Sorry for the late reply but you gave me a great deal to think about Don. After taking a few days to put some serious thought into this debate and all the evidence that surrounds the debate, I'll have to say this is officially a myth. But debunking this theory didn't just come with a simple end. After speaking with a very close source connected with the USPCC, I've concluded that playing cards in general are judged on a 100% circumstantial basis. I agree now that a decks durability is based solely on the life expectancy of a finish and most finishes are way too close to even justify comparing them. Even if one did try to compare them, most of there opinions would still derive from circumstantial events that would lead to an inaccurate judge of quality. I therefore come to a new conclusion that deck reviews are pointless since they are all circumstantial based on how different peoples hands are and the oils they carry. I think this debate makes decks rather simple to evaluate now. Do they appeal to you and are they innovative? The answer is something that will differ to each and everyone of us.
Thanks for a healthy debate Don! Until next time...
Cheers
What's really become the "great equalizer" in handling is Magic Finish. Ever since USPC made it the default finish for custom decks, most new custom decks have extremely similar handling characteristics. The biggest performance difference you're likely to find now is in the paper, and even there USPC has done a bit of jiggering to make more decks handle like other decks.
At one time, not long ago, there was a big variety of stocks - Aristocrat, Tally Ho, Bicycle, Bicycle Casino, Bee, Bee Casino and who knows how many more. You do realize that they use the same paper to make all of these stocks? And that their characteristics have more to do with how much glue was used to make them and how much pressure was applied at the time? It was pretty complicated from their perspective and probably difficult to consistently make.
Today, you have two choices - Bicycle (standard) and Bee Casino. But they've dropped the standard of measuring papers in grams per square meter (gsm) and now rate the paper on thickness. Now - and this is the really good part - the paper thickness of each stock is not 100% consistent, so USPC states that either stock would come within a certain thickness range, and they don't offer you the choice of how thick or thin you get your paper. Worse still - the ranges OVERLAP, meaning a Bicycle stock made on the thick end of its thickness range could end up thicker than a Bee Casino stock on the thin end of its range!
And don't forget - humidity also plays a factor. Based on information I got from a well-known magician with his own brand of cards and deep knowledge of USPC, the print shop is not a sealed, humidity-controlled environment. They use climate controls in the room where the stock is stored, generally for a period of about two weeks, but once it hits the print shop, anything goes. The finish is a flexible plastic coating that's largely immune to simple humidity, but the paper is practically a living, breathing thing. When a deck starts going soggy in a humid place, it's got more to do with the paper, since the coating isn't impermeable nor is it waterproof.
So as far as judging criteria, finish on all custom USPC decks are basically identical now. Paper is the real factor, and for the most part, there's enough consistency that you might not notice a huge difference beyond stiffness and flexibility. But the difference does exist, and some people will swear by a certain characteristic set in their paper. Beyond that, you have design aspects.
While it's true that art is subjective, there are objective observations that can be made. Does the deck have borders? How thin are they? How easy is it to read the indices? How easy is it to see them in a fan? Are the pips traditionally colored or do they use a unique scheme? Is that scheme easy to read? Does the deck contain imagery that would be considered not family friendly or not suitable for work? I even check the alignment and width of the index characters - some people simply use a right alignment, and if the pips and values aren't matched in size, it can look a bit off. Additionally, there's the one double-digit value in the whole deck, the tens. Some people create a "10" that's two characters wide, because let's face it, it is two characters. But this will definitely throw off the alignment - if your opponent is spreading his cards wider at certain points in his hand, odds would be with a deck like this that he's holding a ten at each of those points! If you've ever wondered why the "10" in USPC standard faces is so slim, with a sans-serif stick for the "1" and a "0" that's far more of a skinny oval than a round circle, the answer would be consistent index width - that "10" is pretty much as wide as all the other single-character values.
So no, deck reviews are neither pointless nor are they completely subjective.
