|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 | ||||||||||
crestfallenLyric Veteran user 307 Posts |
I agree, Osterlind's BTC system is great. I wouldn't say it's easy though, until you take time to practice it for a bit.
"It is better for a man to honor his profession, than to be honored by it." - Robert-Houdin
|
|||||||||
Josh Chaikin Inner circle Kansas City 1430 Posts |
Quote:
On 2010-06-28 17:31, Cohiba wrote: No, I'm saying that there's that built-in advantage to the BCS that memorized decks do not have. Much in the same vein, the Joyal system uses "rules" to ease in memorization, whereas the Tamariz and Aronson stacks have built-in effects (and you can get to Tamariz from NDO). It's all a matter of what one wants to do with their stack. Personally, I use Mnemonica, I've found that it suits my needs better (no, it's not the best, but it is the best for me). As far as card controls go, I tend to use the pass or the TPC - hardly easy, not necessarily the best - I use them because, as with the stack, it suits my needs. |
|||||||||
Cohiba Special user Michigan 749 Posts |
I know I'm being a bit of a dink here. It's just that every thread like this tends to become a mem deck thread because mem deck users realize that they are (in general) the most powerful stacks. Then someone chimes in praising the BCS as if it were equivalent.
Everyone understands that stacks are powerful. (Well, everyone in this thread does I would guess.) So that is not in question. 8 Kings, Si Stebbins, BCS, etc., all are powerful because they are stacks. Any one of those stacks (and many others) are fine answers to this thread, except maybe for the fact that there are a gazillion threads like this one. However in general (meaning you are not looking for a stack for a particular effect such as Out of this World), the most powerful stack is a memorized stack - bar none. It doesn't matter which stack you memorize - NDO, BCS, Aronson, Tamariz, Si Stebbins, etc. A memorized stack is much more powerful than a non memorized stack. Now, if you're going to go through the trouble of memorizing a stack, it makes sense to memorize one with built in items of your choice. Aronson's and Tamariz's stacks are great examples of this. If you don't want to memorize a stack, I'd personally recommend Si Stebbins because you can do amazing things with it's built-in properties. But research the pro's and con's of each to decide for yourself. |
|||||||||
ddyment Inner circle Gibsons, BC, Canada 2499 Posts |
Bill wrote:
Quote:
The stack you may want to look at is by Bob Mason its called the O-2 matica stack ... Although I am in general a great fan of the late Bob Mason, I must confess that I have never understood the affection that a few people seem to have for this stack. It's yet another of (many) variations of what is popularly known as the Si Stebbins stack, with a slight change in the way suits are calculated. As a consequence, it exhibits all the drawbacks of that category of stacks: repeating number sequences combined with recurring colour patterns. A stack like the DAO is every bit as simple to calculate (in both directions), yet exhibits none of these telltale patterns. Quote:
Odd facts about this stack. If you have a 3 on the bottom and look at at the cards face up you will see that every other card is exactly 3 higher in value all the way thru the deck. These sorts of "odd facts" are equally true of the Si Stebbins stack (just with different numeric spans), and for exactly the same reasons. It seems to me that such identifiable patterns are exactly what one does not want to embody in a working stack.
The Deceptionary :: Elegant, Literate, Contemporary Mentalism ... and More :: (order "Calculated Thoughts" from Vanishing Inc.)
|
|||||||||
Cohiba Special user Michigan 749 Posts |
Hi Doug:
I agree that a random looking stack is preferred to one in which patterns can be recognized. However, some feel that the trade-off in cyclical gains is worth it. With minimal effort one should be able to hide the pattern from their audience. But everything else being equal, random is better. |
|||||||||
ddyment Inner circle Gibsons, BC, Canada 2499 Posts |
Agreed, but there are fully cyclic alternatives that are no more difficult to compute than O-2-Matica, so there seems to me to be no particular reason for some folks' fondness for same.
Not a big deal: I was just curious to learn if I'd missed some aspect of the Mason stack.
The Deceptionary :: Elegant, Literate, Contemporary Mentalism ... and More :: (order "Calculated Thoughts" from Vanishing Inc.)
|
|||||||||
harvini2 New user 55 Posts |
I like Boris wilds stack, it seems to me the easest one to do minimal math.check it out
|
|||||||||
juggernought Regular user 200 Posts |
Mnemonica- poker deals fantastic. Can be set up in under a minute from a new deck.
|
|||||||||
Doctor REvil Elite user 469 Posts |
http://www.lybrary.com/barrys-stacked-deck-p-25482.html
I can highly recommend this little ebook on stacked decks, its been around for about a year, and I was made privy to the work before that, having tested all of the stacks under many different conditions. Barry had several influences that I know of, and the stack "Barry's Stack" is a very deceptive stack to work with. His Quick Stack is purpose made for specific effect(s) and includes a terrific effect to start you off with. David.
Karma means you buy now & pay later.....think I've over spent....!
Check out my ebooks at the lybrary..... http://www.lybrary.com/david-gemmell-m-13404.html |
|||||||||
GusVanNostrum Veteran user With automatic writing I've produced 343 Posts |
BCS is great. DAO is much simpler to calculate. Even children can be tought it.
A serious performer should use a memorized stack. As Tom Stone nicely put it in the margin (p 68) of his great new book "Vortex": first look into the tricks that is built into the stack. If you don't tend to use them, consider building a stack of your own. I chose a stack that is easy to get into from new deck order: Tamariz' Mnemonica. But for calculated stacks, I'll use DAO from now on. |
|||||||||
Cohiba Special user Michigan 749 Posts |
Gus, if you know Mnemonica, why would you use DAO?
|
|||||||||
ddeckmann Loyal user Paraguay 202 Posts |
I picked up Mnemonica because my dad had a copy. I don't know the advantages of other stacks...
I had into memdeck because the threads on the café convinced me. I didn't like the OBS... when I learned the Mnemonica, the difference was huge for me (in terms of possibilities and routines) and it was even easier to learn the Mnemonica than calculate the cards on the OBS So far, its great. Pity I don't like gambling routines (neither the laymen here). Mnemonica seems full of powerful gambling demonstrations. Control in Caos (tamariz) and the invisible card (aronson and close) are more than enough for me. Just Great. Tamariz talks about stay-stacks and (or?) Mirror stacks. And how is easy to go from his deck to one of these. I'm trying to find some info about this on the café and also some tricks with the mirror stack... I like this stack because it works fine for me. Plus I'll never forget the little mnemonica song and my drawings on the cards |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Shuffled not Stirred » » What is a good stack? (2 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.03 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |