Jon Racherbaumer - Sticks & Stones Number 4.pdf - J - animga

STICKS & STONES NUMBER 4

A leaflet for the left hand

Getting Lost in the Shuffle

Agreed: The subject of Riffle Shuffling is complex. Many claim to

fully understand the. Real Work. Few do.

The Shank Shuffle controversy was a learning experience. I edited

and published Marlo's controversial treatise about five years ago.

There were Underground tremors from coast to coast. The Inner

Circle buzzed and balloon-like egos bobbled in bunches. There were

harsh words and some hard sayings. A lawsuit was proposed and

dropped. Gossip. Estrangement. Private speeches. Then like all

controversies it predictably fizzled. The principal agonists--Ed Marlo

and Herb Zarrow--never clashed or met face-to-face. Marlo's book

and "argument" speaks for itself . There were no formal, public

refutations or rebuttals. What a shame! Here was another

opportunity for the so-called community of experts to intelligently

examine a subject that cries for clarification, a subject that needs to

be fully explored and analyzed. It didn't happen.

Point 1: Vladimir Nabokov writes in Strong Opinions that "reality is

a very subjective affair. He defines it "as a kind of gradual

accumulation of information and as specialization." What is the

reality of false Riffle Shuffles? Good question.

Point 2: Herb Zarrow has a safe and well-earned reputation,

particularly on the East Coast. His contribution to card magic has

been obviously established and his unique riffle shuffle contribution

is well-known. His silence is disturbing. He should publish his

private research concerning false shuffles. He should publish his

side of the Shank Shuffle controversy.

Point 3: In March of 1975 I wrote an article called "Getting Lost In

The Shuffle". This was originally included in a book planned for

publication. The book was published. The article was suppressed .

Since I'm against this kind of censorship, I'm publishing the

squelched article here...

Welcome to the club! There must be a legion of lost shufflers. It's

easy to become bewildered studying the Riffle Shuffle. Information

is scattered here and there, technical descriptions are often

sketchy, and nomenclature is not uniform. The definitive work,

Marlo's Riffle Shuffle trilogy (Riffle Shuffle Systems - The Patented

Shuffle - Riffle Shuffle Finale), is a semi-private and expensive

study. Furthermore it's too detailed and recondite for average

students. Its style will put casually interested readers to sleep.

Likewise the trilogy's structure is not wholly systematic, nor do they

embody a memorable unity . They must be read several times.

Every element, part, and detail must be retained, then mentally tied

together. Each reader is responsible for seeing unwritten

implications. Since Marlo's Trilogy was released and xeroxed copies

were eventually circulated, little research has been published. Karl

Fulves has published several monographs, but his contributions

have further complicated and muddled the subject. At this point we

don't need more information. We need to consolidate, simplify,

unify, and systematize all the information already published.

Let's get down to basics. What is a Riffle Shuffle?

A Riffle Shuffle is a mixing procedure characterized by having two

portions of squared cards randomly riffle-meshed together. This is

done by using the thumbs, each specifically placed on its respective

portion, to riffle off cards in a releasing action so they interlace and

become intermixed. This interlacing always occurs in a partial

manner, i. e. only the corners, ends, or sides mesh rather than the

whole card. Once the portions are interlaced, they're pushed

together in a squaring action.

This sounds simple, but there are many ways to accomplish what's

basically a three-step action: (1) The initial cut or separation of

portions; (2) The actual mode of interlacing the portions; (3) The

final square-up or subsequent cutting actions.

What is a FALSE Riffle Shuffle?

Now things get hairy! A genuine Riffle Shuffle causes the order of

the cards to be changed in a random , unspecific way. A deck is

literally a many-layered object consisting of fifty-two individual and

separate cards held as a squared unit. The positions of these layers

(for the most part) change during a genuine shuffle. The order of

the cards is physically changed or altered. In a false shuffle two

aspects are false: (1) Its appearance : the cards look like a real

shuffle when they're being maneuvered. (2) Its result and purpose :

The result is that all or parts remain unchanged. Its purpose is to

produce this result.

I once argued with Marlo that eight Out Faro shuffles was not false

shuffling. We were both right and wrong. It's a matter of semantics

and interpretation . The purpose of eight Out Faro shuffles is to

produce a deck's original order after shuffling. The shuffling,

however, is genuine and not false. The result is the same, but the

means of achieving it is different. In most false shuffles the order of

the cards is retained . In perfect Faro shuffles the order is regained

in a precise, cyclic way. Again: The Faro shuffle is a true one--the

cards are perfectly interlaced and squared.

To phrase things more succinctly: A false shuffle consists of actions

that seem to emulate a genuine riffle shuffle, but wherein one or

more secret actions nullify or invalidate the real ones. These secret

actions must occur during one or more of the three basic stages of

a riffle shuffle, i. e. the Initial Cut or setting-up of portions, the

interlacing of the cards, and the square-up or subsequent postlude.

Let's examine some false Riffle Shuffles.

THE STRIP-OUT & PUSH-THROUGH

These shuffles are akin. Both feature similar actions. In Initial Cut

or setting-up is fair. The portions are genuinely interlaced. The

secret, nullifying actions take place as the portions are pushed

together and apparently squared, and more importantly during the

final cut (s).

