The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Shuffled not Stirred » » Memorizing 2nd deck (7 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page 1~2~3 [Next]
Steve Crossley
View Profile
New user
Eastbourne, UK
23 Posts

Profile of Steve Crossley
A few months ago I took the time and trouble to memorize the Aronson stack using mnemonics along with the journey method. I now would like to memorize the mnemonica stack but am worried that if I do, I will lose the Aronson stack or just get the two mixed up. Has anyone managed to memorize and work with more than one stack and are there any tips or words of advice?
JanForster
View Profile
Inner circle
Germany ... when not traveling...
3768 Posts

Profile of JanForster
There is no need to memorize two stacks. Instead do this: Use Si Stebbins: (e. g. knowing the Aronson stack) replace each card in the stack with that card that precedes the original card, e. g. #1 JS is replaced by the 8H because in Si Stebbins the JS would follow the 8H (CHaSeD order) a. s. o. Jan
Jan Forster
www.janforster.de
Illucifer
View Profile
Inner circle
1304 Posts

Profile of Illucifer
And I would say there's no reason not to. I use both Aronson and Tamariz. There is no concern about confusing the two. Memorizing a stack is child's play to what, say, a musician commits to memory.
Consider all the routines you've commited to memory (script, presentations, moves, sequences), or all the songs you can recite.
It's not difficult. Why bother with the calculations necessary with Si Stebbins?
Or get Andy Nyman's 'The Code'. You'll learn the Tamariz stack over time just by using it.
It's all in the reflexes.
Cain
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles, CA
1504 Posts

Profile of Cain
I've used three memorized stacks, but not concurrently. I noticed how quickly I forgot my previous stacks (granted, this is without making any effort to retain two simultaneously), so I think the possibility for confusion is a valid concern.

"There is no need to memorize two stacks" > "there's no reason not to"

Steve-- Why do you want to memorize the Tamariz stack? I'd say stick with Aronson to discover which properties you like and actually use.
Ellusionst discussing the Arcane Playing cards: "Michaelangelo took four years to create the Sistine Chapel masterpiece... these took five."

Calvin from Calvin and Hobbes: "You know Einstein got bad grades as a kid? Well, mine are even worse!"
ddyment
View Profile
Inner circle
Gibsons, BC, Canada
2128 Posts

Profile of ddyment
Although it's certainly possible to learn more than one stack using classical mnemonics, a better choice (i.e., one less likely to result in confusion) is to use one of the other memorized stack techniques (rote, rule-based, or algorithmic) for the second stack.
Doug Dyment's Deceptionary :: Elegant, Literate, Contemporary Mentalism ... and More
Waterloophai
View Profile
Inner circle
Belgium
1202 Posts

Profile of Waterloophai
I agree with Jan Forster and Ddyment. IF, with the emphasis on IF, you need a second MD, use a rule-based or algorithmic method for the second one.

Another, very easy method (I believe it was Aronson who came up with it) is to make a stack where the colours and values are just the opposite of the stack that you usualy have.

The hearts become diamonds, the spades become clubs, the diamonds become hearts and the clubs become spades.
The values are the result of the subtraction with 13: the 7 becomes the 6, the 2 becomes the Jack, the Ace becomes the Queen, the 5 becomes the 8, and so on.

Example:
1.) They say "6 of spades". You make the reversal: the 6 becomes the 7 and the spades becomes the clubs = 7 of clubs. You know that in your "normal" stack the 7 of clubs is on the for example 8th place. Now you know that in your "second MD" the 6 of spades is on the 8th place.

2.) They say "number 20". You know that for example in your "normal" stack the 3 of hearts is on the 20th place. You now know that in your "second stack", the 10 of diamonds is on the 20th place.

Hope you got it with my bad English grammar Smile
websmith2000
View Profile
New user
94 Posts

Profile of websmith2000
I also learned Aronson, then Mnemonica. I worried about getting them mixed up but it's just like phone numbers - no problem. I go through two quick drills every day to keep them in place. Drill 1: Go through each card in a shuffled deck, reciting first the Aronson stack position, then the Mnemonica stack position. Drill 2: Go thru each card in a shuffled deck, reciting the Aronson position, then the corresponding Mnemonica card from the same position. Pretty soon the pairs jell into memory and the one stack actually helps you with the other stack. Now, if I could just remember where I put those keys ...
websmith2000
View Profile
New user
94 Posts

Profile of websmith2000
I also learned Aronson, then Mnemonica. I worried about getting them mixed up but it's just like phone numbers - no problem. I go through two quick drills every day to keep them in place. Drill 1: Go through each card in a shuffled deck, reciting first the Aronson stack position, then the Mnemonica stack position. Drill 2: Go thru each card in a shuffled deck, reciting the Aronson position, then the corresponding Mnemonica card from the same position. Pretty soon the pairs jell into memory and the one stack actually helps you with the other stack. Now, if I could just remember where I put those keys ...
Illucifer
View Profile
Inner circle
1304 Posts

Profile of Illucifer
While there's certainly nothing wrong with learning an algorithmic or progressive stack of some kind (Si Stebbins or Eight Kings probably being the easiest), I don't see why you'd want to have to bother with doing calculations. I find it's much easier to simply have them committed to memory. No need to do computations while performing. I simply know that card and its position. The information is immediate..

That said, a valid point was raised a few comments back: why do you wish to learn two stacks? Do you have a particular use in mind? I wouldn't do it simply to do it, unless you just want to exercise your memory muscle, in which case go for it! Learn 3 or 4. Smile
Websmith2000's right. It's like learning phone numbers (anyone remember those days?).
It's all in the reflexes.
Steve Suss
View Profile
Inner circle
1193 Posts

Profile of Steve Suss
Quote:
On 2013-12-20 12:30, Steve Crossley wrote:
A few months ago I took the time and trouble to memorize the Aronson stack using mnemonics along with the journey method. I now would like to memorize the mnemonica stack but am worried that if I do, I will lose the Aronson stack or just get the two mixed up. Has anyone managed to memorize and work with more than one stack and are there any tips or words of advice?
it sounds like you're just getting started with using a memorized deck. I have the same question as others have asked. Why would you want to memorize two decks. Why not utilize your time knowing one deck cold. Can you go through your stack quickly backwards and forwards. Can you run through a deck as quickly as you can and recite the stack numbers as you do so? Can you recall your stack without having to go back to your mnemonic associations?

I would suggest making sure you know your stack cold before even entertaining the idea of learning a new stack and then think long and hard if it is worth all the effort to practice and rehearse the few effects that might require a second stack.
Steve
Illucifer
View Profile
Inner circle
1304 Posts

Profile of Illucifer
Good advice from Steve.
It's all in the reflexes.
Steve Crossley
View Profile
New user
Eastbourne, UK
23 Posts

Profile of Steve Crossley
Firstly, I must say thanks for all of your helpful replies. It's great to be able to feel a part of such a community. The main thing that prompted me to consider learning a 2nd MD and the Mnemonica stack in particular was my recent purchase of Andy Nymans The Code. I couldn't help wishing he'd put it out in Aronson stack order, feeling that the deck would be a more powerful tool if I had the stack memorized as well.
Steve Suss
View Profile
Inner circle
1193 Posts

Profile of Steve Suss
Steve, I haven't purchased The Code but from the trailer I didn't see anything that could not be done with any ordinary deck in stack order. Regardless, I would stick with one stack only if you really want to become proficient with it. If there is a particular effect that you have in mind to do with The Code please PM me and I'll try to guide you to a method using any stack.
Steve
Steve Crossley
View Profile
New user
Eastbourne, UK
23 Posts

Profile of Steve Crossley
Quote:
On 2013-12-21 17:53, Steve Suss wrote:Steve, I haven't purchased The Code but from the trailer I didn't see anything that could not be done with any ordinary deck in stack order. Regardless, I would stick with one stack only if you really want to become proficient with it. If there is a particular effect that you have in mind to do with The Code please PM me and I'll try to guide you to a method using any stack.Steve


Steve, (great name by the way ;-), I think you're right that it's best to become proficient in one stack and stick with it. With so many ideas, techniques and methods it's too easy to flit from one thing to another without mastering any of them. I was just watching a Simon Aronson video and am still blown away by a lot of what can be done with his stack and I'll take your advice and continue using it. I'll also have another look at The Code and will PM you if I come up with anything interesting. Thanks again!
ddyment
View Profile
Inner circle
Gibsons, BC, Canada
2128 Posts

Profile of ddyment
Illucifer wrote:
Quote:
While there's certainly nothing wrong with learning an algorithmic or progressive stack of some kind ... I don't see why you'd want to have to bother with doing calculations.

This (oft-voiced) concern comes from a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of learning mechanisms. Nobody with any experience in these matters is suggesting that one replace a memorized deck with one that needs to be calculated, or have its rules figured out, or go through the steps of a series of mnemonic associations.

The goal is a memorized stack, pure and simple: the end result is always the same. Everything else is a discussion about which is the best learning mechanism. There are strong arguments for each of the three non-rote learning techniques, and people's learning styles differ. All of this is discussed in some detail here for those who have an interest.
Doug Dyment's Deceptionary :: Elegant, Literate, Contemporary Mentalism ... and More
Harry Lorayne
View Profile
V.I.P.
New York City
8371 Posts

Profile of Harry Lorayne
Some "detail" when someone who wrote 17 books (or more) on the shubject of trained memory, including the remembering of cards - was on every national TV show, and etc. etc., is known all over the world as the "World's foremost memory-training specialist" and who the NY Times referred to as "The Yoda of memory training" isn't mentioned at all. Really great detail. Someone once wrote to the NY Times when there was a short article about memory and I wasn't mentioned - paraphrasing: "Writing anything about trained memory without mentioning Harry Lorayne is like writing about the theory of relativity without mentioning Albert Einstein." The above is an excellent example (of what? Lack of knowledge? Ya' got me). Sorry - my obviously biased opinion, folks. HL.
[email]harrylorayne@earthlink.net[/email]

http://www.harrylorayne.com
http://www.harryloraynemagic.com
Steve Suss
View Profile
Inner circle
1193 Posts

Profile of Steve Suss
Quote:
On 2013-12-21 19:19, Harry Lorayne wrote:
Some "detail" when someone who wrote 17 books (or more) on the shubject of trained memory, including the remembering of cards - was on every national TV show, and etc. etc., is known all over the world as the "World's foremost memory-training specialist" and who the NY Times referred to as "The Yoda of memory training" isn't mentioned at all. Really great detail. Someone once wrote to the NY Times when there was a short article about memory and I wasn't mentioned - paraphrasing: "Writing anything about trained memory without mentioning Harry Lorayne is like writing about the theory of relativity without mentioning Albert Einstein." The above is an excellent example (of what? Lack of knowledge? Ya' got me). Sorry - my obviously biased opinion, folks. HL.
i can only speak for myself but I don't know why anyone would not pick up a Harry Lorayne memory book. I read my first Lorayne memory book over 40 years ago and used it not only for magic and memory demonstrations but throughout my schooling up until my final year in law school. I now use it every day memorizing names, numbers,cards , dates and just about anything else. There is a reason why Simon Aronson himself teaches Loraynes system when teaching his stack in his book. Richard Osterlind does the same when teaching his memorized Break Through Card System.

Learning Loraynes mnemonic system will take a little time but once you've learned it you will have a tool you can use the rest of your life. When I first learned my stack it took me less than one hour. Once I memorized it to the extent I could run through it with the help of mnemonics it took me several months to gain the confidence in using it for performance. A couple of months later I knew the stack well enough that I no longer needed the mnemonics. Now days I try to run through my stack at least once a week and have no trouble recalling it just as fast as the actual card itself.

Regarding the original question in this thread you could certainly learn more than one stack using Lorayns system but I would again question why you would want to.
Steve
Harry Lorayne
View Profile
V.I.P.
New York City
8371 Posts

Profile of Harry Lorayne
Thanks, Steve, for helping me make my point. And - happy to have been of help. Best - Harry L.
[email]harrylorayne@earthlink.net[/email]

http://www.harrylorayne.com
http://www.harryloraynemagic.com
Cain
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles, CA
1504 Posts

Profile of Cain
Quote:
On 2013-12-21 19:19, Harry Lorayne wrote:
Sorry - my obviously biased opinion, folks. HL.


Apology accepted. Continuing on...
Ellusionst discussing the Arcane Playing cards: "Michaelangelo took four years to create the Sistine Chapel masterpiece... these took five."

Calvin from Calvin and Hobbes: "You know Einstein got bad grades as a kid? Well, mine are even worse!"
Harry Lorayne
View Profile
V.I.P.
New York City
8371 Posts

Profile of Harry Lorayne
That was NOT an apology, Mr. Cain, as you well know - and we WERE continuing on smoothly before your silly interruption. Sorry. (Now THAT'S an apology!)
[email]harrylorayne@earthlink.net[/email]

http://www.harrylorayne.com
http://www.harryloraynemagic.com
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Shuffled not Stirred » » Memorizing 2nd deck (7 Likes)
 Go to page 1~2~3 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.19 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL