I'm attempting a 2 card system

General Memory Chat
1

Some introductory remarks

After rereading this post, I realised how and when some readers might get confused about all kinds of things. So I have tried to make it more clear. I have erased what i believe are unnessecary explanations, like why there are 16 different 2 card suit combinations and 169 different 2 card value combinations. I have also made a clearer distinction between the origin story in which I am talking about a 4 card suit method and the actual 2 card system which combines a 2 card suit combination and a 2 card value combination in a single object (representing 2 cards).

Origin story

A couple of days ago I tried to learn my 256 4-suit-combinations from the (4 card suits/1 word) translation computer program (as part of my (2 card values/1 word) system) and I realised what a mess it was. The problem was not the words but the way I chose my objects and how I tried to learn them. For some combinations I looked at what the total word sounds like and tried to associate an object with that and for other combinations I looked at the word of the first 2 suits and also (of course) the last 2 suits and tried to come up with something that I could associate with that combination. Not surprisingly this didn’t work very well.

More systematic approach

So I imagined, what if I translate the first 2 suits as a powerful location like a running track, a hanging bridge or a MC Donalds restaurant and the last 2 suits as an object and than finally create the actual object that represents the 4 suit combination. This 4 suit object is than chosen to be compatible in a short story/video/image with the location/object combination.

1 example

Let’s assume that some 4 card suit combination has the location “running track” (first 2 suits) and the object “lion” (second 2 suits). This almost screams for the question: Who is running from the lion on the running track?

some possible objects, that I find appropriate (in a memory technical way):

  • Usain Bolt;
  • a gazelle;
  • a sumo wrestler (with the lion looking really hungry).

2 card system

After some trials I realised how amazingly easy this is, so I imagined I might as well shoot for an actual 2 card system using the same approach:

  • 2 card suit combinations will be read (as ki, ko koe, mak, mat, etc) and translated as a location (16 different locations);
  • 2 card value combinations will also be read (as for example A + 6 = lab, Q + 8 = kwacht, see Playing with unusual number/card translations) and translated as a person (169 different persons);
  • an object representing 2 playing cards (16 * 169 = 2.704 objects) is chosen (I mean “chosen” when making the system; all the 2.704 objects need to be in your long term memory when actually using the system) that is compatible with the location/object combination.

1 example of 2 card system

Let’s assume a 2 cards combination has the location supermarket (2 card suit combination) and the person Lee Haney (2 card value combination). This demands the following question to be aswered: What does Lee haney (famous bodybuilder) have in his shopping cart?

I happen to remember an interview in which Haney said, that after a workout he ate some pineapple as it helps with inflammation, so the answer I would give is a pineapple.

2 Likes
2

Good work

3

Thank you.

4

I not really understand but its good work

1 Like
5

I’m making great progress in building the foundation of this system.

image
image1365Ă—768 131 KB
.

I have decided it would be a very good idea to use only people for representing the (169) 2-card-value combinations (the 2704 “memory object” will be objects and animals; if a person is linked to an animal in one location, the links in other locations will also be with animals); I already have all the persons and locations selected.

The locations representing the 2-card-suit combinations are:

  • skate board ramp;
  • supermarket (person with object in shopping cart):
  • mma cage/octagon;
  • tennis court;
  • running track (in supermarket check out);
  • high jump mattrass;
  • circus (person performing act with object);
  • in bed;
  • long jump sand pit;
  • hanging from a crane;
  • swimming pool;
  • track (for sprinting);
  • throwing (discus, hammer, shotput) cage/circle;
  • water slide;
  • spinning disc;
  • basketbal court.
1 Like
6

Quick technical question…

how do you hold cards in a way that you can see four suits at the same time? Doesn’t that slow down things a little bit?

7

I just try to use all my fingers like a centipede and try to make sure there is a is a bigger gap between the 4th card corner and the 5th card corner (just like when you have a 3 digit system you would like/need space between every 3 digits) than between the cards of the first 4 cards and so on. But, yes it does create a challenge when you try to go fast.

Just to make sure, this talk about 4 suits reading doesn’t create a wrong impression of my 2 card system; in this system I only read 2 suits at the time (= location) and also 2 card values (= person).

By the way, after rereading my original post I realised how messy it was (for example, I was talking about objects when I meant persons in one part of the post), so I have done some serious editing.

8

How would you memorise the order of the cards for a full deck of cards?

9

If I understand correctly, the “location” (e.g. supermarket) and person (e.g. Lee Haney) are just scaffolding, similar to the consonants in the Major system or the initials in the Dominic system. Once the system is known well, that 2-card combination would just be recognised instantly as a pineapple. Presumably the list of objects and animals would then be memorized in the normal way, using the method of loci.

10

Well, the same way I would memorise the order of 26 random objects. I have not decided if it’s going to be a memory palace based method or linking method,or both (like Ben Pridmore).

11

Yes, but the important difference, I assume (based on trials thusfar), is that it is much easier to learn the 2.704 objects when they are linked to a person-location combination than a 4 letter combination. As i have mentioned in an earlier post, it took Ben pridmore several months to learn his objects. To elaborate even further; I remember some of my own 2 digit major system attempts in which I was struggling to remember what some 2 letter combinations were supposed to be read as, so I can only imagine how hard a 4 letter major based system must be to learn. This is also the reason I have chosen a completely deterministic reading system (lNew memory system for fast translation of numbers) for both numbers and cards. The downside of this deterministic approach is of course that some words are not real words, but it is my experience that the advantage is greater than the disadvantage.

Another reason I assume this system is faster to learn than the Ben system, is that I can train by just using flascards with a person’s name on it and simply imagine all combinations of this person and the 16 locations; if have linked the locations in an intuitive way that allows me to go through them at high speed.

12

See my response to Erol.

13

Since I’m replying to some questions I might as will give somewhat of an update.

Lo hanging fruit

The example of the Lee Haney + supermarket = pineapple combination is an example of lo hanging fruit (literally :joy:), as it it a very obvious and thus unforgettable combination. Some more lo hanging fruit for someone I imagine is known by most.

Arnold Schwarzenegger:

  • predator monster (great gift as an action figure, fits nicely in shopping cart);
  • cuban cigars;
  • rolex;
  • giant log (see Commando movie);
  • rubber boat (also Commando);
  • chopper (get to the …; all movies)

I also have persons that are easily linked with animals. For example, the completely absurd creation of a “pet shop owner” from a Dutch comedy show named “jiskefet”; in this pet shop all animals are put in shoeboxes (including horses and elephants) and the only way to see what animals are in the pet shop is to look at the labels on the boxes.

As a rule, if I use an animal as an object for one person/location, I make sure that all other combinations with that person are also animals. This makes it a lot easier to remember.

In order to maximise the amount L H F combinations I use a different color (orange as in orange, nevermind):

image
image1365Ă—768 108 KB

This way I can easily see which persons have a lot of high quality objects and which don’t. If I, at any time can think of something appropriate for a person than I can replace a green cell and make it orange with the new object inside.

And the rest

After the lo hanging fruit is dried up, I will just assemble whatever the amount of objects (all animals will be linked allready to the animal persons) I need for the remaining combinations and assign them randomly. I don’t want to spend months creating the system.

14

In the dutch language there is a saying that basically translates as “making it difficult for yourself”. I think that is what I have been doing with this system.

Not using the persons, but only objects/animals ultimately representing 2 cards:

An obvious choice for Smiegel (from the hobbit movies) in the supermarket is a ring. However I also have a ring for juggler Anthony Gatto (ring juggling) and for Xena warrior princess (throwing ring, also used for cutting meat). The images of any of these three persons holding or interacting with their ring(s) is far more powerful than just the ring as a solitairy object.

Does it still count as 1 object?

So, what if some 2 card combination is translated as Smiegel holding his precious ring, or Arnold Schwarzenegger walking with a giant log on his schoulder (see Commando, really you got to see that movie, if you haven’t allready), or Jean paul Sigmarson (4 times world strongest man) carrying heavy briefcases? Well, I think in these examples we can still speak of single memory objects. Unlike with a person-object(-action) method I don’t have to make sure that both the log and Arnold are going to be remembered, since there is no other person that does log on schoulder carrying.

