Taking a functional step forward in deck design

[Josh Burch]

I love theory11's custom decks and I always have. I feel like as far as quality goes they always push the boundaries. They always look and feel great. I think the magic world needs a deck of cards that takes a step forward functionally as well.

Jason England, Darwin Ortiz and others talk about how cards without borders are very helpful when it comes to performing gambling sleights. For instance a second deal and bottom deal are slightly more deceptive with border less bees than it is with classic bicycle backed cards. Darwin Ortiz only uses border less cards when performing his three card monte. So it would seem that for gambling moves Bees would be the cards of choice.

A classic way to reveal a chosen card is by secretly turning it over in the deck. It would be a bit safer to use a deck with borders for this. There are many effects that need to secretly reverse a card such as "Triumph", some "Oil and Water" routines and many sandwich effects. I even read a Texas Hold 'em effect that requires you to secretly reverse a card.

The irony her is that if I wanted to perform the Texas hold em effect in the middle of my bottom deal demonstration I would be inclined to switch decks! I feel like that is a little silly. I would like to see a deck of cards that can do both.

What would need to be done is on the faces of the cards a border of diamond backs would be introduced. Or the back ground of the face of the cards would match the back design.

Either way, I think a deck like this would revolutionize the design of cards in the future. What do you guys think?

 

[visualartist]

personally I favor deck switching.

 

[ReservoirRed]

I love theory11's custom decks and I always have. I feel like as far as quality goes they always push the boundaries. They always look and feel great. I think the magic world needs a deck of cards that takes a step forward functionally as well.

Jason England, Darwin Ortiz and others talk about how cards without borders are very helpful when it comes to performing gambling sleights. For instance a second deal and bottom deal are slightly more deceptive with border less bees than it is with classic bicycle backed cards. Darwin Ortiz only uses border less cards when performing his three card monte. So it would seem that for gambling moves Bees would be the cards of choice.

A classic way to reveal a chosen card is by secretly turning it over in the deck. It would be a bit safer to use a deck with borders for this. There are many effects that need to secretly reverse a card such as "Triumph", some "Oil and Water" routines and many sandwich effects. I even read a Texas Hold 'em effect that requires you to secretly reverse a card.

The irony her is that if I wanted to perform the Texas hold em effect in the middle of my bottom deal demonstration I would be inclined to switch decks! I feel like that is a little silly. I would like to see a deck of cards that can do both.

What would need to be done is on the faces of the cards a border of diamond backs would be introduced. Or the back ground of the face of the cards would match the back design.

Either way, I think a deck like this would revolutionize the design of cards in the future. What do you guys think?

I understand what you mean. But i completely disagree with your ideas for achieving it.
Dont get me wrong, i honestly thought this was a great post. It truly made me think, "what could be done to a deck to make this possible". There must be something. I haven't come up with answers yet but im impressed by your mindset. It's one i haven't seen in magicians with regard to this topic. Generally it's "Here is the problem, ok here's how we get around it".
But you have said no, "here's the problem, what can we do to fix it". Which is admirable.
My problems with your ideas are plain, no audience is going to accept a deck with a bordered face. No way. Im picturing it in my head and it looks like a gaff straight off. Second idea is a bit better but still not usable in my opinion. For the same reason i dont like black faces on cards. Ive said it before on the forums. The faces of cards are 52 of THEE most instantly recognisable things on the planet. Those symbols that everyone knows straight away, they are built in. When custom cards mess with the faces of decks too much they compromise that integrity, they become unfamiliar. I spend more time with cards than anyone i could possible perform for, yet i have found myself having to look twice at black face cards to be sure which card it is. I love custom cards, i think they are great and i collect them. But i beg the designers to leave the the faces alone.

 

[Josh Burch]

personally I favor deck switching.

Yeah, that's generally what I do too. I don't like to though. The Blue Crown blog explains my sentiments better that I can:

"If an audience sees you pull out a different deck of cards each time you do a trick, they’re not going to think, “Wow, what a great magician!” They’re going to think, “I wonder where he got all of those special decks…”"

 

[Josh Burch]

I understand what you mean. But i completely disagree with your ideas for achieving it.
Dont get me wrong, i honestly thought this was a great post. It truly made me think, "what could be done to a deck to make this possible". There must be something. I haven't come up with answers yet but im impressed by your mindset. It's one i haven't seen in magicians with regard to this topic. Generally it's "Here is the problem, ok here's how we get around it".
But you have said no, "here's the problem, what can we do to fix it". Which is admirable.
My problems with your ideas are plain, no audience is going to accept a deck with a bordered face. No way. Im picturing it in my head and it looks like a gaff straight off. Second idea is a bit better but still not usable in my opinion. For the same reason i dont like black faces on cards. Ive said it before on the forums. The faces of cards are 52 of THEE most instantly recognisable things on the planet. Those symbols that everyone knows straight away, they are built in. When custom cards mess with the faces of decks too much they compromise that integrity, they become unfamiliar. I spend more time with cards than anyone i could possible perform for, yet i have found myself having to look twice at black face cards to be sure which card it is. I love custom cards, i think they are great and i collect them. But i beg the designers to leave the the faces alone.

