(Close Window)
Topic: What is the best stack to learn where a card is named and I know the position?
Message: Posted by: Angelo Carbone (Feb 12, 2005 09:26PM)
As the subject line suggests, what is the best or easiest stack or system to learn where when someone names a card I can instantly know the position of it in a deck.? I don't need the deck to do anything else. No need for poker hands built in or any other fancy extras. Just need it for one purpose - a card is named and I know where it is.

Many thanks

Angelo
Message: Posted by: Mesquita (Feb 12, 2005 09:35PM)
The Mnemonica Deck by Juan Tamariz.
Message: Posted by: Paul Sherman (Feb 12, 2005 09:41PM)
A lot of people seem to like Joyal's stack (which I am admittedly unfamiliar with). If you use Lorayne-esque mnemonics, though, my experience is that no one setup is harder to memorize than any other. You might as well shuffle a deck until it's randomly mixed and then memorize it. This would have the benefit of being indetectable to magicians familiar with any of the standard memorized stacks. After an afternoon of practice you can recall any card with some effort and after a week or two no effort at recall will be apparent.

Since this is something that you'll presumably use for a long time, I wouldn't base my decision strictly on which one you can learn the fastest (if indeed there is one you can learn faster than any other). I'd consider your other requirements. Do you often perform with a new pack so that getting into your stack from new deck order is important? Are their other effects you perform that require a stack that you could build in? etc. etc.

At the end of the day, if you're going to go to the effort of memorizing a stack, you might as well get some "bonus" for your effort in the form of other tricks built into it.

Paul
Message: Posted by: Chris Stolz (Feb 12, 2005 09:46PM)
I use the Nikola Card System which can be found in Hugards Emclyclopedia of Card Tricks as well as many other texts.

I had it working for me in an afternoon. It took another day or two to speed it up. I absolutely love it and wouldn't change stacks for the world!

I might also mention that I came across this website which helps me practice when I am not performing. http://www.stackview.com/

I downloaded the little program which has Nikola and a bunch of others as well.

-Chris.
Message: Posted by: Canvey Card Sharp (Feb 12, 2005 09:58PM)
Bart Harding for me - easy to remember and really flexible for a number of ideas.

PM me for further info if you want.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Feb 12, 2005 10:38PM)
Joyal. The Six Hour Memorized Deck.
Message: Posted by: Rick (Feb 12, 2005 11:04PM)
Joyal,Joyal,Joyal...
Message: Posted by: magicandrew (Feb 13, 2005 12:48AM)
Use a brain wave effect but do a litttle ajustments with the marking and fase up or not.
Message: Posted by: T. Joseph O'Malley (Feb 13, 2005 12:49AM)
With respect to choice of stack, based on your parameters, it's totally irrelevant which one you choose. If you honestly mean that you only want to do this one thing (know the position of a card in the stack), it doesn't matter what you use. Heck, take a normal shuffled deck and memorize it.

It really depends on what your definition of "easy" is with respect to memorization. I personally thought that spending an hour or two a day for a few weeks wasn't all that much of a commitment. I felt this way because I knew that I wanted to have a solid tool to use to create good magic with. There is no such thing as easy to master card miracles. Anyone who says different is misleading you.

Whatever stack you decide on, learn it well, and you'll create miracles. Good luck.
Message: Posted by: Angelo Carbone (Feb 13, 2005 01:44AM)
Thanks all so far. Just to clarify, I don't need to get into the stack from new deck order. It is for my Rising Card effect (see signature). Instead of having it in numerical order I wish to make it up in a shuffled order so when a card is freely named, I know the location. Once the deck is in the stack, I never need to shuffle, cut of do whatever to the cards. They stay in that order for eternity :)

I don't mind spending hours or days learning the stack but I do want to be able to instantly know the location whether it is by pure memory or better yet a mathematical calculation eg: clubs are 10, hearts are 20, spades are 30 and diamonds are 40. The value is determined by some other means. I know Lewis Jones had something similar to this.

Thanks again!
Message: Posted by: BrianCooper (Feb 13, 2005 02:43AM)
No one has mentioned the very popular (in the US at least) Aronson Stack. Also the Si Stebbins stack is quick to get into from new pack order. For your needs any stack would work just as well. Personally I am waiting for Juan Tamariz' book to arrive to check out his Mnemonica stack.