In the Strip-Out the portions are not fully squared. The longitudinal

sides are flush and squared, but the narrow ends are not. One

portion remains in an end-jogged condition known as the strip-out

condition. This jogged portion is stripped out in a simulated cutting

action. In other words, the portions are pulled or drawn apart. The

jogged portion moves away as a squared unit while the other

portion remains stationary as a squared unit. When the cut (?) is

completed, the original order of the deck is retained. Strictly

speaking, the Strip-Out and Push-Through shuffles are true. The

simulated cut is false. The cards are actually interlaced. The false

cut unlaces (nullifies) the portions.

In the Push-Through Shuffle the setting-up procedure and riffle-

interlace are fair; however, the right-hand portion is not

maneuvered into a strip-out condition. Instead it's pushed through

the left-hand portion. This also exchanges the portions (from right

to left). The final simulated cut, of course, is like the "stripping

action" of the Strip-Out Shuffle.

NOTE : The above explanations are necessarily very brief and

rudimentary. Fine points and bits of finesse are not described. One

can limn at great lengths about Block Transfers, Center Transfers,

Delayed Strip-Outs, Partial Strip-Outs, Riffle Stocking, Run-ups, and

so on. These are adequately covered by Marlo in his Trilogy. Other

riffle shuffle experts haven't published their findings. Their lips are

sealed or they're bluffing .

THE ZARROW SHUFFLE

Herb Zarrow introduced his shuffle in 1956, calling it "Full Deck

Control By A Riffle Shuffle." It appeared in The New Phoenix #346.

Zarrow combined known principles and dynamics to produce a false

shuffle that didn't feature a follow-up to nullify a real interlace, nor

did it use push-through or strip-out dynamics. Yet his shuffle

retained the order of a full deck.

The Zarrow shuffle is characterized by its center block pull-out to

divide the deck into two portions prior to their interlace. These

portions are apparently riffle-meshed together and the cards are

squared. How? Simple.

The center block is pulled out to the right. The portions are actually

interlaced, but these meshed portions are secretly disengaged.

During the square-up the original center portion (block) rides back

into place.

THE SHANK SHUFFLE

This shuffle is easy to confuse with the Zarrow shuffle. If a standard

Shank shuffle is executed, the operator must do it twice to achieve

"full deck control". Marlo has a variation with a follow-up cut that is

done only once. Neither variation uses a center block pull-out.

Technical details of this shuffle are included in Marlo's The Shank

Shuffle (1972). This same treatise explains the differences between

Zarrow and Shank dynamics, adds applications, and features further

arcana. Marlo also explains how the Shank shuffle is more flexible

when it comes to block transfer applications and other maneuvers.

Here's one of the biggest problems in the Zarrow Shuffle

Controversy: When we call a certain dynamic by name, we often

muddle our definitions. Ever since Zarrow's shuffle made itself felt

in the closed community of experts, its actions and actions like it

were automatically called Zarrow actions. The word "zarrow" started

an adjective, then became a noun and verb. ("He did a Zarrow..."

"Now Zarrow underneath the held-back block...") Any handling

using block cover and disengaged corners was considered

Zarrowesque. I can understand this and Herb should be given credit

for his unique contribution. His Phoenix article and expert model

inspired other cardmen to reconsider principles and dynamics long

ignored. But let's stick to the facts, giving credit where credit is due.

Herb Zarrow did NOT create the idea of secretly disengaging

interlaced cards under block cover. He didn't create block transfers.

He didn't create the center block pull-out dynamic. These elements

were already in the published Record. Zarrow's special contribution

to Riffle Shuffle arcana consists of combining these established

elements in a detailed and technical manner. He also demonstrated

through his own expertise the possibilities and potentialities

inherent in such a potent combination.

Readers may be asking, " Where are these elements previously

published?" Fair enough question. Try these:

THE EXPERT AT THE CARD TABLE (Erdnase)

"...the deck is separated into two packets, the thumbs riffle the

inner corners together, the left fingers are shifted across the

bottom, the right thumb spreads the top cards over the left hand

packet, and the right hand brings the outer ends of the two packets

towards each other, twisting out the interlocked corners and placing

the right hand packet again on top in much the same manner...the

more fanwise the packets are spread during the operation the more

perfect the blind."

THE L.W. FALSE SHUFFLE ( Genii magazine February-1937)

"The inner corners of the outer ends of the packets are brought

together, the right hand packet being held about half an inch in

advance of the other. The thumbs riffle these corners together, but

with the left thumb releasing its cards more rapidly than the right,

so that about half a dozen cards from the right hand packet fall on

top. The corners of the packets are interlocked only to the slightest

extent. Now while the packets are held in the same relative

positions...the positions of the hands are shifted so that the first

and second fingers of each hand lie alongside the outer ends of the

respective packets, completely concealing these ends. The right

thumb now presses on the free cards on top of its packet so that

they are fanned out to the left, forming a mask for the move to

follow. The packets are apparently squared around side by side and

the cards are pushed into each other, flush. Actually, in bringing the

packets around so that they lie side by side, the interlocked corners

Jon Racherbaumer - Sticks & Stones Number 4.pdf

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: