Yes, actions from PAO should be good for that.
I think you can do all 5 decks with 01-16.
Using other connection for other decks will make it only a bit more accurate and harder to confuse.
But maybe it helps a lot, i don’t know
Same actions, different palaces?
Yes, if you use different connections, you can use palaces as usual.
1 Like
But this not 2 cards system this AO system
Correct, if you are using the 100-image master system, you only need 69 images
Oh, you are right, I missed that.
In my logic PA is person, action and connection.
But of course action and connection here may be the same thing. I didn’t think about it
1 Like
It seems that you did not understand the method well. Each two suits has its own palace, and we have two values. We take the image of the two values, suppose it is the king of clubs and 7 hearts. You take the picture of 7K (I read the cards from the right) and put it in the palace that starts with the first suit, clubs and a heart, and put it in the first location. Let us assume that the cards The next one is 7 diamonds and 8 hearts. Here, you take picture 87 and place it in the second location in the palace for these two suits… When answering, suppose you went to the palace of clubs and hearts and found a direct 7K picture. You take K of clubs and 7 hearts, and when you reach each palace You extract the images in it … In short, it is more like a village. Let’s call it a village of memory. You must pass through all the palaces
2 Likes
I just realized that my earlier idea of adjective modifiers gains nothing. Its not compressing data at all. I have a 2-digit system that includes adjectives already. If I use the first card to give me the adjective modifier for the 2nd card, it’s still two elements of an image that I need to correctly encode and recall in order to decode to 2 cards. At that point a regular PAO format would be just as efficient.
The benefit would be compressing more cards into a single visual element.
With a 3-digit two-block system like shadow, two cards worth of info is compressed to a single element in an image.
With the proposed new system, it would still require accurately encoding two elements to represent two cards (suit combos loci, plus value image), unless I’m missing something?
That’s exactly the way I’m understanding the system too. I like your suggestion of using 16 modifiers to represent the suit-pairings too, although ‘modifiers’ need not necessarily be ‘adjectives’ they could also be ‘adverbs’ or themselves even further ‘concrete nouns’. So what I’m thinking is that Heart/Heart could represent a “Heart-Lung Machine” used in heart transplant surgery, or a Spade/Spade could be a “Coffin” etc. If the 169 card pairings could rather be encoded into people (i.e. a particular person for each card-pairing) then effectively, with 26 loci, you would have 26 people doing something with 26 concrete nouns.
I believe that there is a lot of merit in this system on the face of things. It just needs to be tweaked or developed so there can be no ambiguity in recalling the cards and it must be able to be done at great speed, both of which I think are possible with enough practice. The “Ben System” uses 2 704 images for multiplle deck recall, whereas “Naser Ali K’s System” is only using 169 images + 16 modifiers for a single deck recall. I believe “Naser Ali K’s System” is therefore far more ‘user-friendly’ than say the “Ben System” for mnemonists . I’ve always favoured ‘expediency’, or the path of least resistance when it comes to the use of any ‘memory systems’, so I see there is great potential in the system being proposed. It obviously needs more work to be done to it but well done on putting it out there in our collective spaces!
1 Like
It’s easier then to go with a single card PA system where everyone is doing something tangible and less likely to get confused than the way you said.
The system I mentioned is only one image for two cards
What I was thinking was encoding one image for each two-card combination, albeit it would be a unique person for each two-card-pair combination. So for example a Jack of Spades and 3 of Clubs would translate into a unique Person (one of 169 unique persons in fact). I would still need to work out a suitable coding system though as 1’s (Aces) through to 10’s (Tens) are easy to do but the: Jacks, Queens and Kings pose any interesting problem to the encoding technique that one would ultimately decide on using.
I am sorry to post in an old thread, but I cannot help but post in the ‘2 card’ genre, and this seems like a natural thread to post it in.
Naser described a 2-card system that requires 169 card images, and 416 locations. The 416 locations are 16 palaces, with 26 stops in each palace.
A different idea is as follows: 169 card images, but the exact number of locations required will be determined based on the 2 block Hannes logic.
It would work like this: The card value receives the regular phonetic, A - T, 2 - N, 3 - M. However you like.
Then suit value receives a number, based on the 2 block logic. So some pairs have the same number. For example, in your 2 block logic, a HD may have the same number as a SC. A SS may have the same number as a HH, etc.
The speed card journey would be broken down into ‘rooms’ or ‘clusters’ of 8. You clearly know in advance which of the places is 1 - 8. You could have multiple different journeys of 8 each, or just a very long journey into ‘rooms’ or ‘clusters’ of 8.
Say your deck starts with a black first pair. You put the card value image at the suit value place for that pair. That ‘room’ or ‘cluster’ of locations is then finished, and you move forward.
Second and third card pairs are red first, and the fourth card pair is black first.
You put the second card pair at the X location for that pair, then you go to the Y location for the third pair, and then you go to the Z location for the black first pair. That ‘room’ or ‘cluster’ is then finished, and you move forward.
Would be an option for speed cards for someone who is really great at their locations. You would not follow a linear journey, but you would move around in your ‘rooms’ and ‘clusters’, and you would need to remember this.
So overall you would need a lot more individual loci, but the same number of ‘room’ or ‘cluster’ locations that a 2 card user using the 1352 image system (who on average require 13 locations per deck). But, here, you use the loci to navigate the pairs.
Have a great weekend everyone. I should say I have not experimented to see if this works, but its just an idea and thought experiment, and I dont pretend that its a particularly good or practical one.
1 Like