Brian Cooper
Message: Posted by: magicandrew (Feb 13, 2005 03:52AM)
Sounds like a nise effect you rising card there has been in the past a quite old but very gimmiked version of that trick.
Message: Posted by: gandalf (Feb 13, 2005 03:57AM)
[quote]
On 2005-02-12 22:46, chris_stolz wrote:
I use the Nikola Card System which can be found in Hugards Emclyclopedia of Card Tricks as well as many other texts.

I had it working for me in an afternoon. It took another day or two to speed it up. I absolutely love it and wouldn't change stacks for the world!

I might also mention that I came across this website which helps me practice when I am not performing. http://www.stackview.com/

I downloaded the little program which has Nikola and a bunch of others as well.

-Chris.
[/quote]
Thanks for the link, what an excellent programme!
Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Feb 13, 2005 04:41AM)
[quote]
On 2005-02-13 04:57, gandalf wrote:
Thanks for the link, what an excellent programme!
[/quote]

I'll second that! Thanks Chris.
Message: Posted by: ithomson (Feb 13, 2005 06:08AM)
Angelo

Long time no hear. Hope you're well. Out of interest, I'm still using "Out Of Order".

T. L. O'M. is spot on. It doesn't matter which stack you use if you just need to know the numerical location of a card.

For speed, however, I'd suggest you go for a full memorised system (like Aronson or Mnemonica) rather than a calculated system (like Bert Harding's or Boris Wild's). It takes a while to learn the stack, but it's instantaneous when you do. Calculated ones are easier to use initially, but aren't instantaneous unless you use them for years (like Alan Shaxon). Plus the memory training system is invaluable for a lot of other work (remembering pin numbers springs immediately to mind).

My personal favourite is Aronson's, but only because I like the rest of his work too. If you invest in "Bound To Please", for example, you not only get the stack but "Red Sea Passover" and "Histed Heisted", two excellent routines. However I thoroughly enjoyed "Mnemonica" and am working with a few routines from there. And I like Boris Wild's stuff too.

So. Just pick one, I guess.

I'd also like to thank Chris for his link - very impressive.

Ian
Message: Posted by: ziatro (Feb 13, 2005 06:16AM)
Purely based on your needs, the three most likely and easiest are:
1) Si Stebbins (well known to magicians)
2) Eight Kings (well known to magicians)
3) Bart Hardings stack which is very easy to learn and based on a simple piece of math. I use it all the time for Paul Gordons diary trick. It took a few hours to learn and I'm not great with numbers. (Highly recommended)
Available from Peter Scarlett at http://www.peterscarlett.com/html/details_5.html
Message: Posted by: Hideo Kato (Feb 13, 2005 06:52AM)
Si Stebbins would take several seconds to calculate the location, but Reverse Si Stebbins Stack is easy to calculate. You must remember the positions of every King. For example, let assume King of Spades is at X from the top. If the selection is 5 of Spades, its location is (5 x 4 + x) from the top.

I guess your purpose is to show the cards are mixed, so I think a system stack like Si Stebbins is suffice for the purpose.

BTW, do you think you need to show the cards are mixed in your wonderful 'Any Card Rising'? (Sorry I don't know the exact name). I am really looking forward to releasing of the trick from you.

Hideo kato
Message: Posted by: Larry Davidson (Feb 13, 2005 08:22AM)
I'd suggest Martin Joyal's stack because it meets your criterion for a stack that uses mathematical calculations, with some practice the calculations will disappear and you'll instantly know the location of the cards by position or vice versa, the deck looks completely mixed, and you should be able to memorize the stack in 6 hours or less (it took me less time and my memory stinks). Interestingly enough, it's the stack I use professionally including in an effect I created where I make any named card rise.

Larry D.
Message: Posted by: ddyment (Feb 13, 2005 10:47AM)
As you can see, everyone has an opinion on what is the "best" memorized deck stack. Truth is, there is no "best". What there is, is a set of trade-offs, and each user should determine which particular trade-offs make the most sense for his or her particular interests/requirements.

Further, people confuse the issue of how the stack is initially learned -- mnemonics (Tamariz, Aronson, etc.), rules (Joyal, Matt), algorithms (Harding, Dyment, etc.) with the issue of whether the stack is memorized or not. There are examples of this in the above postings. It's misleading to compare, say, an Aronson stack that has actually been memorized, with a Joyal stack in which only rules have been learned, but the stack has not yet been memorized.

I've written an essay on the topic of [url=http://www.deceptionary.com/aboutstacks.html]Full-Deck Stacks[/url] that covers all of these topics and more. Whichever solution you eventually choose, making a decision based on careful consideration of the attending issues, rather than the random opinions of others, is likely your best bet.

