This idea was an offshoot of my Lazy-B1 and more specifically Lazy-B2 stack.

TWO TUT-2 in a nutshell:
1. Bicycle NDO
2. cut hearts onto the table face up
3. cut spades onto the hearts pile face up
4. turn the heart spades half face down
5. outer faro the heart spades half into the club's diamonds half
6. cut the deck in half 2nd outer faro (AH is top)
7. swap the ace of hearts with the seven of hearts
8. swap the ace of diamonds with the seven of diamonds

The resulting physical deck is below:
7H, KS, AC, KD, 2H, QS, 2C, QD, 3H, JS, 3C, JD, 4H, 10S, 4C, 10D, 5H, 9S, 5C, 9D, 6H, 8S, 6C, 8D, AH, 7S, 7C, AD, 8H, 6S, 8C, 6D, 9H, 5S, 9C, 5D, 10H, 4S, 10C, 4D, JH, 3S, JC, 3D, QH, 2S, QC, 2D, KH, AS, KC, 7D

The suit valuations (HighSchoolChilD) HSCD:
Hearts=1
Spades=2
Clubs=3
Diamonds=4

Card to number:
Spectator says a card name.
The magician's confederate mentally calculates:
If a red ace or red 7 then pretend they switch.
1. If spades or diamonds
then subtract the card value from 13 giving
the working card value
else
make the working card value one less than
the card value.
3. Constant 4 times the working card value.
4. Add the suit value giving card's position (Note that Hearts=1, Spades=2, Clubs=3, Diamonds=4).

Number to card:
Spectator says a number from 1 to 52.
The magician's confederate mentally calculates:
If 25 then AH, If 28 then AD.
If 1 then 7H, If 52 then 7D else:
a. Divide the number by 4 giving a working quotient and remainder.
Note remainder equals 0=diamonds, 1=hearts, two=Spades, three=clubs.
b. If diamonds subtract 1 from the working quotient.
c. If spades or diamonds
then subtract the working quotient value
from 13 giving the card value
else (not spades nor diamonds)
add 1 to the working quotient giving the
card's value.
------------------------------------------

Below is the thought evolution that I went through to come up with this TWO TUT-2 stack.

When thinking about Lazy-B2 which has one descending suit it hit me that the Bicycle decks new deck order NDO comes with two descending suits ie: diamonds, and spades. So why not (starting with Bicycle ndo) just do two perfect faros and you're ready to go?

The first few cards of this stack that I will call here the "Two Tut-1" stack (faro/pharaoh couldn't resist the pun):

After first faro:
AH
KD
2H
QD
...
AC
KS
2C
QS
...

After second faro:
AH
AC
KD
KS
2H
2C
QD
QS
...

Well this deck could not be shown in a spread and doing a face up count would not be wise, but you could do a very quick sloppy table spread for a busy waiter or a quick dribble display and then when the time came to do the count just have them (or you) do a down under count so as not to expose the faces and keep the stack intact and then after the target card is turned face up then show the card just before and just after to be different.

I feel sure that this stack has been done and published somewhere else but it is so obvious it should be public domain in my opinion.

I doubt if we will use this Two Tut-1 stack because of its poor display characteristics (has value pairs all the way through), but it is interesting and simple and calculates all 52 cards but does require the subtraction from 14 for two of the suits.

Well the Two Tut-1 stack could be made to look a little better (new name Two Tut-2) by making a couple of preliminary cuts so that before the first faro:

One half of the deck has hearts (ascending) with spades (descending).

The second half would have clubs (ascending) and diamonds (descending).

Then do the first faro.

This will create like value pairs after the first faro but this is kind of a good thing because now the second pharaoh will intersperse the kings between the aces and queens between the two's etc. and this makes for a little bit better looking spread.

Perhaps the easiest way to make the initial cuts to prepare for the faros: cut the hearts off of the top of the deck onto the table face up and then cut the spades off of the bottom face up on top of the face-up hearts. Now the two halves are ready to have the first faro (both halves face down of course).

Then of course the algorithms would have to be adjusted/changed.

I would make two other minor physical changes: swap the two red aces for the two red sevens. In other words if a red ace is named just pretend it's a red seven of the same suit to calculate its position. If a red seven is named just pretend it's a red ace to calculate its position.

Doing the physical swap of the red sevens for the red aces kills two birds with one stone ie: eliminates 4 sevens in the middle of the deck and eliminates a red ace at the beginning and end of the entire deck (which looked kind of weird).

Another easy memorization is just to know that the ace of hearts and ace of diamonds are at positions 25 and 28 and know that the seven hearts is at position number one and that the seven of diamonds is at position 52.

This is not a great looking stack but it is fairly easy, I think easier than Harding and with proper performance management this could work well and it's very easy to construct.

