Hi all

One thing about the suit order in the Si Stebbins setup (CHSD - CHaSeD) is that you of course can't ribbon spread the cards, not even in a flash. The alternation of black-red-black-red is too much of a giveaway even if the spectator only glances at the spread.

How it came about I don't know, but when I first learned my Si Stebbins setup the suit order was CDHS (Cards Demand High Skill). Now two blacks alternate with two reds. I have the impression that a quick ribbon spread is not so suspect now.

Any thoughts?

Henning Nelms in Magic and Showmanship even elevates the setup by switching some cards around to make it even less obvious, but I still have to study that one.

Ciao for Now

Erik

On the one hand, that seems like running without being chased. On the other hand, my personal feeling is that two blacks alternating with two reds stands out much more than alternating reds and blacks, and is much more likely to attract attention.

Murf

If they can spot it at a casual showing, they've also seen your thumb tip ...

Seriously, unless you're card-calling, CHaSeD should be fine.

Working with si stebbins stack for approx the past 20 years I've never had an issue or a problem with it. Though I've worked with and tried others, its the only stack I use and has been a strong, fail-safe tool for me.

If you're concerned that spectators might notice the order (I wouldn't), just spread the cards in your hands instead of ribbon spreading them on the table, and do that in groups of cards.

I spread the first few cards face up and immediately go into a Charlier shuffle - still face up. The spectator is only aware of random clumps of cards being mixed up.

I agree with Jon that a face up Charlier shuffle is very deceptive.

Those that say the alternating Red, Black order is not important are probably not doing tricks where the deck is ribbon spread on the table for very long. This is the one time where you just might be "burned."

I do ribbon spread a "guilty" deck on the table in my Mentalism 101 effect, and use this strategy: I say: "I wonder if there are any jokers in this deck?" Then I ribbon spread the deck and look for the one joker I've intentionally left in the deck. Of course I know right where it is and this doesn't take long, but the spectators looking at the spread are also looking for jokers and this minimizes their ability to notice discrepancies like duplicate cards or red/black alternation.

Dennis Loomis
P.S. Here's a link to Mentalism 101:
https://loomismagic.com/item6284.htm

Interesting post from Dennis

I have established what I think is a good motivation for ribbon spreading my Si Stebbins deck and diverting attention away from the setup.

Living in Belgium which is a bilingual country (Flemish - same as Dutch) and French, we are confronted with three sort of card decks. Flemish decks where the court cards are indicated by B (for Boer (jack)), V (for Vrouw (queen)) and H (for Heer (king)). We also have French language decks where the indices say V (for Valet (jack)), D (for Dame (queen)) and R (for Roi (king)).

I patter to the spectators about these different language decks and then tell them I use American playing cards (good ol' Bikes) and ribbon spread the deck to show them that the indices in an American Deck are (JQK for Jack, Queen, King).

This is my rationale for spreading the deck, and takes their attention to the court cards (I touch some of them in the spread, talking about the indices). This should get their attention away from any setup and subcounsiously convince them that the deck is 'normal'.

I still believe that the alternation black - red - red - black is less obvious than red - black - red - black.

As the proof of the pudding is in the eating... Boldly, I intend to use the Si Stebbins setup in the described manner in the first trick of my entrance exam in a magical club. If I get away with it in that environment, I guess I'm home free for the laymen.

I'll let you know how it goes.

Ciao for now

Erik

This is one of the advantages of having a lousy card fan. The lack of evenness makes picking up a pattern less likely.

Excellent post. That's exactly what I do - I spread the cards in my hands but in clumps. I take a few clumps from the left hand into the right hand over and over. You can't tell the cards are alternating R-B if you show the cards that way. Not that the order is really an issue anyway. Spectators should be too focused on you and your presentation to notice things like that.

James

Si Stebbins Pro is the modern version of the classic Stebbins Si Stack. The Pro Stack was developed in 2006 by Dr. Hans-Christian Solka, a german card magician. Si Stebbins Pro is still simple as the classic version and has more benefits.