... Doug
Message: Posted by: paisa23 (Feb 13, 2005 10:50AM)
Which one is best to learn "Every body's Lazy" from simply simon?
Message: Posted by: landmark (Feb 13, 2005 01:23PM)
Just curious--if you don't have to show the deck is shuffled, why not just use New Deck Order and a false shuffle or two?


Jack Shalom
Message: Posted by: Jordini (Feb 13, 2005 03:01PM)
Here's what I would reccomend:

Use Si Stebbins (very very simple). Show the deck (will looked very well mixed) then do one faro, and here's what you will have: AAAA 4444 7777 etc, and you will be able to easily find any card.
Message: Posted by: Daegs (Feb 13, 2005 04:01PM)
Guys, here is what this is for(for those of you who just didn't read the thread or don't understand):

Angelo has an effect where any named card will rise from a cased deck.

He can show the deck compleltly fair before casing the deck.

Instead of showing the deck in NDO, he'd rather show it in a random order but still be able to know which position needs to rise for the correct named card.

Therefore, any shuffling is not needed, and stacks like si stebbins won't work because he needs to know the position of any card instantly.


This is why I recommend Joyal's Six Hour Memorized deck.... the best solution.


And for those of you that haven't, check out his Card Rise... sounds very good.
Message: Posted by: Hideo Kato (Feb 13, 2005 05:39PM)
As I posted, you can know the location as soon as the selection is made if you use Reverse Si Stebbins Stack. (Z x 4 + X) can be calculated less than one second.

BTW, can you show the deck before rising selection? Maybe Angelo wiishs to show the deck after rising.

Hideo Kato
Message: Posted by: jbadman (Feb 13, 2005 06:17PM)
Well... first, the comments about Stebbins being no good because a card position takes time to calculate is not entirely correct. Check out Steven Youell's manuscript on 'The Hacker Stack' for more information; makes great reading. I believe it's available via Cogitations subscription currently.

Secondly... Angelo, if this is for a commercial incarnation of your effect then I suggest you select a stack that is either already extremely popular or a stack that can be learned extremely easily. To this end, I guess either Tamariz or Aronson for the most popular or Joyal for something quickly remembered.

Jamie.
Message: Posted by: Angelo Carbone (Feb 13, 2005 06:47PM)
Ok thanks for the feedback all.

Ian: Glad you are still getting mileage out of Out of Order :)

Hideo: Yes I would like to show the cards mixed up before I do my cards rise. I can show them mixed up afterwards too but I choose not to. As for the release of Notion of Motion, it has been on sale for over 10 years, I just choose not to publically advertise it because of the amount of work that goes into making each deck. I just try to leave it at word of mouth which works fine for me.

landmark: I do need or rather would like to show the deck shuffled prior to my rise. All I said was that the deck cannot be shuffled. :)

Daegs: Thank you for clarifying my initial request in my first post to those that did not understand it. :)

Jamie: Hey nice to hear from you. The stacked deck version of my card rise is for personal use only. I sell my card rise in numerical order only. If someone wants me to make it up in their preference of stack that is fine with me. Maybe I should mention that on my site.

So....

....there are so many possible stacks and am getting a little confused and overwhelmed with the reccomendations :D I am interested possibly in the Joyal and QuickStack versions. Possibly even the reverse sti stebbins. So will decide between these three.

I do thank everyone for their help and advice. Much appreciated!

One final thought.....I have always performed my card rise for the last 10 years by showing the deck in numerical order before casing it and having a card named and making it rise. Some have suggested to me it would be nice if the deck appeared to be mixed up rather than in order. Do you think having the deck mixed up makes it more impressive? Natural?

What say you? Mixed or in order?

Thanks

Angelo
Message: Posted by: Paul Chosse (Feb 13, 2005 06:54PM)
[quote]
On 2005-02-13 16:01, Jordini wrote:
Here's what I would reccomend:

Use Si Stebbins (very very simple). Show the deck (will looked very well mixed) then do one faro, and here's what you will have: AAAA 4444 7777 etc, and you will be able to easily find any card.
[/quote]

TWO faro's to get to your ending position - a small thing, I know...

Best, PSC
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Feb 13, 2005 07:39PM)
[quote]

I didn't see this confusion, but I skimmed some of the replies. In the case of the Joyal book, certainly it doesn't take six hours to learn the rules, but rather to learn the stack itself (actually, I found six hours to be a high estimate). Each card is associated with a stack number, and his technique for learning includes going both from the card to the stack number and vice versa.
His "attending issues" seemed very well defined and minimal, and as a result, I didn't find anyone's suggestion "random," though, of course, reasonable minds will disagree.



On 2005-02-13 11:47, ddyment wrote:
Further, people confuse the issue of how the stack is initially learned -- mnemonics (Tamariz, Aronson, etc.), rules (Joyal, Matt), algorithms (Harding, Dyment, etc.) with the issue of whether the stack is memorized or not. There are examples of this in the above postings. It's misleading to compare, say, an Aronson stack that has actually been memorized, with a Joyal stack in which only rules have been learned, but the stack has not yet been memorized. I've written an essay on the topic of [url=http://www.deceptionary.com/aboutstacks.html]Full-Deck Stacks[/url] that covers all of these topics and more. Whichever solution you eventually choose, making a decision based on careful consideration of the attending issues, rather than the random opinions of others, is likely your best bet.

... Doug

[/quote]
Message: Posted by: Jon Allen (Feb 13, 2005 08:17PM)
Firstly, I have just learned the Joyal Stack. It's pretty good and I don't know how far away I was from six hours!

As for ordered or random, I remember Dan Harlan commenting on this issue for Cardtoon. Whetehr it's relevent for your effect I don't know :)

The effect is of a card rising out of the deck. This is impossible whether the cards are ordered or not. I feel that it *would* be more impressive if the cards were shuffled then you did a deck switch. This would be simple if the cardbox were in your pocket. HAve the deck shuffeld then go to your pockets looking for the box. Switch the deck in your pocket, bring the box out and case it. Now they have "examined" the cards and shuffled them. There can't be anything wrong with them, can there?
Message: Posted by: Nick Pudar (Feb 13, 2005 09:29PM)
Angelo,

I agree with others that the specific stack you use is not relevant. My strong recommendation is that since you will be learning a stack anyway, why not learn one that has other features built in? There is some pretty devastating stuff that you can do with a memorized deck (Paisa23 mentioned "Everybody's Lazy -- one of my favorite!). Learning a great stack will not only meet your current needs, but it will also prepare you for some jaw-dropping stuff when you want to dip into the exciting mem-deck space. (Aronson, Joyal, Tamariz, Close, etc.)

Thanks to all for the mention of StackView. I haven't mentioned anything about it lately. I've been a busy beaver in what little spare time I have in programming the next version. A few months ago I thought I'd be done by about this time, but alas, I still think I've got a few more months to go. There are a lot of very cool features that I'm adding this round. Normally, I would not mention progress on an upgrade, but I'm getting closer to being finished -- in telling you about it, I'm stepping up the pressure on my self.

Back to coding...

Nick
Message: Posted by: Shane Wiker (Feb 13, 2005 09:42PM)
The stack you use really doesn't matter, but I prefer the Mnemonica Stack.

Shane Wiker
Message: Posted by: Larry Davidson (Feb 14, 2005 07:06AM)
[quote]
On 2005-02-13 19:47, Angelo M Carbone wrote:
What say you? Mixed or in order?
[/quote]

Mixed, not because "in order" will lead laymen to conclude how you made the card rise, but because it [i]may[/i] lead at least some of them to conclude how you knew where the card was. Maybe I'm missing something, but I can't imagine a compelling argument against adding that layer of deception.
Message: Posted by: Phaedrus (Feb 15, 2005 09:16PM)
If you're really interested in getting into memorized stack magic, you should go to Aronson's webpage. He has a .pdf file containing his thoughts on memorized stacks (not just the Aronson stack) that is essential reading. He also has a few effects listed for those who have already memorized the Aronson stack. By the way, the website that ddyment created is absolutely brilliant: if you want a good overview of stacks and some knowledgeable comparisons of the most popular systems out there, this is the place.
Message: Posted by: Hideo Kato (Feb 15, 2005 11:29PM)
Angelo Carbone is not interested in momeorized satck magic.
He only wishes to do his rising card with mixed cards.

Hideo Kato
Message: Posted by: Steven Youell (Feb 16, 2005 02:10AM)
I use a memorized Si Stebbins Stack which allows me the following
advantages:

1) I can get into it from new deck order in less than 30 seconds
2) I have a cyclical stack and Mathematical calculations are possible.

Getting into it from NDO is not a small thing. If you're going to
memorize a stack for one trick, it makes sense to memorize a stack
that will have advantages in OTHER tricks that you might want to
perform in the future.

I have a PDF on my website called "The Hacker Stack" and I think
you'll find it highly useful. The PDF is a free download, so you
have nothing to lose.

Steven Youell