talkmagic.co.uk

If you are worried about a discernible pattern, and expect to show people the faces for any length of time, then I imagine your own stack would be quite as obvious as the two ones you've mentioned. Black, Black, Red, Red, etc... is going to be at least as obvious as Black, Red, Black, Red.

So don't show the faces clearly (and stick with the old stacks, or use yours), or invest some time in a more random-looking stack.

Just my opinion.
T.

Yeah i know its performance !(A) but dont u just feel more secure when u know they will never see the stack whatever happends?

i LOVE hard rude people to practice my magic on ... they always interfere and make me sharper... and push me to make different handlings and outs for effects...

If this happends what will i do ... thats what im al about... ofcourse it doesnt always happen ... but i rather be prepared for everything

Thanks for that information, Miniolo. You must be a Bridge player!

It is actually quite similar to Doug's QuickStack, at least as I recall it. Not the same, but there are similarities.

I have to say that I think it's too complicated for me, and I often use Osterlind's stack!

Part-Timer wrote:Thanks for that, Ted. I shall be buying Doug's new book very soon indeed!

It's worth it just for the DAO playing card stack, but it also includes some cool ESP card-related material too. There is an ESP stack that I just can't bring myself to learn because I'm lazy and use the standard one - and don't show the faces too clearly

T.

nope no bridge player;) only play poker but i once used the principle of major minor alternation for a trick from juan tamariz (neither blind or stupid)

which involved a stack that was also red black red black etc ALThough there wasnt a number order ...

but u could not show the deck as i wished and the trick is performed by the spectator for a great portion of the time and they would see how the trick works when they shuffle the cards

There's a reference above to Chan Canasta and his suit set-up for 8 Kings; in order to overcome the possibly obvious Red/Black/Red/Black rotation.

Having watched his performance recently on YouTube, I believe he's simply using Hearts, Clubs, Spades, Diamonds rather than the standard CHaSeD. Whilst this puts the order R/B/B/R/R/B/B/R, etc. it does indeed hide the alternating colour sequence somewhat.

There's a channel on YouTube by 'Conjuring Community'. Whilst even online magic clubs don't interest me in the slightest, the guys do make some excellent observations upon Chan's performance, which offer up a lot of food for thought:

https://youtu.be/Km2HRkvIahQ

What I noticed from the performance but the guys don't seem to touch on, is when blocks of cards are taken and recalled, Chan only calls the picture cards out of sequence. Yes he makes the odd miscall - irrespective of whether this is in error or deliberate, it adds some authenticity to proceedings in my view.

I'm sure that I am not the only one here to have used this superb stack over the years. I certainly prefer it to Si Stebbins; although I readily admit that Stebbins offers mathematical options for locating a card at a number, etc. - if indeed, that floats your boat. To my way of thinking, naming the number a card is at (or naming a card at a specific number) just screams out that the pack is prearranged. I could be wrong.

Whilst on stacks, a few years back, everyone wanted to be a Juan Tamariz and learn Mnemonica. Well, each to their own. However, I knew two magicians who learnt the stack forwards, backwards and inside out. However, both performances that I watched had significant, embarrassing(?) silent gaps, whilst their brains were no doubt working overtime upon modus operandi. Moreover, everything that I saw them do could have been achieved with a shuffled pack; and some degree of minimal set-up/sleight of hand.

Please don't get me wrong - Juan Tamariz is a superb, unique, creative performer. However, I shudder to think how many magicians across the planet over the past 20+ years have learnt Mnemonica; and thereafter tried to copy his performance style. Some have no doubt even gone out and bought a hat!

Joe Riding had a system for memorising a shuffled pack; and had 10 packs set up in different order - but could still perform a memorised pack routine with whichever one was selected. He performed this once on Granada TV with Stuart Hall - but it was never aired as it simply went on for far too long. He called me up somewhat annoyed that the director called out 'cut' after he'd called out just 3 cards. I remember saying to Joe at the time - you should have just stuck to 8 Kings mate!

As an aside, I might have bored you before by telling you that I was born (literally) into the East End pub game; the Mariners Arms next to Wapping Docks. I remember Dad telling me that a Scandinavian seaman came in one night and amazed people at the bar, just using 8 Kings. This would have been in the 1960's so who knows - the guy's inspiration could have come from actually watching Chan Canasta on the tele.

What a superb performer Chan was - and a brilliant example of how presentation is a whole lot more important than the method used.

I hope that if you have time, you enjoy watching the clip. It has certainly reignited my interest. I've got a show next week at a golf club for the ladies team. Knowing how they enjoy mind-reading, I may just mix a few 8 Kings ideas in with the palm reading.

Reading women's minds is very dangerous - they change in an instant. (OK, I know, hat, coat, door....)

Mandrake wrote:Reading women's minds is very dangerous - they change in an instant. (OK, I know, hat, coat, door....)

Don't they just!

I was thinking of using a Swami writer as well next week.....but I can't find one with an eraser attached.