Favorite Memorized Deck Effect?

Nov 8, 2007
1,238
3
What is your favorite memorized deck effect?

Mine is Steve Ehlers' "Three Card Location." It's very similar to Bill Malone's "Hands Off Memory Test," but I think Ehlers' is stronger (Ehlers' effect was published first).

First time a friend did it for me and a few others it blew my mind. This is the effect that, after I saw it, made me sit down and learn a memorized deck (the Joyal stack in "shocked" order).

What is the most amazing effect you've come across with a memorized deck?
 
Jun 2, 2008
134
0
Dallas, Texas
I really like Dave Forrest's Pseudo Memory routine in which you 'pretend' to memorize an entire deck. Its a great trick with some memory involved but you really can convince to the spectators that you have excellent memory.

There is a color memorization stack I use developed by Lewis Jones to remember the color of every single card in the pack. With the same method, you can memorize the color order in a borrowed, full shuffled deck within a few minutes. This is an awesome demonstration in memory that appears to be 100 times harder than it really is.

As for entire card stacks I am still unsure which ones to commit myself on. Perhaps you could point me in the right direction?
 
Nov 20, 2007
4,410
6
Sydney, Australia
I really like Dave Forrest's Pseudo Memory routine in which you 'pretend' to memorize an entire deck. Its a great trick with some memory involved but you really can convince to the spectators that you have excellent memory.

There is a color memorization stack I use developed by Lewis Jones to remember the color of every single card in the pack. With the same method, you can memorize the color order in a borrowed, full shuffled deck within a few minutes. This is an awesome demonstration in memory that appears to be 100 times harder than it really is.

As for entire card stacks I am still unsure which ones to commit myself on. Perhaps you could point me in the right direction?

There are many types of stacks.

There are stacks such as Aronson and Mnemonica (which I use) which are full memorised stacks. There are stacks like Osterlind's Breakthrough Card System which are calculation stacks. There are stacks like Si Stebbins and Eight Kings which are cyclical stacks.

There's no real answer to which one is the best - these are the three main categories, and each has their good and bad points. The ones I've named are the ones generally considered the best of their kind. It just depends what you need to use it for. For me, I use a full memorised stack (Tamariz's Mnemonica) because no other stacks match the benefits it gives me. Although it is the most difficult to learn (although not that difficult in my opinion - I learned it in 2.5 hours, the average according to Tamariz using his memory techniques is 3, and for a friend using other memory learning techniques it took about a month), and there is no backup in case you fail (I've never forgotten it in performance), the benefits outweigh the cost for me. Since I am not a card worker (mentalist), I prefer a full memorised stack because it gives me the widest array of possibilities, which is what I'm looking for - a tool that has the maximum possible usage potential.

As for Mat's original question: Not really sure, actually. There are some nice ACAAN effects using a mem deck. I quite like Mnemonicosis from the Tamariz book.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Viljo99
Nov 8, 2007
1,238
3
As for entire card stacks I am still unsure which ones to commit myself on. Perhaps you could point me in the right direction?

I would say pick up The Six Hour Memorized Deck book by Martin Joyal, but it's out of print. This is the stack I learned and I love it. Learned it on two plane rides to and from Florida to Vegas. The stack looks absolutely shuffled and it really only takes about six hours to master it.

A lot of people I know enjoy the Mnemonica stack, plus the book teaches a lot of great effects with the stack. Not sure how easy or difficult Tamariz's stack is to learn, but the guys I've met that have it memorized seem to enjoy it.
 
Nov 8, 2007
1,238
3
There are stacks like Osterlind's Breakthrough Card System which are calculation stacks.
BCS was the first thing I started with. You can do some incredible effects with a system, but much more with a stack, which is why I switched over to the Joyal stack--you can do everything you can with BCS and more. For those just looking into systems and stacks, though, Osterlind's system is killer. It will take you about 20 minutes to learn and feel comfortable with, and you can do some incredible effects with it. Fun place to start, but a stack is really the way to go, I think.[/quote]

As for Mat's original question: Not really sure, actually. There are some nice ACAAN effects using a mem deck. I quite like Mnemonicosis from the Tamariz book.
That's funny--I just performed both ACAAN and Mnemonicosis this morning. Both are killer.
 
Jun 2, 2008
134
0
Dallas, Texas
Thanks guys for the suggestions. Looking through my books I also happened to find the Nikota Card system. It seems to be really old but I can't find any background creator info on it. It does however explain a multitude of ideas. Now is the Joyal stack based on a calculation stack or a mental symbol stack?
 
Nov 20, 2007
4,410
6
Sydney, Australia
Alright, a few dot points:

-Six Hour Memorised Deck: I've heard good things about this. However, its big selling point is that you can learn it in six hours. As I mentioned, I learned Mnemonica in two and a half hours - so I find the idea of this one redundant - although I admittedly have never looked into it because of this.

-Mnemonica: Definitely difficult to memorise. It requires a long period of serious concentration - 3 hours of sitting down and doing everything suggested to commit the stack to memory. But it's rewarded.

-Nikola Card System: Created by Louis Nikola, published in 1927 by him, but more famously included in Hugard's Encyclopedia of Card Tricks (1937). Classic system which is still used quite widely, based on a memory system. It requires perhaps the most work of those listed here; but the tools used to memorise it can be used in other contexts.

-BCS: For me, agreed. Although, as I mentioned - I require the versatility of a full deck stack; I certainly wouldn't fault anyone for having different needs. If you don't need it, use whatever suits.
 
Sep 12, 2007
153
1
40
Normandy, FRANCE
I use Richard Osterlind's Breakthrough card System : it's easy to learn, and the decks looks truly shuffled. His Challenge Mind Reading is honnestly the strongest card trick I perform, period : you accurately read the mind of a spectator without asking any question, nothing is written down, and you don't even touch the deck !!! To the spectators you really do the impossible.

I know it's not a memorized deck, thus less possibilities , but as praetoritevong said, it suits my style, and I'm happy with it !
 
Mar 6, 2008
1,483
3
A Land Down Under
I personally have memorised Osterlind's stack. It gives the best of both worlds as it is appears to be fully shuffled and random however you can use the simple idea of knowing the next card in sequence. I this makes it more effective for certain effects where by sighting one card you know the next. It can also have the advantages of knowing say the 17th card in the deck.

For example say you spot the 4 of clubs in the Tamariz's stack you would need to calculate that as the first card and think of what is the second card and go from there. Whilst this is very easy for the first card sometimes you may miss the card. However with the BCS you can spot one card and within seconds figure out the next card.

As for my favourite effect with a memorised deck that has to either be card calling or something along the lines of HCE.
 
Jan 1, 2009
2,241
3
Back in Time
The Hands off Memory test can be done with pretty much any Mem deck.

I personally like the Tamariz stack, because it doesn't have any particular order to it and the false cuts and shuffles he goes over end up making the deck look better.
 
Mar 22, 2009
39
1
For example say you spot the 4 of clubs in the Tamariz's stack you would need to calculate that as the first card and think of what is the second card and go from there. Whilst this is very easy for the first card sometimes you may miss the card. However with the BCS you can spot one card and within seconds figure out the next card.

This doesn't make any sense. If you're using a memorised stack that you've completely commited to memory there is no calculation or hesitation. As soon as I see the Four of Clubs I automatically know the cards on either side. I don't need to calculate to determine the next card. I don't even have to translate the card back to the stack number to determine the next one. Once you're fluent with a mem-deck the recall is instant.

Joyal's Six Hour Memorized Deck is a great book, and he goes into a fantastic amount of detail on all types of stacks which was the most interesting part of the book for me. The only downside is all the tricks with the exception of one are not very strong and are easily done by better methods that retain the stack.

For those interested in learning the Aronson Stack I would pick up a copy of Bound to Please. This includes his system for memorising the stack and details on the effects built into the stack.
 
Sep 10, 2008
915
3
QLD, AUS
I use mnemonica purely because it's the first stack I learnt. Since I don't do any of the stack specific tricks like "Any Hand Called For", or "Deal of a complete suit", any memorised stack would work for me.

I usually open my card act with multiple divinations, or "The Joker".
But my all time favourite effect with a stack is "All of a Kind".

For example say you spot the 4 of clubs in the Tamariz's stack you would need to calculate that as the first card and think of what is the second card and go from there. Whilst this is very easy for the first card sometimes you may miss the card. However with the BCS you can spot one card and within seconds figure out the next card.

When a stack is properly memorised, whenever any number from 1-52 is named, the card is instantly known by the magician, and when any card is named, the number is instantly known by the magician. The only calculation that should happen is when the stack is cut, and even then, it's only 2 digit subtraction.
 
Nov 8, 2007
1,238
3
Now is the Joyal stack based on a calculation stack or a mental symbol stack?

Unlike most stacks it doesn't use mnemonics to memorize the stack. No calculating is necessary either. It uses a set of 14 rules that are extremely easy to retain. This page goes over the basic techniques, and what is the norm for most people in committing a stack to memory.

I found the Joyal stack very easy to learn, and I've taught it to two other people who picked it up quite quickly as well. Best place to go if you want to learn a stack fast, I think. Every stack has its advantages though. Some stacks are easier to learn than others, some you can get into quite quickly from new deck order with a few faros and cuts, and some have built in effects other stacks don't have. In the end you have to decide what you want out of your stack. For me, the effects I wanted to do could be done with any memorized stack that, when spread, looked shuffled. So all I wanted was to learn a stack as quick as possible. For me the Joyal stack suited my needs and I was able to memorize it quickly and start working with a memorized deck sooner than later.

Just all depends what you're looking for really.
 
Nov 8, 2007
1,238
3
For example say you spot the 4 of clubs in the Tamariz's stack you would need to calculate that as the first card and think of what is the second card and go from there. Whilst this is very easy for the first card sometimes you may miss the card. However with the BCS you can spot one card and within seconds figure out the next card.

This isn't quite accurate. If I spot the four of clubs in my stack (#16) I don't have to calculate anything to know the next card because I have the deck memorized. The next card is just #17 (JS), the next 18 (9H), 19 (KD), and so on. No calculations needed at all.

The BCS is a great place to start as you can do quite a bit with it. And for some those effects are enough. They were for me for quite a while. The disadvantage, however, is that if someone names a card you don't know what number that card is in your deck, and there's a lot of effects you can when you have that information. That's the main advantage of a memorized deck over a card system.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nov 8, 2007
1,238
3
I usually open my card act with multiple divinations, or "The Joker".

I just started playing with this effect a few days ago. I really dig it, but have yet to perform it. Do you use a riffle, thumb count, or an estimation cut to get to their card? All it says in the book is after they name a card you "secretly riffle to the card named and pass it to the top." I'm fine with the pass required in the routine, but do you have any advice on the misdirection needed to locate the named card?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sep 10, 2008
915
3
QLD, AUS
I just started playing with this effect a few days ago. I really dig it, but have yet to perform it. Do you use a riffle, thumb count, or an estimation cut to get to their card? All it says in the book is after they name a card you "secretly riffle to the card named and pass it to the top." I'm fine with the pass required in the routine, but do you have any advice on the misdirection needed to locate the named card?

When I'm spreading through the deck with the faces to them saying something like "Now you can see all these cards are different", or "I want you to think of any card in the deck", I down-jog 13th, 26th and 39th card. So that when I close the spread, I have an impromptu index, so that the most i have to thumb/pinky count is 6 or 7.

Or I just estimate, pass, then glimpse the bottom or top card, I usually get within 5 cards or so from the named card, so I just compensate somehow with clipshifts, passes, bottom changes, bottom palms + clipshifts, etc.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nov 8, 2007
1,238
3
Nice. Some good techniques. I've been thinking about putting breather crimps in at 13, 26, and 39. Think I'll give it a go and see how it works out.

Appreciate the response, man. :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sep 10, 2008
915
3
QLD, AUS
Yeah, sometimes I make the 13th, 26th and 39th cards short cards, but lately I've been drifting away from that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nov 20, 2007
4,410
6
Sydney, Australia
Yeah, sometimes I make the 13th, 26th and 39th cards short cards, but lately I've been drifting away from that.

If you do this, you'll love this bit of advice.

DON'T crimp/mark/jog/short the 26th card. Instead - use one of 20-22, or 29-31.

Why?

If you've ever faro shuffled, you know that cutting to the 26th card is actually quite easy to do most of the time without a break. With a bit of practice (that most already do without thinking), you essentially have a short card without a short card - you will always be able to hit 26.

Therefore, instead, short a card that is a few away from 26 - far enough away to be useful and to take advantage of this natural skill, but still close to the middle.
 
Sep 10, 2008
915
3
QLD, AUS
If you've ever faro shuffled, you know that cutting to the 26th card is actually quite easy to do most of the time without a break. With a bit of practice (that most already do without thinking), you essentially have a short card without a short card - you will always be able to hit 26.

Cutting to 26 while looking at your hands is second nature, yes. Simply lifting up with your thumb at 26, or simply pulling down with your pinky at 26, isn't so much.
I find an index at 26 necessary when I need to rapidly find cards without arousing any suspicion that I have even begun to focus my attention on the deck, since I'm nowhere near practiced enough with estimation to find breaks invisibly in such a fashion.
 
Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results