

Go to page 1~2 [Next]  
Claudio Inner circle Europe 1757 Posts 
I was reading again Kirk Charles’s Marked For Life book. He mentions “the Marlo Marking idea that signals the numerical position in a memorized deck”.
Do you know in which Marlo’s book the idea is developed? Does anyone use his system? It seems a great idea if you know your stack very well. Thank You. 

Kabbalah Inner circle 1621 Posts 
See Marked Memory in Issue 4 of The Olram File. Also, the January, 1968 Pallbearers Review.
"Long may magicians fascinate and continue to be fascinated by the mystery potential in a pack of cards."
~Cliff Green "The greatest tricks ever performed are not done at all. The audience simply think they see them." ~ John Northern Hilliard 

Claudio Inner circle Europe 1757 Posts 
Thanks.


twistedace Inner circle philadelphia 3772 Posts 
I use this exact idea, but didn't know Marlo also did. Then again, I should've known. Marlo did everything!


JanForster Inner circle Germany ... when not traveling... 4131 Posts 
That's true, he invented all, even things before he was born...
Jan Forster
www.janforster.de 

Claudio Inner circle Europe 1757 Posts 
Quote:
On Jan 22, 2015, twistedace wrote: If He did not, it looks like He did I read some of his memdeck tricks and some of them are really mindboggling, the snag is that often you'll need to faro multiple times. One of his versions of Mental Topper, Memorized Mentalism, requires 3 faros to perform as described, which is a tad too much for the one effect. On the other hand, he has selfworking versions of the trick. Can you tell me which system you're using to mark the cards? I am interested in doing it but I am still unsure about what marking system to use. Thanks. 

Atom3339 Inner circle Spokane, WA 3242 Posts 
I use a binary system recommended by Dennis Loomis (RIP). He was very generous. A great loss.
TH
Occupy Your Dream 

Claudio Inner circle Europe 1757 Posts 
Quote:
On Jan 22, 2015, Atom3339 wrote: Sounds interesting. I could not find Loomis’s post where he describes his system. As you need 6 digits to code 52 (110100), I can’t imagine using this system as is. I can do a calculation on the fly (adding powers of 2) but not quickly enough to be workable. There must me another way and I hit on this (let me know if it’s Loomis’s solution): Use 1 or two discreet binary sequences to express numbers, such as 15> 1 and 5 > 1 – 101 47> 4 and 7 > 100 – 111 This system would assume you know by heart the decimal values for the 10 first binary values (0 to 1001, i.e. 0 to 9 in decimal). 

Nicolino Inner circle 2891 Posts 
Combined with the underestimated tool of estimation, a grey sequence of 4 (in a o**w** deck) should even be enough
The Mati Envelope
A brandnew peek device for the working mentalist! Chance's Token Tarot cards in a scenic piece of mystery..... 

JL Sparrow Regular user 165 Posts 
Quote:
On Jan 23, 2015, Claudio wrote: Niether can I. If someone could point us to his post, I would be very grateful. Quote:
On Jan 23, 2015, Claudio wrote: You are correct that you need 6 bits (binary digits) to encode 52, but there's another, similar, method you can use. Just use BCD (BinaryCoded Decimal) encodings. Instead of encoding the whole number to its binary equivalent, just convert each decimal digit. For example, 52 would be encoded twice: once for the "5", and once for the "2". The 5 would become 0101, and the 2 would become 0010. That way, you would only have to memorize ten different binary numbers: 0000 = 0 0001 = 1 0010 = 2 0011 = 3 0100 = 4 0101 = 5 0110 = 6 0111 = 7 1000 = 8 1001 = 9 BCD is a real encoding system that can be found on many modern novelty binary clocks, as most people find BCD easier to read than straight binary numbers. (And from what I understand, BCD was used frequently among engineers working with computer readouts before digital clock displays became the norm.) Whereas 52 requires six bits (110100) to be encoded into regular binary, it needs seven bits (5 and 2 encode as 101 and 0010, or 1010010) for BCD. You might think that it takes eight bits (four for each digit), but since the number of cards in a deck is limited to 52, the ten's digit never goes higher than 5 (0101), so you can omit that last, "high" bit (that is, the bit on the far left that is always 0) on the ten's digit. Using BCD, you only have to memorize ten combinations of bits (0000 through 1001), but you have to do two separate conversions (one for each decimal digit). My personal preference is to use regular binary numbers (that is, 000001 through 110100), but if that's too daunting for you, BCD encoding (using 0000001 through 1010010) is a nice alternative, at the cost of one extra bit and one extra (and quick) conversion. A quick tip: Although it may be easy for you to work out in your head what numbers the bits 0000 through 1001 represent, I still recommend memorizing them. There are only ten bit values to memorize (and they follow a nice pattern), so memorizing them shouldn't be too difficult. 

Nicolino Inner circle 2891 Posts 
Quote:
On Jan 23, 2015, JL Sparrow wrote: Here's a reference: http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......art=0#12
The Mati Envelope
A brandnew peek device for the working mentalist! Chance's Token Tarot cards in a scenic piece of mystery..... 

lcwright1964 Special user Toronto 569 Posts 
Quote:
On Jan 23, 2015, Nicolino wrote: Thank you! It does indeed look like the late Mr. Loomis was advocating the 6bit system described above. Now I am math savvy, but if I were to use a numbering system I would find it easier just to directly code each digit of the decimal representation. Marking a binary representation is clever but I can't say that it seems too practical, unless one has computer science chops and does these conversions effortlessly. At any rate, where in, say, the Bicycle back design are people actually making these marks? Les 

JanForster Inner circle Germany ... when not traveling... 4131 Posts 
Quote:
On Jan 23, 2015, Nicolino wrote: That's it
Jan Forster
www.janforster.de 

lcwright1964 Special user Toronto 569 Posts 
Somebody sent me a reference in a PM, and I take it all back! Binary marking is actually less error prone than digital marking, once one learns the system.


Nick Pudar Veteran user 369 Posts 
My Binary Marking system was written up in Antinomy #8 (2006), and I had already been using it for a few years. I had corresponded with a few magicians knowledgeable with marked decks, including Kirk Charles, and concluded that while my approach incorporated several existing ideas, the combination seemed to be unique at the time. I can assure you that with some minimal learning curve, binary markings are very easy to read. And extremely time and cost effective to make yourself!
Nick
Let me explain. No, there is too much. Let me sum up.
www.stackview.com Version 5.0 is available! 

lcwright1964 Special user Toronto 569 Posts 
Quote:
On Jan 24, 2015, Nick Pudar wrote: I agree. Actually, I think it could be simpler than the BCD system mentioned above by JL. In your system, one need recognize only the visual representation for 7 combinations for the three rightward bits (001 = 1, 010 = 2, 011 = 3, 100 = 4, 101 = 5, 110 = 6, 111 = 7), and 6 combinations for the leftward bits (001 = 8, 010 = 16, 011 = 24, 100 = 32, 101 = 40, 110 = 48). (We don't use the leftward 111 = 56 for obvious reasons, and I am not counting the 000 = 0 as something to memorized because it is obvious that zero needs no marking at all.) Indeed, my brain just appreciated that the decimal value of the a leftward threebit representation is simple eight times that of the rightward representation. So one can start out learning the system by learning just 001 through 111 and doing a little math. For example, if I see the encoding for 101 on the left rosette and 111 for the right, my brain can think "101 is 5, 111 is 7, 8 times 5 plus 7 is 47, which is 10D in Mnemonica." What I think I am doing here is construing the binary encoding in base8 terms Yeah, I think this is very doable. Two questions: 1. Is there a good ink colour match out there for those of us who wish to block mark blue Bicycle decks? This is just an aesthetic preference for me. 2. Is it okay for me to mention here that I learned of Nick's marking system because someone directed me how to sign up for Nick's blog on stackview.com? Someone was kind enough to direct me in a PM, which accounts for my newfound enthusiasm. Les 

Nick Pudar Veteran user 369 Posts 
Here is a very good link for matching blue ink: http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......=93270#4
Doug's advice has worked well for me over the years. I did get the Prussian Blue KohINoor ink, and it does a very nice job. Red Sharpie markers work great with Red Bicycles. But blue Sharpies leave too much iridescence (shine) and even appear a bit purple in certain angles of light. I will make a red deck whenever I need it in right around ten minutes. But for the blue decks, I make them in larger batches, and it takes longer to properly control the ink flow with the needleintube pens. Enjoy! Nick
Let me explain. No, there is too much. Let me sum up.
www.stackview.com Version 5.0 is available! 

lcwright1964 Special user Toronto 569 Posts 
Seems like a lot of hassle for blue, and what is basically an aesthetic rather than a functional preference. Red Bicycle decks are cheap and plentiful in North America, and I tested out a red Sharpie on some discarded cards and the match is perfect.
As an aside, it occurred to me, that, in the vein of JeanLuc's posts above, one could refer to your system as BCObinarycoded octal, with the right rosette coding the units digit, and the left rosette coding the "eights" digit. This probably has no bearing whatsoever on the utility of the system, but it is mathematically interesting. 

Claudio Inner circle Europe 1757 Posts 
I am now using a hybrid system based on Marlo’s and Nick Pudar’s systems – and it’s the perfect one for me.
Thanks Nick for being so helpful. 

JL Sparrow Regular user 165 Posts 
Quote:
On Jan 26, 2015, lcwright1964 wrote: Sometimes when teaching people how to convert sixbit binary numbers to familiar decimal ones, I use the trick you mentioned, where the two sets of three bits are converted to their octal/decimal digit (that is, 0 through 7), and then the first digit is multiplied by eight and then added to the second digit. However, only mathematically inclined people seem to appreciate this approach. (Others tend to think it's too complicated or, as one person thought, ridiculous.) But if you like the octal approach, instead of using BCO (BinaryCoded Octal) to encode the number, you could just encode the octal number itself. After all, each rosette has eight "petals"; each petal could represent a different octal digit. Even zero (not always represented in some encodings) could be represented with the top petal (much like 00:00 gets represented with a clock's hour and minute hands pointing to the top). The upside of BCO (BinaryCoded Octal) is that you get straight binary encoding in it for free. So if you feel like switching from one to the other, you don't have to change decks. But you won't get that with straight octal encoding (that I mentioned in the paragraph above), or BCD (BinaryCoded Decimal). 

The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Shuffled not Stirred » » Marlo’s memdeck markings (6 Likes)  
Go to page 1~2 [Next] 
[ Top of Page ] 
All content & postings Copyright © 20012022 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 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 < 