USA National Memory Championships 215
bigtallmofo writes "Could you memorize 1,000 digits in under an hour? How about remember the exact order of 10 shuffled decks of playing cards in under an hour as well as one shuffled deck in less than two minutes? If so, you could be counted among 36 grand masters of memory worldwide. Slate is reporting that other spectacular memory feats were performed at the 2005 USA National Memory Championship. Congratulations to Ram Kolli, a graduate student in computer science at Virginia Tech, and this year's champ."
Congress To Open Hearings On Memory Championships (Score:5, Funny)
WASHINGTON -- Senator John McCain (R-AZ) announced Friday afternoon that the Senate would be opening hearings on the USA National Memory Championships after allegations of illegal memory augmentation surfaced. "These allegations of illegal computer implants are very frightening, and we owe it to the American people to investigate this matter fully. Our children are looking up to these men and women as role models, and if they're not actually memorizing things on their own with their God given abilities, we need to put an end to it. There are long term dangers to brain function many of these people are either unaware of or simply ignoring for short-sighted goals."
This year's champion Ram Kolli was among the first to be subpoenaed in the matter, and was expected to testify this week. "I've never illegaly used a computer to assist my memory in my life" said Kolli, noting that he had used computer storage in the past but only in legal ways, such as for class notes and assignments. "I've trained too long and too hard for these championships to throw it all away by using illegal implants. When I memorized pages 73 through 82 of the New York City phonebook, that was all me, and Jorge Benwalt of 212-555-2934 knows it."
Several Google executives have also been called on to testify following claims that they've produced a blackmarket implant that allows people to search Google with their brain. Sources close to Google acknowledged they've done research on such devices, but claim none have been produced or used outside of the lab environment. Google could not be reached for official comment at press time.
Re:Congress To Open Hearings On Memory Championshi (Score:1)
Even though you're joking, reading this part got me to thinking of how much our concepts of time and memory at large could be altered if we were able to search through the vast archive
Re:Congress To Open Hearings On Memory Championshi (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Congress To Open Hearings On Memory Championshi (Score:2)
Why? Why would the Alcoholics Anonymous [aa.org] object about that?
Re:Congress To Open Hearings On Memory Championshi (Score:2)
FAKE FAKE FAKE! (Score:2)
As any real journalist would know, it should be "...none has..."
Re:FAKE FAKE FAKE! (Score:2)
Guess that means we won't see that story on the front page of Slashdot.
Re:Congress To Open Hearings On Memory Championshi (Score:5, Informative)
AFAIK, this was not always the case though.
Re:Congress To Open Hearings On Memory Championshi (Score:2)
Re:Congress To Open Hearings On Memory Championshi (Score:2)
Both (quite recent) examples don't follow the new rule. So even if they stuck with them for consistency, the rule can't be older than 15 years.
So who do you get when you call 555-28
Re:Congress To Open Hearings On Memory Championshi (Score:2)
Car Keys (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Car Keys (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Car Keys (Score:1)
Unless you're an idiot and keep searching after they've been found
Re:Car Keys (Score:2)
The problem is being aware that you're putting them in some stupid place while you're doing it. You can't remember what you don't know in the first place.
Re:Car Keys (Score:2)
Harry Lorayne is your friend. (Score:2)
= 9J =
So I'm about to post a comment... (Score:2, Funny)
The visual memory technique really works... (Score:5, Interesting)
- Imagine you're going to send an email to everyone in your department.
- Imagine, now, that email lists are somehow unavailable.
- Starting with yourself, identify all the people in your row.
- Go one row over, and identify all those people.
Do the same for the rest of the rows.
For those of you who sit in circles in the office, just work your way around from right to left (or left to right).
You'll be surprised at how many people you can remember!
It works with restaurants, too, but since you're not likely to know those people, faces and habits will most likely stick out, rather than names.
hmmm (Score:1)
I ran rattle them all off. Now where's my prize?
Though sometimes I have to think about what my own phone number is.....
Re:The visual memory technique really works... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The visual memory technique really works... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:The visual memory technique really works... (Score:2)
I don't know...I find I have to refresh my memory every so often...
On the plus side, my hand-eye coordination rocks!
Re:The visual memory technique really works... (Score:2)
I wonder if they need volunteers for those studies?
The guy has it easy (Score:5, Funny)
A guy named "Ram" who's a memory champion? come on...
Re:The guy has it easy (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The guy has it easy (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The guy has it easy (Score:2)
Re:The guy has it easy (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The guy has it easy (Score:2)
I spotted another issue with the Slashdot intro -- they spelt "chump" incorrectly.
Re:The guy has it easy (Score:2)
Re:The guy has it easy (Score:2)
DUPE DUPE !!!!!oneleven!! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:DUPE DUPE !!!!!oneleven!! (Score:2)
Imagine if... (Score:5, Funny)
The obvious solution... (Score:3)
More practically.. (Score:5, Insightful)
In this context such methods are fairly controversial, since the mnemonics are rather time-consuming to learn and recall is slower than brute force (on the order of 5-10 seconds instead of instantaneous), but it has some quite dedicated followers.
