Ortiz Memorised Deck Routines Made Easy?

Struggling with an effect? Any tips (without giving too much away!) you'd like to share?

Moderators: nickj, Lady of Mystery, Mandrake, bananafish, support

Ortiz Memorised Deck Routines Made Easy?

Postby SpareJoker » May 12th, '12, 11:40



Whilst I have long admired the meorised deck (MD) routines of Darwin Ortiz (such as 'The Zen Master' and 'The Last Laugh' from Scams & Fantasies), I have never performed such routines because I feel (personally) that the time spent in maintaining a memorised stack is not justified by the numer of times I get to perform (I can see how this would be different for a full/ part-time performer however).

With 'The Zen Master' (which is an elaboration upon the 'Lazy Man's Card Trick'), Darwin states that one of the improvements he made to the routine was that the deck was always face-down (in the original it was spread face-up), thus further hiding the secret of the effect. It struck me the other night that the practical upshot of this is that it means that the stack can be in any order the performer desires (the same applies to 'The Last Laugh').This makes a lot of the routines easily adaptable to a more easily remembered sequence (personally I just arrange the cards by CHaSeD suit order, with each card in it's numerical position A-K). This makes calculating the stack number a piece of cake. If the card is a club its stack number is equal to its numerical value. If the card is a heart its stack number is equal to 13 plus its numerical value, and so on.

Must admit, I'm kinda suprised Mr Ortiz hasn't spotted this himself (as far as I'm aware), as he's a smart guy. Or have I missed something here?

Are there any other MD routines that members are aware of that can also be used with a 'simple' stack?

User avatar
SpareJoker
Senior Member
 
Posts: 399
Joined: Apr 25th, '10, 12:16
Location: West Midlands, UK (SH, Card magic)

Re: Ortiz Memorised Deck Routines Made Easy?

Postby Lenoir » May 12th, '12, 11:50

Is The Last Laugh the "improvement" on The Smiling Mule by Walton? If so, don't bother learning it. It is a serious step back from the original.

It's funny, because I know a few people who use MDs and yet they use effects that just require you to know which number a card is at, or to determine the card by knowing the card above...something that any cyclical stack does just as well.

"I want to do magic...but I don't want to be referred to as a magician." - A layman chatting to me about magic.
Lenoir
Elite Member
 
Posts: 4246
Joined: Dec 31st, '07, 23:06

Re: Ortiz Memorised Deck Routines Made Easy?

Postby Part-Timer » May 13th, '12, 13:41

I've recently finished reading Charles Gauci's book, A Lifetime of Magic, and he states that he doesn't agree with the obsession with having a stack that must be capable of examination. He has his own memorised stack that allows you to know where any card is, just by following a few simple rules. There is a clear pattern, were you to ribbon spread the pack for the audience, but why would a performer need to prove something that wasn't in question to start with?

Part-Timer
Elite Member
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: May 1st, '03, 13:51
Location: London (44:SH)

Re: Ortiz Memorised Deck Routines Made Easy?

Postby Mr_Grue » May 17th, '12, 13:42

I use Tamariz's stack, but must admit I mainly use effects that can be done with a cyclical stack. MDs are better camouflaged, and, in the case of Tamariz, can be easier to set up than Stebbins or similar, but Part-Timer and Gauci are right - people don't generally spot patterns in the stack.

I do have maybe three or four effects (that I actually perform - more on file) that couldn't be done with a cyclical stack. They do seem to be a rarity. I know John Born was planning a book on MD effects - not sure if that's still in the works, but the effect he published in Card Magic USA seemed to promise that they'd go beyond the cyclical. Though there are stacks that allow you to calculate the position, it takes less headspace in performance to recall the position than it does to calculate the position. Caveat to that, though, is that you can routine for this, and can even have the calculation support your performance - reading minds, for example, ought to take mental effort, so use the calculation to support your faked mental effort.

There's the utility aspect - the old saw that a memorised deck can take most "any card selected" effects and turn them into "any card named" effects.

As far as Zen Master goes, I suppose Ortiz may not have spotted or included the fact that the improvement means you can use a much simpler stack because he already has a memorised stack that he can use.

Oh, and I don't perform that often, but still feel that the memorised stack is worth the investment.

Sorry - this post seems terribly incoherent.

Simon Scott

If the spectator doesn't engage in the effect,
then the only thing left is the method.


tiny.cc/Grue
User avatar
Mr_Grue
Elite Member
 
Posts: 2689
Joined: Jan 5th, '07, 15:53
Location: London, UK (38:AH)

Re: Ortiz Memorised Deck Routines Made Easy?

Postby Part-Timer » May 17th, '12, 21:59

I think I managed to unscramble it. :wink:

I have just realised that there is one thing that I should also have mentioned. If you use a simple stack, you should probably do a false shuffle or switch the deck. I usually false shuffle. Don't make a big deal out of it. Do it casually, then into the trick.

"Proper" memorised stacks seem to have two advantages. The first is that the cards seem to be in a truly random order. As I said before, this is not necessarily an issue in practice. Also, there are some cyclical stacks that use formulae or rules to disguise the stack; they are not all obvious, even if someone does inspect the deck.

The second is that there may be tricks built into the memorised stack, such as Poker deals or spelling tricks. These may be harder to fit into a cyclical stack, but there are definitely tricks that use the cycle as part of the method, which couldn't be done with a non-cyclical stack. One of my favourites uses this principle, in fact!

There may be other pros and cons, such as the ability to get into the stack quickly from new deck order (as Mr Grue rightly remarks). I prefer Eight Kings or the Osterlind BCS, but I can see a place for the Gauci stack in my repertoire.

Part-Timer
Elite Member
 
Posts: 3085
Joined: May 1st, '03, 13:51
Location: London (44:SH)

Re: Ortiz Memorised Deck Routines Made Easy?

Postby Mr_Grue » May 18th, '12, 13:58

Part-Timer wrote: but there are definitely tricks that use the cycle as part of the method, which couldn't be done with a non-cyclical stack. One of my favourites uses this principle, in fact!


Osterlind has a lovely "knife in the deck" effect with one of his(?) cyclical stacks. A card is selected, you cut the deck at the selection point, then knife the deck in the middle to find the selection's mate. The stack makes it virtually almost self working.

Currently warming to the idea of estimation and fishing with a memorised deck...

Simon Scott

If the spectator doesn't engage in the effect,
then the only thing left is the method.


tiny.cc/Grue
User avatar
Mr_Grue
Elite Member
 
Posts: 2689
Joined: Jan 5th, '07, 15:53
Location: London, UK (38:AH)


Return to Support & Tips

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests