Magic Tricks

I put "memorized" in quotes because you're really only memorizing a quarter of the deck. The rest uses what I can only call an algorithm, but NOT a "mathy" algorithm, if that make sense. I'm picturing a card in my mind, or a number. I'm not doing math.

This stack has a distinct advantage in my view to other algorithmic stacks like the Bart Harding stack, which are mathy. If you do, say, Asi Wind's ACAAN, you're doing math as a base part of the trick. Adding MORE math to derive card or number is just going to make it more difficult and more prone to calculation error. With this, you're using 2 different modes of thinking when doing the trick, which i think is superior and less confusing.

I am using his simplified stack, which I think is completely sufficent for a few second "I have 52 cards here, all different and in no particular order" flash to the audience. Would I deal this face-up? You could probably get away with it, but I would avoid if possible. It's more randomized in appearance than say, Si Stebbins.

I do not want to have to retain a memorized stack like Mnemonica. I don't do enough memdeck work to justify that. With the Common Stack, you could just come back to it later and refresh yourself on the rules and probably get back to full speed in a few hours. Like I said, you do have to rote memorize a quarter of the deck, but it's just a pattern of 3 different card values so it's not very difficult.

I also want to thank Carl for including the PDF supplement for this. I asked him about this and he came up with it same day. Most people wouldn't do this. He's a good teacher (that's his job) and supports his work.

I highly recommend this to someone who wants to do "memdeck" work but that's not his full repertoire or job.