Great post! I assume your personal preference wouldn't be to use Bicycle Pro Poker Peeks, as they do alter the face of the cards. I'm sure your sentiments are shared by others in the industry as well. Personally I would imagine that if I used those in a routine that the suspicion would be higher than classic bikes, but I don't think it would be too substantial. I would assume the laymen reaction would be similar with a pack of Pro Poker Peeks, as it would be to a pack of cards with a border on the face.

I don't really like black backgrounds either, they tend to confuse the spectators more then I'd like. Personally, I'm not opposed to some variation in the faces of the cards, that's just my personal preferences though.

 

[ReservoirRed]

Great post! I assume your personal preference wouldn't be to use Bicycle Pro Poker Peeks, as they do alter the face of the cards. I'm sure your sentiments are shared by others in the industry as well. Personally I would imagine that if I used those in a routine that the suspicion would be higher than classic bikes, but I don't think it would be too substantial. I would assume the laymen reaction would be similar with a pack of Pro Poker Peeks, as it would be to a pack of cards with a border on the face.

I don't really like black backgrounds either, they tend to confuse the spectators more then I'd like. Personally, I'm not opposed to some variation in the faces of the cards, that's just my personal preferences though.

Well bicycle pro poker peeks could arguably work to your advantage. As the world poker tour decks do for me. You can easily say these are specifically designed for professional poker, so you know they are not rigged.

I dont mind small touches to the faces of cards to make them classier. Like theory 11 tend to do. In fact i really liked the dark red associated with the faces of their cards. And i dont mind the squeezer type pips on the sentinels as i think it makes the faces look elegant, thought ive heard mixed reports about performing with the small pips, visibility issues are raised. These things dont bother me as i never perform with custom cards. Arguably a reason for me to stop 'hating on' black face decks, however, i just really do no like them. They seem so tacky to me. They dont even look nice for cardistry.

 

[visualartist]

Yeah, that's generally what I do too. I don't like to though. The Blue Crown blog explains my sentiments better that I can:

"If an audience sees you pull out a different deck of cards each time you do a trick, they’re not going to think, “Wow, what a great magician!” They’re going to think, “I wonder where he got all of those special decks…”"

You misunderstood the purpose of deck switching, the purpose is to switch a deck of cards for another without the audience knowing. sleight of hand and misdirection. Both decks are the same brand of cards just pre-ordered differently. thats what a deck switch is for.

 

[Jskwared]

You misunderstood the purpose of deck switching, the purpose is to switch a deck of cards for another without the audience knowing. sleight of hand and misdirection. Both decks are the same brand of cards just pre-ordered differently. thats what a deck switch is for.

Only, that still limits you to either cards with borders or cards without borders.

 

[Josh Burch]

Would it be weird to use a deck of blank backs as your regular deck? That might help the problem and they already make decks like that. It seems strange though.

 

[RickEverhart]

Perform an ACR with a double blank (both sides). It is funny at first because the spectator laughs and "any" card would look like theirs when it comes to the top. Then have them sign their card and fry them.

 

[Josh Burch]

Perform an ACR with a double blank (both sides). It is funny at first because the spectator laughs and "any" card would look like theirs when it comes to the top. Then have them sign their card and fry them.

That's interesting, it would make for a strong "Aniversary Waltz" as well I. Does a blank backed card have the same effect as a diamond back card with second deals? It seems like it might be better than borders but worse than diamond backs.

If I could find a deck that could do triumphs and seconds equally well it would definitely be my go to deck. Are there any decks out there like this? Why aren't there?

 

[RickEverhart]

To answer your question I am not sure. I do not deal seconds. I would have to watch someone deal seconds with an all blank deck to see how it looks in person. I believe it was Keith Fields who gave me the idea to do the ACR with a blank deck and I also read about it in an old Linking Ring years ago.

The reason it works is because the minute you pull out an all blank deck from a box, you have the audiences attention. They've never seen blank cards like that. Then when you start the ACR, it becomes a bit of a joke that "their" card keeps showing up on top because any of the cards match their card. That's when you have them sign in and go back into the ACR. At the end you can choose to give them their card with the signature or do a color change and wipe off their name. Either way it is a great effect.

 

[eostresh]

Just realized..If you are looking for a deck design that is good for both reversed cards and one that looks good for seconds, you might check out the Conjuring Arts Smith Back designs. They will kind of work for both.

 

[Josh Burch]

Yeah I've seen those, they look like they might work. It reminds me of stingers just a little bit, I like those because the borders are less stark. I bet the effect would be similar to a deck of Bees with a casino logo on the back. It is better than a deck of Bikes but not quite as nice as a uniform deck of Bees.

The problem is even more prevalent now as I'm trying to develop a mock center deal routine using a second deal and a face up royal flush. I might check out some of the Smith backs.

I just think it's kinda funny that the decks look cooler and cooler and claim to be better than past decks yet they can't do anything new. They just look nice. It seems like a great selling point to have cards that are more versatile than ever.

 

[ReservoirRed]

You might want to look into guy hollinworth's centre deal. I learned it from his book drawing room deceptions. It's his take on a martin nash idea. It allows for a royal flush to be inserted in different parts of the deck, and then have them dealt from that position at will, without trickery. And dare i say it's almost as 'easy' as a second deal.