Black Lions - David Blaine

[Don Boyer]

Hey Don

I've attached a picture of the back of the 7♦️ (WL SB B). Would you mind using your marker (or MS Paint) to show where the value would be, please, because I can't see for looking 😉

Thank you :-)

If you search for the old topic on the White Lions, I'm sure someone's detailed the entire marking system for that deck.  I'm going with the assumption that you've presented a Seven of Diamonds and what I remember of the marking system.

Notice I made two marks on your card image.  The top mark points to a full split spade - picture a diamond made of four split spades and that's the leftmost spade in the diamond.  Notice it's DARKER along the center line than the other three.  That's your suit indicator.

Now look at the second mark, pointing to a half split spade along the card's edge.  Notice how the long vertical line at the edge of that half-spade is THINNER than the same line on the spades above and below it.  Now notice the gap line that the half-spade is pointing to and follow it diagonally going up, seeing that it's WIDER than the gap of neighboring gap lines.

This is very similar to the Seven of Diamonds in the Black Lions, except that I can't tell any difference between the half-spades on the card edge for the Black Lions.  While its not immediately apparent, the gap positioning looks to be the same if you mirror the image of the Black Lion card, flipping it along the vertical axis - when you do that, the gaps in both decks are located in the same place.  The suit marker, however, is now using what appears to be different positioning, unless the White Lions Series B card presented isn't a diamond and is some other suit.

Need more info?  Go to the homepage and search "white lions marking system" and you'll find the older posts covering the marking systems used on the Series A and Series B decks.  I don't know if the markings were carried over into the Black Label - can't honestly say if I've looked or not - but I'd wager they're probably the same as Series B, considering the timing of the release.

[fenderdemon]

Hey Don

I've attached a picture of the back of the 7♦️ (WL SB B). Would you mind using your marker (or MS Paint) to show where the value would be, please, because I can't see for looking 😉

Thank you :-)

If you search for the old topic on the White Lions, I'm sure someone's detailed the entire marking system for that deck.  I'm going with the assumption that you've presented a Seven of Diamonds and what I remember of the marking system.

Notice I made two marks on your card image.  The top mark points to a full split spade - picture a diamond made of four split spades and that's the leftmost spade in the diamond.  Notice it's DARKER along the center line than the other three.  That's your suit indicator.

Now look at the second mark, pointing to a half split spade along the card's edge.  Notice how the long vertical line at the edge of that half-spade is THINNER than the same line on the spades above and below it.  Now notice the gap line that the half-spade is pointing to and follow it diagonally going up, seeing that it's WIDER than the gap of neighboring gap lines.

This is very similar to the Seven of Diamonds in the Black Lions, except that I can't tell any difference between the half-spades on the card edge for the Black Lions.  While its not immediately apparent, the gap positioning looks to be the same if you mirror the image of the Black Lion card, flipping it along the vertical axis - when you do that, the gaps in both decks are located in the same place.  The suit marker, however, is now using what appears to be different positioning, unless the White Lions Series B card presented isn't a diamond and is some other suit.

Need more info?  Go to the homepage and search "white lions marking system" and you'll find the older posts covering the marking systems used on the Series A and Series B decks.  I don't know if the markings were carried over into the Black Label - can't honestly say if I've looked or not - but I'd wager they're probably the same as Series B, considering the timing of the release.

Thanks for the detailed explanation, Don! I understand completely, now.

I'll also do the search you recommend.

Cheers!

[HolyJJ]

I got a brick as part of a trade (got rid of some decks which I was not having any luck selling)... and now that I've opened a deck and checked them out, I seriously don't like them.

For starters, the deck I opened was not even traditionally cut. As for the back design... the marking system is exactly the same as the White Lions Series B. Yeah, it does have the advantage of allowing the magician (or cheater) to be able to read the card value from backs from across the table, but unless you have the eyesight of an eagle or binoculars strapped to your face, you won't be able to read the suit unless you're very close to the cards. Furthermore, the back design does fail the riffle test.

The Sharps by LPCC still retain their place as the best marked deck by far (can read the suits from across the table also, and the marking system passes the riffle test!), and the Lions (both white and black) by David Blaine are still the second best. Having that second place spot isn't terrible by any means... but I'm kind of disappointed seeing as it's a David Blaine deck, and nothing has been done to improve that marking system.

The edges on the Bicycle metal luxe deck that I got were pretty good (for USPCC standards), and so I thought maybe that improvement would be noticed on the Black Lions also... but sadly, the edges were as bad as they get.