The lo hanging fruit portion is going to grow and grow

There are many objects, that are very difficult to memorise when they are visualised out of context. In the sport of strongman (I have many strongman in my person list) for example there is all kinds of strange looking equipment, that is however extremely recognisable when visualised in combination with a strongman performing an event with it.

1 object, how about no object?

Some of of my persons are known for doing stuff that does not involve any kind of object, like:

  • Jean Claude van Damme (splits, precision kick);
  • Simone Biles (all kinds of gymnastic moves);
  • Jujimufu (youtube acrobat/bodybuilder/powerlifter known for jumping acrobatics and crazy exercises).

I feel that like the Arnold/log combo, a Jean Claude/split combo counts as a single (powerful) memory “object” and has a place in my 2 card system.

More people

Another category of memory “objects” that I didn’t allow myself to use was “other people”; people that are not part of the people list. Breaking free of this restriction gives a lot of possible top quality images, for example:

Arnold Schwarzenegger:

  • Franco Columbo (one of his training partners);
  • Danny de Vito (see movie Twins);
  • Sharon Stone (Totall Recall)

Batman:

  • the Riddler;
  • the Penquin;
  • the Joker;
  • Doctor Freeze;
  • Robin.

Superman:

  • Iron Man;
  • Lois Lane;
  • general Zod.
15

What’s your goal?
What’s the efficiency of this system?
Have you thought of the actual method of memorization of the cards?
Is not a PA, PAO, PAOC or PAOF (C for Character and F for feature, or replace with another option) a better method?

Ok.

First, a 2 card system implies you’re going to make a peg list for 2,704 combinations of two cards. I don’t believe in the efficiency (as speed is the most valuable part of competitions) of large mnemonic peg lists.

Second, I estimate even a single card peg list would with 52 loci would be more efficient, than the possibly best option of pair card peg list of 2,704 mnemonic images, 26 loci (this could be “improved” by PA or alike memorization methods, reducing the number of loci).

Third, I consider a better option to create at least a PA style peg list or alike (two images per single card) and with that reduce the number of loci from 52 to 26, though with PAO you reduce it to 18, with PAOx you then reduce it to what I consider the most efficent in speed of mnemonic images permuations and number of loci making it 13, just hindering in 216 mnemonic images in a 52 rows peg list.

Though if you want to go with this, then I recommend you to take a look at this:
https://memory-sports.com/millennium-pao/Double%20Card%20System/index.html

But if you decide for a PAO, I just made this one inspired by you:

A simple system for the names of the people/characters (best if done without system).

C= Clubs, D = Diamonds, H = Hearts, S = Spades, T = 10

2 - B, 3 - C, 4 - D, 5 - E, 6 - S, 7 - G, 8 – H, 9 – N

How to visualize the PAO?

The person performs the action with the object. It is not Person MI performs action MI with fixed object upon the Object MI. I prefer to choose actions that can be done by anyone with anything and to mostly anything. Where anyone is the Person MI, and anything is the object MI. This way, I don’t make the person-action-object interact with loci, where I stored them.

Objects: by Major System from A to 10, and

You don’t really need to use a system for any categories and if you already have a system for one category, just use that category as peg base for the rest.

Card Person Action Object
Christina Aguilera Swing Bat
Cate Blanchet Sing Microphone
Charlie Chaplin Wave Flag
Cara Delevingne Write Shield
Chris Evans Drop Rope
Charlie Sheen Hold Axe
Chris Gardner Push Pick
Chris Hemsworth Puke Hammer
Connie Nielsen Jump Shovel
Charlize Theron Hug Pencil
Carly R. Jepsen Clap Gun
Caroline Quentin Sneeze Cane
Chance Kelly See Mace
Dianna Agron Dance Wand
Drew Barrymore Juggle Trumpet
Daniel Craig Mop Newspaper
Dana Delany Smash Sword
Daniel Ek Sleep Camera
David Spade Shave Bottle
Daphne Guinness Flip Handcuffs
Daryl Hannah Throw Ball
Diane Neal Blow Rose
Danny Trejo Lick Suit
Dwayne Johnson Break Necklace
Dennis Quaid Explode Skull
Diane Kruger Burn Heels
Hayley Atwell Freeze Treasure Chest
Halle Berry Bath Glass
Henry Cavill Play Telescope
Hugh Dancy Knock Comb
Heart Evangelista Lift Scythe
Hailee Steinfeld Punch Paintbrush
Heather Graham Box Mask
Hannah Hart Catch Cigarette
Hannah New Carry Bra
Heather Tom Cut Pumpkin
Hugh Jackman Dig Whip
Huma Qureshi Electrify Popsicle
Hideo Kojima Levitate Chihuahua
Stephen Amell Comb Bouquet
Sandra Bullock Bath Crown
Sean Connery Iron Gloves
Sarah Drew Eat Cake
Sam Elliot Cook Boot
Sharon Stone Pick Panty
Sienna Guillory Dodge Dish
Stephen Hawking Kick Hat
Sanna Nielsen Drag Violin
Stanley Tucci Ride Piano
Steve Jobs Play Guitar
Sophie Quinton Draw Car
Stephen King Zip Wig

It’s missing the cards because i have pictures within the Word file and I’m not writing the initials again…

Cheers and thank you!

16

I would be somewhat disappointed if I could not get below 30 seconds for a deck of cards.

First, a 2 card system implies you’re going to make a peg list for 2,704 combinations of two cards. I don’t believe in the efficiency (as speed is the most valuable part of competitions) of large mnemonic peg lists.

There are 2 key elements in card memorisation that ultimately determine speed:

  • translation and image retrieval time;
  • placement of image in memory palace in memorable way time

Retrieval time

In a 2 card system only one image needs to be retrieved for every 2 cards as opposed to 1 image for for every single card in a 1 card system (forgive me for having stated the obvious). It seems obvious that the retrieval time of a single image in a 1 card system is faster, than in a 2 card system, since:

  • the retrieval of every single image is practiced more often in a 1 card system; those 52 images are retrieved every time a deck of cards is memorised;
  • the retrieval time of an image in a 1 card system is also faster, because for every image only 1 card needs to be read as opposed to 2 cards in a 2 card system (in my system the retrieval process involves translating a part of the 2 card combination in a person and another part in a location: the combination of these two trigger the ultimate image).

The most interesting question is: Is the retrieval of 2 images (for 2 cards) in a 1 card system faster, than the retrieval of 1 image (also for 2 cards) in a 2 card system. Well let’s look at my 2 card system by means of overlapping and comparable processes. In a 1 card system for every 2 cards, 2 cards need to be translated in a different image. I assume that this is very much comparable to the translation of the 2 card value combination into a person (there are 169 different persons, so it may be somewhat more “difficult”) and the translation of the 2 card suit combination in a location (there are 16 locations, so this may somewhat “easier” in comparison).

If you agree with the comparableness of the above mentioned processes, than you might also agree that the difference between a 1 card system and my system is the retrieval time after the 2 triggers (person and location) have been given (to the brain let say). So for example when I am given the triggers Arnold Schwarzenegger/supermarket I translate that as Predator. It is my hope, that I can do that very fast.

But all things considered the retrieval time winner will be a 1 card system.

Image placement in memory palace

I think the obvious winner in this category is the/my 2 card system since:

  • for every 2 cards only 1 image needs to be placed;
  • there is less chance of ghost images, specifically caused by having placed the same image in the same location multiple times.

It is my guess (and that is all it really is) that the image placement advantage will outweigh the retrieval time disadvantage and therefore make the 2 card system the winner.

About person/action/object method

I have tried multiple variations and I am just incredibly bad at this, which obviously does not say much about it’s value in general, but for me it doesn’t seem to work very well.

18

I feel that there is a bit of dishonesty in this statement. Perhaps I can show you why I feel this way, first by means of comparing your summary of mental steps to a simular summary of a rather ordinary reading task. And second by means of an actual example of my system.

Polar bear

Allow me to guide you through the steps neccesary to translate the above word combination. “Polar” means “relating to the North or South Pole” and “bear” refers to a group of animals that are carnivoran mammals of the family Ursidae. The combination of the aforementioned geographical and family group information can be used by your brain as triggers to release the required image of a polar bear.

Example of my system

2 :clubs: + A :heart: translates as nieki (2A = nie = Arnold Schwarzenegger; :clubs: :heart: = ki = supermarket = predator).

