[VID] Red Jaqk

[DeckReview]

This is a cool deck all and all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntfGpJDNFdQ

It's one of my new favorites. The fanning ability is not top notch but no big deal really.

3/5 Stars for me because I'm pretty big on fans. Otherwise a unique feeling deck that is worthy for everyone.

Buy it here
http://www.bmpokerworld.com/JAQK-Playing-Cards-in-Red.php

[xela]

I feel like your reviews became a lot less critical since you got sponsored. Remember that you can still find ways to professionally critique a deck. As a reviewer, you have to create some kind of dichotomy between the good and the bad. If everything you receive is genuinely good, then the bar is raised, and the former good becomes the bad, and the new perfection becomes the good.

That dichotomy has to exist, otherwise there is no point to reviews (i.e. everything is good or everything this bad.)

As always, though, you are currently my favorite deck reviewer on YouTube, so keep up the good videos, but really take into consideration what I said. (It doesn't apply to the Jaqks, because they are quite fantastic, but it does apply to some other reviews you've made recently).

[DeckReview]

Yeah, I evaluated my reviews and figured out the problem. Normally I review decks that I buy, and with my highly selective criteria, it's usually a deck everyone can agree is pretty good. I follow my regular formula of:
box
extra cards
ace
extra elements if applicable
handling
Cons

The problem is I'm reviewing cards that I would otherwise not normally review and use the same lax formula and review system I'm used to. The cards are not in my "character" I suppose and people aren't used to seeing these kinds of decks in my possession I guess.

Now that I am sponsored by a bigger re-seller reviewing all sorts of cars, I noticed people do want me to raise the bar. That being said the only things I can be critical about is the handling;

Which for the most part all USPC handle pretty good and similar to each other.

And the design;
Which is entirely up to the eyes of the beholder, except for giant fans which can clearly
be talked down upon if need be. I can critique the theme but that's about it.

The only specific reviews that got negative feedback from viewers were the Inferno, which only real crime is the Karnival branding, and the New Era. The Inferno review is stated can't be trusted because it has the branding series and because it is a sponsored review. So far the inferno fans better than my red jaqks and archangels. The new era is stated to be a bad review because the majority do not like the hats and I rolled along with it because I thought the hats looked hilarious yet I did point out that they were bad for color changes and a then "magician" comes whining to me about color changes 

Well fortunately for everybody I came up with a new video title that will ail the odd decks outside my character. The review system will be tweaked a tad overtime, rest assured.

[YorbSterling]

One thing that is being missed in the reviews is the fact that the box is not embossed like the blue jaqk box.  This made me upset, however i really do love this deck.

[loldudex2]

One thing that is being missed in the reviews is the fact that the box is not embossed like the blue jaqk box.  This made me upset, however i really do love this deck.

Glad I'm not the only one that noticed. It really did make the blue box, really beautiful and elegant. I have no idea why they didn't add it.

[Don Boyer]

One thing that is being missed in the reviews is the fact that the box is not embossed like the blue jaqk box.  This made me upset, however i really do love this deck.

Glad I'm not the only one that noticed. It really did make the blue box, really beautiful and elegant. I have no idea why they didn't add it.

Simple guess - increased costs.  Also there's the issue of production policies that change like the breeze over at USPC.  Earlier this year they stated they'd no longer be able to do deck boxes that are embossed on BOTH sides.  It's as if they had the technology and somehow lost it, never to be found again...    More seriously, though, they probably found it was more error-prone than it was worth.  You might have received all perfect-looking blue JAQK boxes (or close to perfect at the least), but how many percent of those produced had to be culled for defects while still at the factory?  We just don't know.  I can't imagine you'd have been any less disappointed if the box was embossed only on the front, would you have?

Actually, if USPC still has that policy, then next Monarchs print run is going to look rather disappointing...

[loldudex2]

This is just a wild guess, Don, but were the original decks (before t11) made by USPCC? The most I could find is they were made by an "unnamed casino card manufacturer". I feel this would make a lot of sense, and when t11 reprinted them, they used left over tuck boxes from the first run (which is why the bottom of the box reads 2008, when they were released in 2011, and why there is a one way back on the box), and possibly now for the red version, te boxes were made in-house at USPCC, where the might not have the tools and technology available to make that fine detailed embossing.

Does that make any sense at all, or am I just completely wrong and misled?

[Don Boyer]

This is just a wild guess, Don, but were the original decks (before t11) made by USPCC? The most I could find is they were made by an "unnamed casino card manufacturer". I feel this would make a lot of sense, and when t11 reprinted them, they used left over tuck boxes from the first run (which is why the bottom of the box reads 2008, when they were released in 2011, and why there is a one way back on the box), and possibly now for the red version, te boxes were made in-house at USPCC, where the might not have the tools and technology available to make that fine detailed embossing.

Does that make any sense at all, or am I just completely wrong and misled?

Actually, you could be completely correct.  USPC is known for reusing old, extra boxes like that.  I have some decks, common stuff like Tally Ho and Bikes, where the box said Cincinnati, but the cards inside said Erlanger.

No matter how you slice it though, they had the technology to make boxes that are embossed on the front and back - clearly they were doing it in 2008.  But now they're not.  It's like some civilization using "black box" technology that suddenly breaks down, and the people who were using it no longer have the knowledge of how it operates, and thus can't fix it.

But we're starting to clutter up this review page, when these comments would be better suited for this deck's topic on the PCP.  If you'd like to continue, please start it up there and I'll follow you.

Actually, I'll make copies of these posts we've made and drop them over there.

[authorXD]

I would have liked the box to be all red... but I still like the design.

[Don Boyer]

I would have liked the box to be all red... but I still like the design.

But the bigger question, since you're on the Deck Review board and not the PCP, is "Did you like the review?"

[NathanCanadas]

Hey, Deckreview, I'm a long-time fan of your reviews. I admire them because of your easy-going manner of showing the deck and explaining it's different aspects etc. However, one think I myself love to think about and hear in reviews is how they think it could have improved (finish + stock combo, or metallic ink, smaller borders etc.) This is similar to what Alex asked, but I would really love to see it. Also, congratulations on getting sponsored: it must be a bit of work, but receiving so many decks on a regular basis must be pretty fun! So, I wish you the best of luck, and good continuation!