On the plus side, the tuck on this deck is pretty awesome, as is the silver foil deck seal.

Overall I'm disappointed though. I'm going to have to try and sell off the remaining decks!

[Don Boyer]

I got a brick as part of a trade (got rid of some decks which I was not having any luck selling)... and now that I've opened a deck and checked them out, I seriously don't like them.

For starters, the deck I opened was not even traditionally cut. As for the back design... the marking system is exactly the same as the White Lions Series B. Yeah, it does have the advantage of allowing the magician (or cheater) to be able to read the card value from backs from across the table, but unless you have the eyesight of an eagle or binoculars strapped to your face, you won't be able to read the suit unless you're very close to the cards. Furthermore, the back design does fail the riffle test.

The Sharps by LPCC still retain their place as the best marked deck by far (can read the suits from across the table also, and the marking system passes the riffle test!), and the Lions (both white and black) by David Blaine are still the second best. Having that second place spot isn't terrible by any means... but I'm kind of disappointed seeing as it's a David Blaine deck, and nothing has been done to improve that marking system.

The edges on the Bicycle metal luxe deck that I got were pretty good (for USPCC standards), and so I thought maybe that improvement would be noticed on the Black Lions also... but sadly, the edges were as bad as they get.

On the plus side, the tuck on this deck is pretty awesome, as is the silver foil deck seal.

Overall I'm disappointed though. I'm going to have to try and sell off the remaining decks!

Traditionally cut?  When have any of Blaine's decks been traditionally cut?

I spoke with the USPC reps at the convention.  Once in a while, they have trouble feeding print sheets through the cutter, where it gets cut into strips and the cards are punched from the strips with a die cutter in the shape of a card.  They try feeding the sheet flipped over when this happens - it's why once in a while, a deck not traditionally cut becomes so for a least a portion of the print run.  But as a general rule, casino decks are usually requested as traditionally cut and non-casino decks are not, and USPC has been known in the past to discourage custom deck makers from requesting traditionally-cut cards because the cuts supposedly aren't as clean.

Most marked decks don't pass the riffle test.  Even the Ultimate Marked Deck doesn't.  Speaking of which, a batch was recently "accidentally" printed by USPC - the creators ordered it, no one spotted it until AFTER it was printed and by then it was too late.  This means you can find them on the market again, but they aren't cheap.  Well-hidden markings, not as bad a failure at the riffle test as either of the Lions and readable from across the table - in the traditional Rider Back design.  I can't speak for Sharps as I haven't seen them, but if the marks can be read with the naked eye, there's a chance that it can be detected in a riffle test with the naked eye - the more subtle and smaller the markings, the more difficult they are to spot, but no naked-eye visible marks are unspottable.  If they weren't, they wouldn't be marks, would they?

Best deck I've seen for defeating a riffle test: marked Bicycle Series 1800.  The weathered look on the backs have dozens and dozens of visible marks from back to back, making the suit/value markings as easy to spot as a single drop of water in a tsunami.  But the markings are VERY subtle - I can see them with my glasses on, but that's also because with glasses on my "arm's-length range" vision is 20/15, on par with a fighter pilot.  They require practicing to read them accurately, but they are readable at at least arm's length if not across the table.

Second best is that Madison deck that looks a lot like a Bee Diamond Back - there's so many Madison decks I stopped keeping track of the names long ago.  It came in a borderless and white-bordered version, and the marks are small enough to be very hard to spot, but unlike the UMD and the 1800s, you have to memorize a marking system, while those other two decks are plainly readable and unencoded.  You just have to know where to look!

[HolyJJ]

Don, to answer the question, the White Lions series B decks (at least the ones I used) were traditionally cut, as were the Silver Split spades. That's one of the reasons why Blaine decks were one of my go-to decks for practising with, before EPCC and LPCC started business.

In response to a question I posted in one of his KickStarter campaigns, Erik Mana also confirmed that even if you ask USPCC for your deck to be traditionally cut, every single deck won't be guaranteed to have the requested/demanded cut.

I think I've tested pretty much every single marked deck that's released in the past 4 years -- because card cheating/crooked gambling is what got me into cards in the first place, and so I marked decks do intruigue me.

The UMD deck is terrible. I was going to start putting it through the riffle test, but before I even started, I saw the blatant marking in the top corner. Wasn't impressed at all.

The Bicycle 1800 marked deck isn't bad, but it doesn't pass the riffle test -- that's how I found the markings, because I couldn't find the instructions video anywhere. As the 1800 design deliberately has different wears and tear patterns across different card backs, the markings are definitely better hidden than 90% of other marked decks... but as the markings are in "the usual place", after a few riffle tests, you can see them. It took me four riffles. Not bad.

The Madison Dealers fail the riffle test quite blatantly. Yeah, it does require one to figure out the dot code, but it's not difficult.

The Black and White Lions marking system is much better than the Madison Dealers, because although the Lions do also have a pattern type of code, even though they fail the riffle test, like the Bicycle 1800, the riffle test failure is difficult to detect, because the offsetting of the pattern is probably by only a couple of pixels.

The Sharps are the only marked (or rather, readable-via-back-design) deck that I know of. I trust that you know about "juiced" decks that cheaters use... that's what the Sharps use.

As per LPCC's Instagram account, they're producing a second edition of the Sharps. For me, that's probably the best news I've heard in months. I'm curious to see whether they really can top the first edition!

In the interim, for those who don't have the Sharps, the DB Lions decks are a decent alternative... if you don't mind the furry edges!

[Don Boyer]

Don, to answer the question, the White Lions series B decks (at least the ones I used) were traditionally cut, as were the Silver Split spades. That's one of the reasons why Blaine decks were one of my go-to decks for practising with, before EPCC and LPCC started business.

In response to a question I posted in one of his KickStarter campaigns, Erik Mana also confirmed that even if you ask USPCC for your deck to be traditionally cut, every single deck won't be guaranteed to have the requested/demanded cut.

I think I've tested pretty much every single marked deck that's released in the past 4 years -- because card cheating/crooked gambling is what got me into cards in the first place, and so I marked decks do intruigue me.

The UMD deck is terrible. I was going to start putting it through the riffle test, but before I even started, I saw the blatant marking in the top corner. Wasn't impressed at all.

The Bicycle 1800 marked deck isn't bad, but it doesn't pass the riffle test -- that's how I found the markings, because I couldn't find the instructions video anywhere. As the 1800 design deliberately has different wears and tear patterns across different card backs, the markings are definitely better hidden than 90% of other marked decks... but as the markings are in "the usual place", after a few riffle tests, you can see them. It took me four riffles. Not bad.

The Madison Dealers fail the riffle test quite blatantly. Yeah, it does require one to figure out the dot code, but it's not difficult.

The Black and White Lions marking system is much better than the Madison Dealers, because although the Lions do also have a pattern type of code, even though they fail the riffle test, like the Bicycle 1800, the riffle test failure is difficult to detect, because the offsetting of the pattern is probably by only a couple of pixels.

The Sharps are the only marked (or rather, readable-via-back-design) deck that I know of. I trust that you know about "juiced" decks that cheaters use... that's what the Sharps use.

As per LPCC's Instagram account, they're producing a second edition of the Sharps. For me, that's probably the best news I've heard in months. I'm curious to see whether they really can top the first edition!

In the interim, for those who don't have the Sharps, the DB Lions decks are a decent alternative... if you don't mind the furry edges!

There's a little secret I discovered to make it easier for a deck fail the riffle test if it's marked.  For the Black Lions, I first sorted the deck by suit only to find the suit markings, then I sorted them by value to find the value markings.  It makes it easier to spot the transitions because for suit, the back change you're looking for happens every thirteen cards and for value, every four cards.  I couldn't spot the value changes off the bat at first, but after sorting for value, they stood out like sore thumbs.  It's like watching a flipbook-type movie but it takes place in slow-motion, making the changes easier to detect than the rapid flicker you might get in a randomized deck.

Most people I show the UMD to never spot the markings unless I point them out.  Magicians might not be fooled as easily, but how often do you perform for magicians?  My local magic shop used to sell them regularly to a poker cheat who came in for them.  I know of juiced decks but haven't yet experienced one first-hand, so I can't comment on them authoritatively.

[ksi]

I got a brick as part of a trade (got rid of some decks which I was not having any luck selling)... and now that I've opened a deck and checked them out, I seriously don't like them.

For starters, the deck I opened was not even traditionally cut. As for the back design... the marking system is exactly the same as the White Lions Series B. Yeah, it does have the advantage of allowing the magician (or cheater) to be able to read the card value from backs from across the table, but unless you have the eyesight of an eagle or binoculars strapped to your face, you won't be able to read the suit unless you're very close to the cards. Furthermore, the back design does fail the riffle test.

The Sharps by LPCC still retain their place as the best marked deck by far (can read the suits from across the table also, and the marking system passes the riffle test!), and the Lions (both white and black) by David Blaine are still the second best. Having that second place spot isn't terrible by any means... but I'm kind of disappointed seeing as it's a David Blaine deck, and nothing has been done to improve that marking system.

The edges on the Bicycle metal luxe deck that I got were pretty good (for USPCC standards), and so I thought maybe that improvement would be noticed on the Black Lions also... but sadly, the edges were as bad as they get.

On the plus side, the tuck on this deck is pretty awesome, as is the silver foil deck seal.

Overall I'm disappointed though. I'm going to have to try and sell off the remaining decks!

Oh... so sad to hear that the deck seems disappointed.

How about the paper?  Feel like casino grade?  Or just close to normal bikes?

I personally more concern on the paper quality, handling and finish.  My recent experience on USPCC decks are not good.  All feel soft and relatively thin.  My hope is DB would be one of fews who are still able to push USPCC using more high quality paper.

And I am worrying about the delay issue.  If a majority portion of stock did lost by USPS, then DB would have to ask USPCC to print again immediately.  That might cause the decrease in quality control.  I hope this is not the reason that some of the decks are not traditionally cut.

[Don Boyer]

\Oh... so sad to hear that the deck seems disappointed.

How about the paper?  Feel like casino grade?  Or just close to normal bikes?

I personally more concern on the paper quality, handling and finish.  My recent experience on USPCC decks are not good.  All feel soft and relatively thin.  My hope is DB would be one of fews who are still able to push USPCC using more high quality paper.

I think it's more that the BUYER was disappointed.  The deck I'm sure is perfectly happy! 

The paper isn't as bad as cheap mass-produced Bikes, but it's not Bee Casino grade.  I'd say it's on the heavy end of Bike stock.  And yes, they are definitely not traditionally cut.  The quality is on par with the previous recent Blaine decks.

[HolyJJ]

Don, from my experience, juiced decks are the ultimate when it comes to marking systems -- my 8 year old cousin (who is obviously not a magician) found the marks on the Madison dealers, and so I'm never comfortable handing out decks like that for inspection. Sharps on the other hand, I don't mind if a person inspects them for hours!

The marking pattern on the Sharps is very similar to that on the black lions (at least for card value/number).

KSI, Don's assessment of the Black Lions is correct -- the card stock doesn't feel anywhere near as thick or study as the Bee Casino decks from around 8 years ago.

I personally preferred the card thickness and feel of the White Lions more.

Expert Playing Card Company's classic twins feature a stock which has much more of a Casino quality paper feel than anything that USPCC is putting out these days.

[ksi]

\Oh... so sad to hear that the deck seems disappointed.

How about the paper?  Feel like casino grade?  Or just close to normal bikes?

I personally more concern on the paper quality, handling and finish.  My recent experience on USPCC decks are not good.  All feel soft and relatively thin.  My hope is DB would be one of fews who are still able to push USPCC using more high quality paper.

I think it's more that the BUYER was disappointed.  The deck I'm sure is perfectly happy! 

The paper isn't as bad as cheap mass-produced Bikes, but it's not Bee Casino grade.  I'd say it's on the heavy end of Bike stock.  And yes, they are definitely not traditionally cut.  The quality is on par with the previous recent Blaine decks.

Don, from my experience, juiced decks are the ultimate when it comes to marking systems -- my 8 year old cousin (who is obviously not a magician) found the marks on the Madison dealers, and so I'm never comfortable handing out decks like that for inspection. Sharps on the other hand, I don't mind if a person inspects them for hours!

The marking pattern on the Sharps is very similar to that on the black lions (at least for card value/number).

KSI, Don's assessment of the Black Lions is correct -- the card stock doesn't feel anywhere near as thick or study as the Bee Casino decks from around 8 years ago.

I personally preferred the card thickness and feel of the White Lions more.

Expert Playing Card Company's classic twins feature a stock which has much more of a Casino quality paper feel than anything that USPCC is putting out these days.

Thanks a lot for the info.

My Black Lions is still not yet arrived.  I am dreaming if these Black Lions could be comparing with the Split Spades Lions in terms of the paper.  But likely I would be wake up soon...