The Pro Stack has a random suit appearance. Nevertheless, to determine following or preceding cards is as simple as with the classic stack.

The position of every card in Si Stebbins Pro is determined by only one clear rule. This rule makes the Pro Stack in a very easy way completely predictable. The Pro Stack involves a simple relationship between cards and positions.

The Pro Stack approach is new and much more simple than the conventional Si Stebbins formulas. For one third of all cards you even know the Pro Stack number immediately.

The first 9 cards in the Pro Stack are: 3H-6C-9D-QS-2C-5D-8S-JH-AD….

Examples for card to stack number relationship:
JC ==> B2P9 ==> stack number 22
stack number 46 ==> B4P7 ==> 8D

Best regards
hcs

Link: http://www.solka2.privat.t-online.de/memdeck/sistebbins.htm

Hi everyone

Last friday I performed my entrance exam act in the magic club I wished to join. It was very succesful too I am glad to report. They were suitably impressed and I am a member.
I did a routine of six cards tricks (mostly) unified around an occult theme. For the first effect I did a card location under 'impossible' conditions using a Si Stebbins setup.
I used the suit order CDHS as posted above and used the misdirection technique also explained above. I must say I fooled all those magicians. One guy, the most experienced conjuror present, eventually worked it out, simply by eliminating all other possibilities. There was no force, no glimpse, no control, no stooges, no gaffed deck - hence a setup was the only explanation. (Actually, this guy is one of the reasons I joined that particular club - to benefit from his expertise.)

To get back to the Si Stebbins theme of this post. I do think I will revert to the standard suit order. My reasons for this are:
1. The misdirection technique described above (pattering about the different language indices of the court cards) worked like a charm even on a magician, so it should work more so for a layman.
2. To give no hint of a setup I didn't execute a false shuffle. Those magicians would immediately heve spotted a false shuffle (certainly with my lousy technique) and that would have been a dead giveaway. But for layman a Charlier shuffle would be most convincing.
3. The original suit order of Si Stebbins allows for a nifty spelling effect in my own language.

I'll report more fully on my entrance exam in the New to Magic Table.

Ciao for now

Erik (now a happy member of the Lucky Ring)

Congratulations, Erik. Best to you in all of your endeavors.

Dennis Loomis

When I use the Si Stebbins method, I often have the spectator shuffle the deck thoroughly well before I reach the revelation part of the trick. So they help destroy the evidence. By this point in the trick, my work has already been done, though it may look like the part of the trick where I'm working the hardest. It means I have to go back and repair the sequence later, but it's well worth it.

Lennart Green Uses an eight kings stack and this stack has the same issue.He taught a method of spreading the cards that hides this. If you've ever dribble/ribbon spread a Svengali deck, it is just like this. Just dribble the cards face up onto the table into a spread. This bunch up pairs and such and hide the obviousness in SS. It makes it appear very random. And, of course, will look a bit sloppy and careless which is a good attitude to portray when using a stack. Try and you'll see what I mean.


J "I'm Smart" C

The Bicycle clear plastic cards were made for Si Stebbins. When you glance at the indices, it's the blue background and the red border on every card that grab your attention -- it's not the index colors that stand out.

Even if you're doing some type of card calling, I always have them shuffle the cards in their hands so there's nothing to find anyway.

TIP: Great ebook full with Si Stebbins stuff:

http://trickshop.com/stebbins.html

Can I add my own slim volume, Stripped and Stacked, to Trickshop's Si Stebbins Unplugged. It has a chapter on Si Stebbins that goes into far more depth on the stack's hidden properties than anything else I've seen. For instance, if you adapt it to stack the major arcana, there's only one instance where taking 7 cards will result in there not being a heavenly body in the selection.

They reviewed it at Online Visions, too: http://www.online-visions.com/reviews/07......ked.html