I think below is an easier way to visualize the formulas (easier than my original post):

Note that suit values are: Hearts=1, Spades=2, Clubs=3, Diamonds=4.

CARD TO NUMBER:
Spectator says a card name.

The magician's confederate mentally calculates:
If a red ace or red 7 then mentally substitute the other card's value ie: if a red ace is named then use 7 as the value. If a red seven is named then use 1 as the value.

Beware below that suit value Hearts=1, Spades=2. This is different than most systems.

1. If SPADES then 13 minus card val then times 4 then add the suit value.

2. If DIAMONDS then 13 minus card val then times 4 then add the suit value.

3. If HEARTS then card val minus 1 then times 4 then add the suit value.

4. If CLUBS then card val minus 1 then times 4 then add the suit value.

Notice that spades and diamonds (the ascending suits) use the exact same formula.

Also motice that hearts and clubs (the descending suits) use the exact same formula.

-------------------------

NUMBER TO CARD:
Spectator says a number from 1 to 52.

1. The magician's confederate mentally calculates:
If 25 then AH, If 28 then AD.
If 1 then 7H, If 52 then 7D else:

2. DIVIDE the NUMBER BY 4 giving a working QUOTIENT and REMAINDER.

3. Evaluate the REMAINDER ie: 1=hearts, two=Spades, three=clubs, 0=diamonds.

a. If rem 1: HEARTS add 1 to the quotient giving the card value.

b. If rem 2: SPADES 13 minus the quotient giving the card value.

c. If rem 3: CLUBS add 1 to the quotient giving the card value.

d. If rem 0: DIAMONDS then 13 minus the quotient then add 1 giving the card value.

Note that hearts and clubs use the exact same formula.

Note that spades and diamonds have the same formula except diamonds has an additional "add 1" step.

In hindsight I think it was a mistake for me to swap the red aces with the red sevens for the following reasons:
1. makes it awkward to physically swap those cards in front of your audience (this means you would need to do this out of their view).
2. the magician does not have an excuse for the deck being poorly shuffled.
3. It makes the calculations a little more complicated.

Therefore I now believe the better way (to create and use this stack) is in front of your audience:
to spread a brand new deck showing that it is in NDO and then do the two faros as mentioned above and that's all leaving the AH on top and the AD on the bottom.

The magician then spreads the deck face up and says "well the deck is not completely shuffled but nonetheless the cards are mixed up pretty good, enough that we can try a few things".

By making this statement the magician is implanting in the audience mind that it is okay for the cards not to be completely shuffled and besides they physically have seen two dovetail type shuffles so this should negate the idea in the audience minds that there could be anyway to know where any specific card is.

The magician could also point out the two red aces and tell his audience not to name them, in fact the magician could say "when I ask you to name a card please name one not normally said because that makes the trick more impressive".

The resulting physical deck is below:
AH, KS, AC, KD, 2H, QS, 2C, QD, 3H, JS, 3C, JD, 4H, 10S, 4C, 10D, 5H, 9S, 5C, 9D, 6H, 8S, 6C, 8D, 7H, 7S, 7C, 7D, 8H, 6S, 8C, 6D, 9H, 5S, 9C, 5D, 10H, 4S, 10C, 4D, JH, 3S, JC, 3D, QH, 2S, QC, 2D, KH, AS, KC, AD

This does leave the ugly grouping of four sevens but I think this is tolerable given that it has been explained to the audience that the deck is not completely shuffled (and they may not notice them especially if the count doesn't go that high).

The calculations are the same except simpler because the stuff about the red sevens and the red aces are eliminated.

When doing card to number: a way to never count through the four sevens (ugly) is that if the calculated number is greater than 26 then mentally subtract that number from 53 and turn the deck face up.

Secretly convey that number to your shill.

https://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/view......orum=205

After the shill names the appropriate number then count that shill's number of cards arriving at the target card.

This way you would never count through the ugly sevens except if a 7 is named but then the most they would see is two of the sevens.

The suit valuations
Instead of calling it HighSchoolChilD call it HuSkCeD kind of like the Nebraska cornhuskers
HSCD:
Hearts=1
Spades=2
Clubs=3
Diamonds=4

Of course we never mention HuSkCeD in front of spectators, this is just for us magicians when talking about the suit sequences amongst ourselves and on this forum. I'm just making this clear to the newbies.

Note that even though the suit pattern is very similar to Si Stebbins I think it is more acceptable because the spectators saw that it was originally in new deck order and just given a couple of shuffles so they may mentally think well that's okay (if they even notice). Of course a sloppy spread Will somewhat hide the suit pattern.

The value progression is very different from Si Stebbins.

Be sure to look at four posts above about how to avoid the four sevens during the count.