@Reagan: I thought the original intent of your deck was that you were targeting the poker-player market?
If you are still, the black borders (and the red thin line surrounding the face) on the front are a bad idea. It forces a player to expose more of their card to determine the value. The frame around the court card is pretty nice, though. The curlicues on the back are not great for poker, but they do have a certain undeniable style. The ape images on the back - back to the drawing board.
If you are targeting magicians, then a black-bordered face would be both useful and different - never seen a deck that had them before. It does mean that "blank fans" (fanning in the reverse direction to make the deck appear blank) are pretty much ruled out, but the more important handiwork such as hiding reversed cards becomes possible.
You seem set on having four indices. This will turn off some collectors, entertainers and players, but it's your personal style choice. Frankly, some collectors won't even look past any deck whose box doesn't say "Bicycle" on it, but that's their hang-up. Go with your vision - but make those indices LARGER. They're smaller than standard (or at least appear so) and both magicians and poker players need cards that can be easily read by players/spectators. Get a standard index size, or consider "parlor size" like the Phoenix Parlor deck from
http://card-shark.de. Those are kind of cool, actually - slightly larger cards with big indices, but they're still small enough for card sleights.
People are voting no for a couple of reasons:
1) It's not bicycle.
2) It's not USPCC
3) It's not magic finish.
4) It's not the best deck ever.
5) It's not aimed towards magicians or collectors.
NO offense, just trying to help.
I'd like to comment on those statements you made, Nathan:
1) for anyone too nearsighted to see there are decks other than Bicycle worth owning, it's their choice and their loss.
2) see above statement, swap "Bicycle" with "USPC"
3) see first statement, swap "Bicycle" with "Magic Finish". I'll never see a non-USPC deck with Magic Finish, but I'll also never see a USPC deck with Quantum Grain Finish, either. MF is nice, but it's not the be-all and end-all of finishes - some people DISLIKE the slickness of the cards, saying it makes them more difficult to handle. Great for flourishers, not great for every single application imaginable. If it was so perfect, why is USPC themselves working on "Experimental Finish" with Alex and the Vortex deck? It should be totally unnecessary if MF is the apex of finishes.
4) we have yet to see the "best deck ever". If that was your ONLY requirement, you'd never buy even ONE deck.
5) believe it or not, the huge majority of decks being collected (ESPECIALLY prior to the existence of Ellusionist) WEREN'T aimed at collectors, but they collect them anyway. As far as magic - 52 pasteboards are all you need. Some are better than others, but ANY deck can be used to perform at least SOME tricks, even the cheapass 99-cent store two-fer packs.
David Blaine had the same old deck given to him by his mother, heavily worn and decorated like a fortune-telling deck, while growing up as a kid, and it served as his inspiration to become a magician. Somehow, I doubt they met a single one of the criteria you set above.
The two decks from Misdirection's Mystery are considered by almost everyone who owns them to be among the finest decks ever made. They aren't Bicycle. They aren't USPC. They don't have Magic Finish. Some might say they're the best decks ever, some might not - people have their preferences. All but the most dedicated Bicycle-brains out there would be glad to own a deck, especially if they got a good price on it - mean feat, considering the scarcity and popularity.
NO OFFENSE, Nathan, but consider your statements a little before blurting them out. Just trying to help.
Poll
