I've already done all the memory work though. The recall is no work at all, it's automatic. What other benefit does the new version have, that would justify putting extra work into learning it?

Working with borrowed decks is your jam, not mine. My cards are my instrument and my audience doesn't begrudge my having a preference, just as the audience at symphony knows the virtuoso could play any clarinet they handed him, but they don't expect him to borrow one from the audience each performance. This seems entirely a topic for another thread and I'll be interested in continuing it if one pops up.

No problem - as usual, my cliché - to each his own. Interesting analogy, except that there are no (so far as I know) "fake" clarinets, as there are fake/set-up and/or trick decks.

And to try to answer your question - the "benefit" my new version has is - you can be handed someone else's deck and do the darn thing - and the "extra work in learning it" is about one minute. But if being able to do those kinds of effects when someone else's deck is handed to you is not important - then, obviously and of course, my suggestions - my "jam" - is of no importance to you. And again, that's fine - to each his own.

The only other thing I must mention is that I understand that your audience doesn't begrudge you having a preference, and that's fine. The thing is - MY audiences DO!! So again, and obviously, to each his own.

To save time and space - no need for another "topic" because I've written this here, there and everywhere MANY times --- and again to save time and space, let's call it my personal opinion if that makes some happy(!) - doing any strong effect with your own deck LOSES ANYWHERE UP TO 20% or more of the effectiveness of that effect.(No matter how "stupid" the guy who likes to RIDE my BACK calls it. Like he REALLY knows.)

Now, I understand that that concept may be pertaining to the effect. I can only speak for myself and my 80 years(!) of experience doing card magic all over the world - it all started all those decades ago when I'd do one of my routines and the attitude I'd hear is - "It's gotta' be a trick deck!!" That's it - they (at least the audiences I have/had experience wi sth - in all areas, all types, all over the world) "know" that what they just saw is IMPOSSIBLE so it has to be a "trick" deck. They'd either say it, or it was obvious in their attitude. I started seeing the DIFFERENCE in remarks/attitudes when I started doing the same effects/routines with BORROWED deck. So perhaps it all breaks down to the type of card magic you do.

And for those who are going to respond by saying that you can give your deck to the spectator or let them examine it to prove that it is a regular deck - no, sorry, doesn't work. I know 'cause I tried that all those decades ago. Attitude is - "Hey; I'm not a magician - I won't be able to find the trick in your deck!"

So again - I guess it's all according to the kind of effects you do. Forgive what seems like ego (and I really don't care if some think it is!) - the kind of effects/routines I do (teach) with cards - laymen will simply assume that it can only be a trick deck - UNLESS YOU DO IT WITH THEIR DECK! I really see no way that that can be "disputed."

I think the tradeoffs in performing with a borrowed vs. non-borrowed deck have already been considered and accepted by the people who populate this forum, which is explicitly about stacked and memorized deck magic.

This is like going into the coin forum and arguing that the folks there should dump their coins and perform with cards instead.

Wish I understood your analogy, Tim, then perhaps I'd learn something. But not sure I understand it. Are you saying that the subject shouldn't be discussed because it has "already been considered and accepted..." etc? Because how can that be so when there are two and half pages about it here?

I understand the analogy. I’m pretty sure you’re right that you’d learn something from it if you could understand it too. There are only two-and-a-half off topic pages here because you came in to change the topic and got defensive when that was pointed out.

Yeah - you're so right - your vast knowledge - Good Lord, 57 posts - makes you sooooo right.

A discussion of deck switching might be useful, to give the appearance of using someone else's pack while still using the stacked deck, which is the clearly defined tool specified by this forum.

You claim 80 years of experiece. Is that just your posts on the Café, or can we agree that experience transcends internet posts?

I don't "claim" anything - I simply, always have - "tell/told it like it is." I don't know about "experience transcending internet posts" -- not sure I even know what you mean - that's why I'm told that I'm just about the best writer in magic - BECAUSE I SAY IT LIKE IT IS - no need to try to figure out "what the heck is he talking about"?

So, yeah, I'll take this great chance - and put my LITERALLY 80 years of card magic experience against your - to repeat - "...vast knowledge - Good Lord, 57 posts - makes you sooooo right." And we'll all breathlessly await your next "what did he say?" response.

Not understanding basic posts seems to be a repeating problem for you, but I can clarify: My 57 posts do not represent the whole of my knowledge of magic, any more than your 7567 represent the whole of your knowledge in magic. Are you prepared to argue that those posts are in fact the sum of your knowledge, or are you hypocritical enough to apply that standard to me but not yourself?

Good; as I said, we all breathlessly awaited your "what the heck is he talking about" response. You didn't disappoint.

Now let me save time and space - whatever it is you're saying/talking about - you're absolutely right. Now, instead of wasting more of everyone's time - you can go back under your moist rock and continue to pull wings off flies.

Whether your failure at reading comprehension is feigned or genuine, I'm confident my posts make perfect sense to the rest of the readers. Instead of under a rock, I'll go back to being a professional, paid magician. You have stated that it's been decades since you did that, so I have no hesitation trusting that I've got a finger closer to the pulse of the modern-day audience's mindset.

You can go back to being retired and pretending no new ideas have surpassed the ones you had in your glory days, but believe me they have.

Mr. Lorayne, the section "Shuffle, not stirred" of The Magic Café is devoted to those interested in memdeck work.

You are completely right when you say you are entitled to have an opinion and you have already made clear for us that you don't work with memorized decks. But the question was literally about card magic with memdeck. If you don't do that kind of stuff, then your reasons (which you have already mentioned) can be of interest, but not much more than that (specifically in this context).

We already know you don't do memdeck, but should we all stop using memorized decks just because you don't?

In April 1983, for the vol. 6 of Apocalypse, you wrote about an effect by Tamariz called in spanish "Los Tres Actores". I, here, ttranslate the first paragraph from Spanish (my source) to English:

"Juan, together with Camilo, Ascanio, Anton and maybe 25 other magicians is member of the "Escuela Magica de Madrid", the most prestigious group of close up and card magic in Spain. He has some excellent card magic routines..."

Well, Juan uses memorized decks. Use is not the right word, he amuses with memdeck. Your first advice to the OP was to learn impromptu card magic, which is basically telling the guy to drop memdeck magic altogether. Would you say that to Juan Tamariz as well?

Do you have a deck I could use? Yes? Great! Here's a sharpie. Take your deck out and sign the face of each card to make sure I don't secretly swap out any of your cards for my own. I'll just sit here for several minutes while you do that. Once you've finished, I promise I've got some great, impromptu tricks to show you, and you'll be able to be perfectly assured that I'm using *your* cards--not my own! Yes, my magic comes with the rock-solid guarantee that no trick decks are in play!

Oh, you over there? You think this guy might be a stooge? Let's burn that idea. Do you have a deck? Yes? Great! Could you take the sharpie and sign every single card in your deck? .... Thanks.

Now both of you, please wash your cards for us. Really mix them up. Make sure to prove that I couldn't possibly have the order of the cards in either of those decks memorized. Great, thanks for your help.

Now, if you would, while I close my eyes, I want just one of you to hand me a deck. I won't even know whose deck I'm using! Hang on, and let me plug my ears with these earplugs. Now you can pick a random third spectator to decide whose deck we should use. Once you've figured that out, and placed a deck of cards in my hands, I'll perform the remainder of this trick without removing my blindfold, just to make it as clear as possible that I haven't used a stooge.

Do you know what we call this nonsense? Running while you're not being chased.

If HL is constantly running into the problem of folks thinking he's using a trick deck, I think HL needs to rethink his routines. That's what I'd do.

RiderBacks: Your post above makes sense - yours above that does not. The answer to your makes-sense post is obvious - at least to me - if you do really IMPOSSIBLE-seeming things with your deck, laymen will think it's a trick deck. Now, that's from my 80 years of experience - if I'm wrong, so be it --- but I will continue, as I have for a couple of decades, to use only borrowed decks for laymen. Finally; I think your remark about me rethinking my routines fits much better for YOU! Start to do IMPOSSIBLE-seeming routines and you'll see that laymen always think you're using a trick deck. Again, if I'm wrong, so be it.

I won't bother responding to CR....'s silliness except to tell him that I have been coming up with new ideas for decades - and some more coming up in my upcoming book, AND FINALLY! Retired? Wherever I go - to this day - I'm asked to "do something." And the people I "do something" for are the kind of people (Mel Brooks, Carl Reiner, former mayor of NY Mike Bloomberg, Alan Alda, Dick Cavett - and on an on -- and their friends) that I'm sure don't fall into CR...'s area/category. So, as usual - he has absolutely no idea as to what he's talking about. My advice remains as stated - suggest that you pay no attention to him whenever he comes out from under his trollistic moist rock.

Ricardo: Nice to see an intelligent post, one that "fits" the subject. Thanks for that. So, just a couple of points in response to a couple of your statements/questions. In no way have I ever said that anyone should stop using memdecks - or anything else - that they want to use. I must have said this many times - TO EACH HIS OWN.

I'm stating my opinions, and the things that WORK FOR ME when I enter these threads. If that's wrong, I apologize. Incidentally, another one of your statements that I must mention - when I suggest to anyone that they learn some good impromptu card stuff in no way am I telling him or anyone "to drop memdeck work altogether." You're putting words into my mouth there, Ricardo.

Re: Juan Tamariz. Again, you're missing the point. What Juan does publicly FITS him - that's what he does. And he does it great. (Remember? To each his own.) But - I don't have to suggest to Juan that he learn some impromptu, any deck, card stuff. He's a friend - he visited me at my home in NYC some years ago, and we did card stuff for each other for hours. He blew me away with his NON-MEMDECK effects/routines. And if you check, say, Blown Away, his contribution to APOCALYPSE, you'll see that that does not depend on a memdeck. (I did make a few changes to it in one of my most recent books.) Anyway; hope I've made myself clear re: some of the stuff here. Most important - to each his own!

Well, maybe. Us unworthy should definitely start reading the good stuff, LOL!

For the OP:
I don't use a stack much, but what I do with one (or am trying to do with one):

Weighing the cards (and other stuff, see EoCT Nikola section and elsewhere), and other super-sense demonstrations (see Darwin Ortiz Memorized deck download).
Card Calling (awesome!)
Some mental tricks from Corinda's 13 Steps
Pseudo- memorisation tricks
Card matching effects
Card control effects (dealing 4 of a kind or whatever)
Red/Black effects, like OOTW etc.

There's probably a huge amount more, but that's what's keeping me busy with stacks at the mo.

I approve of Aronson's advice. Don't do that...

I'm not aware of that advice - is it because he thought it was an obvious methodology?