I know riffle stacking is supposed to be done without looking, and anyone who is a skilled stacker can do so. this is much easier when you're only stacking two cards for hold 'em.
recently though I found a trick to stacking larger hands without looking and am curious if anyone else has tried stacking with ends? I pulled out a random deck a few months ago and realized the stacking was working almost automatically, took me a while to realize what deck I was using, but when I did, it was a revelation! I CAN stack 6 and 7 handed games without this advantage, but using this deck is so much more fun.

secondly, I'm curious if anyone practices, or has seen the cut nullification I performed sloppily at the end of the shuffle sequence? I realize I didn't use cover for the shuffle and it looks vastly different from my other shuffles, but this nullification is still new for me and I don't even have a year under my belt with it. I can do it much more convincingly when I have more patience and it's not extremely late at night/morning. I worked out the maneuver on my own while doing stevens drills. there's no breaks or crimps, and the previous advantage I mentioned for stacking is not used for this in any way (it can be done with a completely normal deck). I found it to be a very interesting/useful move since an other player can cut the deck normally and complete it on their own if they wish, yet the deck can still be restored. I heard Forte mention in the GPS series that "the dealer reserves the right to shuffle again after the cut" and figured this type of maneuver could be used in game as it abides by the rules. this could be used if you did not expect the player/spectator (in the case of demos) to complete the cut, (eliminating the possibility for any hops or passes) after performing a lengthy and tedious stack.

feedback is welcomed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRK5CZRkFDo&feature=youtu.be

I enjoyed watching you, for what reason when dealing the aces at the end are you holding the deck like you are about to preform a Gene Maze bottom deal?, just curious!.

Thanks!
the reason for the grip is consistency. it's such a drastically different grip than my normal deal, that when I do go to deal a bottom, or set up for dealing base, it's apparent that something else is happening. so I got into the habit of always dealing with a mechanic's grip; or at least 99% of the time.

I think the "ends" idea is great. Ripping would be a much better impromptu way of getting the same result in my eyes.

I'm not positive if you're using the term "ripping" in reference to collecting ends or not (don't want to assume), but how would you stack them using this process? I understand I could have "ripped" 'em from a shuffled deck to give a more impromptu feel, but I can't use them well enough to make it look natural; and I still would have had to stack after that anyway. care to elaborate?

i'm positive there's plenty of easier ways of doing most of the things I practice, like using a breather to cut aces. but why use a breather when you can practice the real deal culling techniques for decades!? lol. at least if I go the long way around, I'll always have something to work on.

i don't do demos or perform these for people, it's just about learning the work. so if I were to use some other technique to accomplish the same thing, it's kinda beside the point for me. very open to hearing alternative methods though!

Just a few corrections: I realized the place that forte mentions that the dealer reserves the right to shuffle after the cut was not in the GPS series, but rather the youtube video "hand quicker than eye"

also I guess I was under the wrong impression about what a mechanic's grip is. back when I was starting to learn this stuff over a decade ago, I had thought that the mechanics grip was where two fingers were above the deck and a dealers grip was just one finger. now I'm unsure of everything. I have never learnt these things from sources other than the gps series and ortiz on card cheating (my first cheating video [which, if you noticed, also explains why I stack like I'm left handed, when indeed I am not]) both of which do not explain much other than to briefly show you how things work. I did not learn a bottom deal from any of these videos, I just adapted my grip until I was able to access the bottom card. sorry for my lack of knowledge on the terms.

I don't think too many people know about ripping. Isn't it fairly new?

I was slightly confused to why you was mentioning a mechanics grip at the end of your video when it was not. I think you have clarified that though. The grip at the end looked like you was preparing to do a bottom deal and actually drew more attention to your dealing, especially when you was just dealing normally!!. Your stacking looked great although their are ways to reach the same outcome a lot quicker with fewer shuffles.

Ah, that's also the other half of the reason for the grip. I knew people "in the know" would be expecting something else to happen. I was going to actually make the deal look slightly fishy as to bring question to if the stack really happened or not, like make the dealt aces noisier, and not make it apparent that they were coming off the top...which would be the ultimate test as to if the stacking was actually detectable. but I decided against it in the end as I didn't want to have to defend myself or explain that it was a real stack lol.

as for stacking in fewer shuffles, is there any way you can elaborate without giving up info you don't want to? sources? names? maybe a pm? also care to point to a direction for what "ripping" is?

i've seen people stacking large hands in fewer shuffles, and I've considered looking into it, however in a real game. I never shuffle less that 5 times anyway... possibly more. as most of us know, it takes 7 shuffles to legitimately mix the deck, so I figured it's ok. the only place where I would need to stack in fewer shuffles is if I were to cull every card I needed before the stack, like a completely cold stack... in which case, it might be useful to know something like that.

Thanks for sharing.
but I'm not sure what sloppy move you are talking about.

Maybe I was being too critical on myself, however, after I cut the deck - the last shuffle seemed sloppy to me. it's a restoration of a legitimately cut deck using a stevens variation I've never heard mentioned anywhere, but my knowledge of all things stevens is... not vast. I just stumbled upon it myself one day and was quite curious if anyone more knowledgeable has seen it done? or in print (less likely) or even just heard it mentioned somewhere?

That looks like a regular push through probably with a blockoff to the previously cut position?

Pretty much, I'd hardly say it was a regular push through though. the blocking off is much like a stevens control; you have to find the top card in the shuffle, then the break is transferred after the push through.

If it's so, it's not a new idea. Forte did one in 52.

Did he? I've watched that thing dozens of times. care to give a time stamp or something so I could check it out?
also I know the general attitude of people saying they haven't seen something before is so they could claim they invented it. however I tried to carefully word it as to not portray that attitude. I said I stumbled upon it, never mentioned or indicated at all that I thought it was new...more like I thought it might not be in print, or sources would be scarce, which is why I asked if anyone has even heard it mentioned anywhere.

So where's the information here? you're all saying things but nothing to back it up!? help a guy out! lol

I reviewed forte's 52 again, and the only thing I found is a slug control where it starts out with the setup for the classic stevens control (shuffling a few cards on top of the deck [4 in this case])then uses a push through to bring them back to the top. this is fairly similar, but wouldn't say is the same as I was showing. having the deck cut cleanly means having to look for the top card during the shuffle, whereas forte only had to block off at a known position (4 cards down) the control in this form wouldn't be possible under the same circumstances as it has to be done in the mechanic's hands. I was more so looking for the move used in a culling manner. but the premise is there. thanks for the tip.

That's the one I was talking about. Same sleight: push through with blockoff, but with a different application.

I shipped my all my DVDs and books to Detroit so I don't have them with me right now. Sorry for the late reply.

That's alright. thanks, it's the closest thing I've seen to what I did, anyway.