Re:More practically.. (Score:1, Funny)
Re:More practically.. (Score:1)
Re:More practically.. (Score:2)
Many local students? (Score:2, Interesting)
A game these guys would pwn at... (Score:5, Interesting)
Take a deck of cards, shuffled. Remove 1 card randomly and place it face down on the side of the table. All of the players sit in a semi-circle in front of the dealer.
The dealer than plays 1 card face up in the center of the table. ~1 second later, he plays another on top of the card. Repeat 51 times, showing the players 1 card in the deck at a time. When the last card is played, cover the deck up in the middle of the table.
The players (and dealer if he didnt cheat) has seen all cards - save one. The pur-chance-guessing-game ensues: what is that card that is face-down on the side of the table?
Re:A game these guys would pwn at... (Score:1)
Re:A game these guys would pwn at... (Score:5, Interesting)
Just assign all the cards a numerical value from 1 to 13. Now, assign the suits a letter, eg. S=Spades, C=Clubs, H=Hearts, D=Diamonds.
Now as long as you can add, you only have 4 numbers to keep track of
At the end of the dealing, you should have three numbers that are equal to 91 (the sum of 1 through to 13), and one number that is less,
eg. S91, C91, H91, D80.
This tells you that the initial card was the Jack of Diamonds (11 count for D). Simple
I'm sure there is an easier way, but this was the first thing that immediately popped into my head when I read you post.
Have fun the next time you play!
Re:A game these guys would pwn at... (Score:3, Insightful)
This requires keeping track of one number up to 12 and one number up to 3, instead of four numbers up to 91 for your method.
Re:uh... (Score:2)
0 0 0 0
First card comes up, six of spades. Add six to the Spade number
6 0 0 0
Second card comes up, 4 of hearts. Add four to the heart count
6 0 0 4
Third card, jack of spades, add 11 to the spades
17 0 0 4
Re:uh... (Score:2)
Or you could think Clubs, Diamonds, Hearts, Spades (alphabetical). One less thing to "remember" :-)
Re:A game these guys would pwn at... (Score:2)
Re:A game these guys would pwn at... (Score:2)
Re:A game these guys would pwn at... (Score:2, Funny)
Aw, Pooh (Score:2, Funny)
How many of us can remember how many girlfriends we've had sex with?
Oh.--wait--I forgot where I was posting...
Re:Aw, Pooh (Score:2)
Probably everyone. (At least, Andie McDowell's character in Four Weddings in a Funeral had no trouble remembering her 33, which (I hope) is a great many by most people's standards.)
But a more important thing to remember is this: the probability of contracting something nasty increases exponentially with the number of partners.
Re:Aw, Pooh (Score:2)
Re:Aw, Pooh (Score:2)
The value p will vary depending on whether you are finding partners for long-term relationships, short-term relationships, one-night stands, etc. Thus, if you first have two long-term relationships and then have a one-night stand, the latter certainly increases your risk more than linearly.
If that is all you're saying, we agree. I do maintain that if you're having a number of sexual encounters all of the same type, the risk is as I described.
mounted? (Score:5, Funny)
Ok, this is just a little wierd... (Score:5, Interesting)
It's that much easier to remember something like that than just three cards? I guess it's like they actually translate the entire deck into a sort of language. Then they just translate it using the same language every time.
Re:Ok, this is just a little wierd... (Score:2)
Re:Ok, this is just a little wierd... (Score:3, Funny)
Often enough, nobody would be able to tell the difference.
Re:Ok, this is just a little wierd... (Score:2)
Re:Ok, this is just a little wierd... (Score:2)
I'd settle for... (Score:5, Funny)
Imagine (Score:2, Funny)
So the champion is a sheep (Score:1)
I was gonna compete... (Score:1, Redundant)
drats!
Obligatory quote... (Score:2)
Of course. I'm an excellent driver... four minutes to Wopner...
Re:Obligatory quote... (Score:2)
shoot! (Score:2, Funny)
When it fails (Score:3, Interesting)
Ed Cooke (Score:5, Interesting)
Casinos! (Score:4, Interesting)
The private "agency", that Casinos use to scope these potential card counters, probably compile a dossier of these mentats.
Don't bother, just rip the casino off while you can.
Re:Casinos! (Score:5, Interesting)
If you want to make money at a casino, don't try to beat the casino at their own game. Play against chumps who are bad at poker.
Re:Casinos! (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, you don't need a good memory to card count.
Card counting consists of determining the ratio of high cards (tens, aces) to low cards (2-6). To find this you simply add one for each low card that appears and subtract one for each high card.
This gives the running count, which you can divide by the number of decks remaining to find the True Count, which is used to make decisions - how much to bet, or whether to deviate from Basic Strategy in playing a hand.
So, at any given time you're only actually remembering one number.
The hardest part about modern card counting is actually maintaining a good cover, that is, pretending to be rich and careless when you throw out black chips, or drunk and stupid, or talking incessantly to convince the dealer or pit boss that you can't possibly be counting with all that distraction.
There are quite a few professional card counters around, but they're more likely to have honed their skills by taking acting lessons rather than memory courses...
good thing I looked... (Score:2)
My memory may suck... (Score:2)
memorized zip codes (Score:5, Interesting)
As I recall, he calls himself "the zip code guy".
The downsides.. (Score:2)
Honey, I forgot your birthday....
I really was going to call you the next day - but I forgot your number.
I was going to get you that more expensive present, but I couldn't remember where it came from.
I'm sorry boss, I forgot about that deadline.
The expectations would be so high nobody would ever believe them if they said they forgot something.
Good memories, but they are no Einsteins... (Score:2)
Einstein replied that he couldn't remember his number, but it didn't matter, because it was in the phone book.
Smart man, Albert!
Easy (Score:2)
I meant to attend this year (Score:2)
Re:The Human Brain (Score:2)
Re:The Human Brain (Score:1)
Re:The Human Brain (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The Human Brain (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The Human Brain (Score:3, Funny)
Metric spaces, metric spaces. Met-ric spaces.
These things are all over the place now. You know the Poles have their own sorts of metric spaces. Polish spaces. Have you heard about these? They're completely metrizable separable topological spaces. What kind of an idiot do you have to be to name a separable space after your own country?
made me laugh. Oh well, to each his own.
Re:The Human Brain (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Human Brain (Score:2)
Or maybe not. If Einstein were so absolutely, magically, intelligent as many people believe, then he would have unified gravitation theory with quantum mechanics. What people in general don't realize is how cooperative science is. Einstein didn't create his theories out of nothing, his work was based on a lot of other theories. As Newton said, he stood on the shoulders of giants. So, maybe his bra
Re:The Human Brain (Score:4, Insightful)
Likely, not that much better. Read the article. These people use an assortment of mnemonic devices to remember these large chunks of data. If you tried to remember a series of cards, you would get lost in the volume of data. But if you remember each three cards in order as "person action object", then you can remember the sequence of cards as a story, and that is orders of magnitude easier to remember, because it has real meaning, whereas a sequence of cards is essentially meaningless. The brain sucks at remembering things without meaning, and excels at things that have meaning. That seems to be because our memory is inherently associative. We remember things by associating them to other things. That way the more associations you can make between a new factoid and existing concepts in your brain, the more easily you'll remember it.
Re:The Human Brain (Score:3, Funny)
Well, not that much anymore, I suspect.
Re:The Human Brain (Score:2, Informative)
Re:So what (Score:2)
Re:1000 digits in an hour not particularly impress (Score:5, Informative)
0=s or z,
1=t or d
2=n
3=m
4=r
5=l
6=j, sh, ch
7=hard c, k
8=f, ph
9=p or b
Called the Major System [wikipedia.org], it's been around for hundreds of years (as I recall, haha).
In college I could memorize a deck of cards on clock-ticks. 52 seconds for a deck.
A more impressive trick (to most people) is to have the person shuffle the deck, take out 5 cards and put them in their pocket.
I flip through the remaining 47 card for 30 seconds, and tell them what's in their pocket. (Loraine / Lucas explain how to do this one in the memory book). It's not hard, but takes practice.
After that, I found girls, and quit doing the geek memory thing. You don't want girls to know that you have a good memory - then you lose all your excuses for forgetting to call them, forgetting anniversaries, etc.
Re:1000 digits in an hour not particularly impress (Score:2)
Re:1000 digits in an hour not particularly impress (Score:2)
I was wondering about the lowest number of bits in which you can stick the full order of a 52 card deck into. So far I can do it in 253 bits of information. Thats about 64 hexadecimal digit number or 78 decimal digits. So you need only some 780 decimal digits to remember order of 10 decks of cards.
I can do it in 226 bits; I would be surprised if it can be done in less.
But the manipulations required to encode/decode that sort of compressed representation is so complex it is useless as a mental technique
Re:1000 digits in an hour not particularly impress (Score:2)
Re:1000 digits in an hour not particularly impress (Score:2)
Yeah, I got two results with 253 bits using two different algorithms, but then I devised a different algorithm that uses only 216 bits.
No, you need to recheck your math, you can't do it in 216.
I would guess your solution won't even do it in the optimal 226 since your grouping wastes a fraction of a bit in each step due to the grouping of cards and there's only a small fraction of a bit to spare in the 226 solution.
Re:1000 digits in an hour not particularly impress (Score:2)
Re:1000 digits in an hour not particularly impress (Score:2, Funny)
Your Mr. Magoo method sounds much better.
Re:Memrization: It Seems to be a Minimum Requireme (Score:2)
Of course this isn't nearly as powerful as the methods of these champions, but it's a good trick for those of us who don't have days to practice asso
Re:Memrization: It Seems to be a Minimum Requireme (Score:2)
Re:Memrization: It Seems to be a Minimum Requireme (Score:2)
As a few people have posted now, Einstein had a terrible memory for trivial stuff like this. But who has done more to advance civilization:
The guy who can say, "Hey Bob, how you been these past 9 months, are you still at (618) 555-2324, and how are those 3 children of yours?"
Or the guy who developed the General Theory of Relativity...