I don’t have to translate nie in an image of Arnold Schwarzenegger or ki in an image of a supermarket; the combination Arnold/supermarket simply triggers the image of predator. Hopefully many of these combinations will, after a fair amount of training, take on the nature of a “polar bear” reference.

As far as the “how does it help to think of a person and a location”: the 169 persons and 16 locations allow 2.704 images to be linked to a card combination in a hopefully (thusfar my experiments point in this direction) more memorable way than by directly linking to a (mostly non existing) word.

to then think abou 2 cards?

It is not clear to me when you think I would have to think of 2 cards and if you are implying that in some other system you don’t have to think of (2) cards. In my system the thinking of 2 cards only happens in the retrieval part, not in the actual memorisation part.

What 169 persons? Why do you need persons?

This seems like the same question as the one I just answered, but without the location part. I don’t really know what you mean with “what 169 persons?”.

You could have ACAH = an image of anything, ACKS another image of anything else, this will then add up to 52x52 mnemonic pictures. I’m trying to understand how your system helps either make memorizing 52x52 easier or reduce the number needed to memorize the mnemonic list or at least reduce the number of loci which is 26 (unless another method is used), you can get to 26 loci with a simpler list of PA style.

To me this also seems like the same question phrased differently. I don’t understand “reduce the number needed to memorise the mnemonic list” part; what number are you talking about? I also don’t understand why my system, if I understood you correctly, has to result in reducing the number of loci to being less than 26 to be valid; I don’t think the number of loci is even close in importance to number of images (combined images such as person-action-etctera don’t count as a single image in my understanding).

Let’s remember what information needs to be memorized of a card: the kind and the name, two pieces of information, making them equivalent to two digits when talking about numbers… so, with numbers atempting a 0000-9999 would be the equivalent of atempting a two cards systems, the difference is within the size of list of distinct pair permutations. But both give a huge number: 10,000 and 2,704.

You have lost me completely with 2 cards equals a 4 digit number. According to your logic, if someone can run 27 miles (almost a marathon) without to much problems, running 100 miles (almost 4 marathons in a row) should not be much of a problem either.

and no one who has claimed to use a 2,704 or beyond card mnemonics images and also won in speed anything.

So true, Ben Pridmore using the Ben system which has 2.704 images has never won anything, don’t even mention anything speed related (sarcasm much :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:. ).

I don’t see how shuffling over 2,704 pictures will be faster than shuffling over 52 two times ¶

I feel that you are misrepresenting reality in the same way that I felt you did at the beginning of your post; I am not shuffling over any number of pictures when retrieving an image representing 2 cards. The person and location point the brain directly to the appropriate image, just like reading “polar bear” results in an image of a polar bear (no koala bears or grizzly’s are being shuffled over whatsoever).

Despite the fact that we see things differently regarding multiple parts of this subject, I would like to thank for you for critically reading my posts and responding to them.

19

[quote=“erikfromholland, post:18, topic:54103”]
You have lost me completely with 2 cards equals a 4 digit number. According to your logic, if someone can run 27 miles (almost a marathon) without to much problems, running 100 miles (almost 4 marathons in a row) should not be much of a problem either.[/quote]

What I meant is that, in list size equivalence, the 2,704 imgs, meaning “2 cards one image” as for instance card A Clubs 2 Diamonds pegged to an image, it’s equivalent to a four digit number peg list 0000-9999, meaning “4 digits on image” for instance the number: 3456 will be pegged to an image. So, in both you are pegging to an image 4 pieces of different information. That’s just it .And again, the difference is 10,000 and 2,704. With that I’m saying 2704 are less than 10,000, so memorizing 2704 imgs it’s more plausible than 10K, let’s say you have to memorize 400 digits, how much it’s the benefit
.

Yeah, that was a dumb statement on my part. But think of it like this: did Ben Pridmore won because his technique is superior? Which is anyways it’s different to what you’re doing. His technique is just 2,704 images generated from a code. I’m still trying to understand what you’re doing, but it seems that you feel like I have offended or that was my intention. So, in that regard, keep doing what you’re doing and those who get it, will use it, I may miss it, because as hard as I’m trying to overflow it, I see the benefit: “in the mechanism you use to create the images” obviously, if you train your self win 2704 images, or 140608 (3 imgs) or 7311616 (4 imgs), you can win in the top as if you train yourself in another system to get to the top, and that’s assuming that your opponents don’t have a “better system”.

I’m not talking about a conscious action, it’s your brain that do the shuffling.

In my first answers, I ask you: what’s your goal? you answered:

The point of my second answer was to address the fact, that I, don’t see why this system, first 2,704 imgs and second the way that you choose to memorize the images for that list pegs, it’s an improvement or a need or anything related to get to that goal. I want to know, how it helps you more to do this. Yes, you can do it, I’m not saying you can’t. AND I’m not trying to encourage you to stop. I don’t think you’re making any improvement by just using this system or Ben’s in contraposition of a PA or PAO, it won’t just magically make you reduce your times to 30s.

There are various factors that affect speed:your physical state (obvious), your pegs (if present), your memorization algorithm, your recall algorithm and the structure you choose to order you information (if order is needed). The structure of order, tend to be the use of memory palaces, or method of loci, in a premade journey or not, most efficient a premade journey. Your pegs how imagined they are for you, time it takes to summon at least the connotation or feeling of the image (you see it on detail or not) and finally the memorization and recall agorithms. The recall algorithm will be affected by the memorization algorithm and how well your pegs make “sense” for the memorization. The memorization algorithm can be as simple as: see one card, select first place in premade journey, place peg img; can get more complex as: see three cards, select first place in premade journey, PAO: first peg is a person…, recall person, action, object… place on locus.

Mullen’s record was 15.61s: 2 cards system of 1352 imgs

Alex Mullen’s technique Memory Sports - Tips from 3x World Memory Champion Alex Mullen | Memory Championship Tips — Mullen Memory

Then Shijir-Erdene Bat-Enkh’s record with a PAO/PVO: 12.74s

So, to improve a 2 card system of 2,704, I think that maybe the algorithm of memorization can be work on: person action, entity action, whatever-feature… whaterver. Now my thoughts are in 8 pieces of information memorization, rather than 4 or 6, again I’m looking for the least amount of effort with the max output and potential of improvement. I think 52 cards PAO and 00-99 PAO are the most efficient, you are memorizing 6 pieces of data. Now If there’s no way around to bring the least amount of pegs, it is with a 2 card system that I can only see to safely reach 8 pieces of information per locus, even 12 seems plausible.

In memorization time a 2704 cards (or shadow system, or mullen’s) or 10k numbers, you have a way to place 8 or 12 pieces of information per locus, it may then be physically impossible to not beat 12.74s… But that’s just my estimation. One of the worst problems any technique for people is their lack of practice. Training time is another variable, maybe the most important and good training that is. Anyways I hope you keep it up as you see fit.

1 Like
20

I can see myself using a sentence like this to someone who doesn’t know my system to explain it; So I agree that this is a valid way of describing both the 4 digit and 2 card system.

but…

When comparing the possible problems/benefits of different systems things may get a bit fuzzy.

Like: what constitutes a single piece of information?

  • “saber tooth tiger”: 3 words :arrow_right: 3 pieces of info? , 15 letters :arrow_right: 15 pieces of info?
  • “001100”: 6 binairy digits :arrow_right: 6 pieces of info, 1 and 100 (read in chunks of three) :arrow_right: 2 pieces of info.
  • “queen of hearts” = Ava Max, because your are fan (:heart:) of her song “King and Queens”: 1 or 2 pieces of information?

did Ben Pridmore won because his technique is superior?

I have been asking myself that very same question and some of thought on this are:

  • A 1 card system is going to be superior to a 2 card system when very little training is done, unless the 2 card system is so cleverly designed that it takes almost training to learn (still searching for that);
  • The more training is done, the more the 2 digit system will get better relatively to a 1 card system;
  • I don’t know if the 2 learning curves are going to cross in general or if this my very much depends on the person using the system.

I’m still trying to understand what you’re doing, but it seems that you feel like I have offended or that was my intention.

I didn’t find anything in your post offensive at all; I only had 1 or 2 occassions on this forum where I felt somewhat offended and in both cases I had reacted to a post and got a reaction like: "next time you respond, you must read better/more, because your question is stupid (something like that).

2 Likes