Are the Classic Twins in "Classic Finish"?  Recently I got both Draconian (Classic Finish) and LUXX Palme (Elite Finish).  I don't know which one (or both?) are casino grade.  For me, both of the stocks are really impressive.  And by measurement they seems to be the same thickness.  Personally I prefer the Elite Finish a bit more.  The texture of the coating seems more subtle.

[HolyJJ]

KSI, I don't have any Silver Split Spades decks left... but from what I recall, the Silver Split Spades paper did feel very slightly sturdier than the Black Lions.

I wouldn't say it's David Blaine's fault... it's more USPCC's fault for not even attempting to improve their poor quality paper at a time where EPCC and LPCC paper stocks are tons better.

You're right about the Classic Twins (and also the Classic black and Classic gold) featuring the Classic Finish, as does the Draconian deck. The Elite Finish that the LUXX Palme uses I very good also. Whilst I'm not 100% sure about this, to me they feel like the same paper stock, but with a different embossing pattern (and possibly a slight variation in coating).

The Elite Finish pattern does appear to give the cards more durability than the Classic Finish. For what it's worth, I like the Elite Finish very much.

If only Blaine printed his cards with EPCC of LPCC... they'd be so much better than the badly cut, and cheap feeling, non-traditionally cut cards that they presently are.

[fenderdemon]

I don't under why people think the BL's are not traditionally cut. DB'S BL's are traditionally cut. It states so in the snippet in the first paragraph of the description, verbatim...

"... After a year of detailed development with the United States Playing Card Company, we are proud to introduce The Black Lions, printed on custom casino-quality card stock and traditionally cut with new blades to create our best feeling deck yet... "

Surely, making traditionally cut cards isn't a difficult process. After all, they managed to do so all those years ago, the majority of casino decks are, and Turner's Gold Seal decks are traditionally cut. I honestly can't see USPC 's problem with it, unless they like to play the 'superior' card, pardon the pun, and 'we want you you have non-traditionally cut cards', so there.

Then again, I've only just woken up and am drinking my first cup of delicious, fresh coffee 😜

[HolyJJ]

I don't know about "people", but as I said, the deck I opened was not traditionally cut.

Blaine may well have asked for the decks to be traditionally cut, but as has been established during some of the replies, USPCC are unable to guarantee that every single deck will receive the direction of cut that was requested.

I probably just ended up being one that was unlucky. I had a similar problem with the Madison Private Reserve Rounders deck that I opened -- despite that deck being touted as being traditionally cut, I got one that wasn't. I guess USPCC's quality control really is as bad as it's reputed to be.

Therefore, there really isn't any reason to think/not think about whether or not BL's are traditionally cut -- especially when people are able to test it themselves.

[fenderdemon]

My perspective of people, is, but not limited to, people; posters; narrators, commentators, et, cetera. The list is endless, but you get the general meaning. I wasn't being rude. Just damn tired, all the damn time, with all my damn prescription medications.

USPC can't guarantee anything, nowadays. +/- 10% of 'delivered decks', What the hell does that even mean? I order 1000, I want 1000. If you order, say, 1000 company cars, I'm sure as hell not going to accept +/-10%. That's a huge ratio and just plain ridiculous.

If traditionally cut can't be guaranteed, then it should state, +/-10%, or thereabouts 😜

(USPC speaking here) Were not too sure on the exact amount, here, chaps, however, if you don't get a traditionally cut deck, tough shit!!! Sorry and all that! Arf, Arf...

All hail our new Masters: EPCC and LPCC!

Oh, man...

I'm going back to bed 😉

[ksi]

KSI, I don't have any Silver Split Spades decks left... but from what I recall, the Silver Split Spades paper did feel very slightly sturdier than the Black Lions.

I wouldn't say it's David Blaine's fault... it's more USPCC's fault for not even attempting to improve their poor quality paper at a time where EPCC and LPCC paper stocks are tons better.

You're right about the Classic Twins (and also the Classic black and Classic gold) featuring the Classic Finish, as does the Draconian deck. The Elite Finish that the LUXX Palme uses I very good also. Whilst I'm not 100% sure about this, to me they feel like the same paper stock, but with a different embossing pattern (and possibly a slight variation in coating).

The Elite Finish pattern does appear to give the cards more durability than the Classic Finish. For what it's worth, I like the Elite Finish very much.

If only Blaine printed his cards with EPCC of LPCC... they'd be so much better than the badly cut, and cheap feeling, non-traditionally cut cards that they presently are.

HolyJJ, I actually mean the 1st Edition Split Spades Lions which was printed in OHIO.  I love this deck very much.  The thickness and handling is just like an UV500 or OHIO Casino Bee.

For the stock using by USPCC, I think I have similar view with you.  Since 2014 there seems very few Bee Casino stock being used.  I got some 1902 Erdnase Smith back (red and black), which said to be using the Bee 825 casino grade paper.  These decks are quite close to those OHIO Bee Casino stock in terms of thickness and stiffness.  But since then, I never have chance to get a deck with such thickness and stiffness.

And for the traditional cut.  I got a brick of HoneyBee, which said to be under traditional cut.  But the deck I opened, was not.  Yes I think this is an accident, an accident caused by USPCC.  And this accident appeared on your Black Lions again.

Recently I opened 2 decks of normal Tally-Ho, and a Bicycle Cupid back, and a Bicycle Speakeasy Deck, and a Bicycle Skull Deck, and a Bicycle Guardians v1 --  they are all traditionally cut.  My feeling is, it seems that for their in-house decks, there are a significant portion being cut traditionally.  But for those custom prints, the percentage is relatively small.  And even you requested to do so, sometimes accident appeared.

[Don Boyer]

I don't under why people think the BL's are not traditionally cut. DB'S BL's are traditionally cut. It states so in the snippet in the first paragraph of the description, verbatim...

"... After a year of detailed development with the United States Playing Card Company, we are proud to introduce The Black Lions, printed on custom casino-quality card stock and traditionally cut with new blades to create our best feeling deck yet... "

Surely, making traditionally cut cards isn't a difficult process. After all, they managed to do so all those years ago, the majority of casino decks are, and Turner's Gold Seal decks are traditionally cut. I honestly can't see USPC 's problem with it, unless they like to play the 'superior' card, pardon the pun, and 'we want you you have non-traditionally cut cards', so there.

Then again, I've only just woken up and am drinking my first cup of delicious, fresh coffee 😜

David Blaine can advertise them as whatever cut he wants.  A traditional cut, known in the trade as a face-down cut because of the orientation of the paper relative to the die when it's being punched, will faro and weave shuffle easily while face down from bottom to top straight out of the box.  The modern cut, known in the trade as a face-up cut, has to be face up in order to weave and faro shuffle straight out of the box.  Given a little breaking in, any deck will weave or faro either direction, unless they're really poorly cut and made of poor-grade paper like most dollar-store specials.

The Black Lions are NOT traditionally cut.  At least not the pack I opened.  Of the untold thousands of decks that were made (no one but David and USPC knows the size of the print run), it's indeed possible that some were traditionally cut - but clearly at least some if not most were not.

The problem with making a traditionally-cut deck is that it adds an extra step (flipping the sheet) to the process of feeding the paper through the cutting machine.  It's more efficient to make decks in the modern cut.  The Turner Gold Seal decks were made at the Cincinnati plant, no longer in operation.  I've spoken with USPC reps about the Erlanger plant - they do occasionally have trouble feeding paper into the new cutter, in which case they'll flip the paper over before feeding it.  It's why there's such confusion about traditional and modern deck cutting.  Anyone specifying that they want traditionally-cut decks has to pay extra for it and will be discouraged from their request, apparently not only because of the added step but because of the inconsistency of their own cutting equipment.

[Magic_Orthodoxy]

the black lions add copy "says" they are traditionally cut and my first deck out of the box was cut that way - I was actually surprised because I wasn't expecting it - so wasn't looking for it - went back and checked the add copy and bam - there it was. Am I going to open all the decks in my brick to verify? Nope. But the 1st one I pulled was.

[Blockheads88]

So there was a Post From David Blaine about the Red / Blue coming out Xmas?
Anyone have any update when they will be released?

Haven't heard anything since and nothing released yet.

[crazyfandecks]

thank you very much Don  i was dizzy while keep staring at the long side spades line just to see if  it have same marked of Series B. but the only i recognized is 7 - it still have the "marked to separate 7 & Queen" of series B. thank to you, now i know how to read all of them.
also anyone notice DB change the 4 of Hearts in Queen of Spades hands is now 4 of Clubs 
oh and is there anyone know why Labyrinth Hsieh closed his blog of Hidden Secret of White Lions  i really missed that site

[hecrob]

So in classic Blaine fashion, he said something and then later didnt deliver :/

[Don Boyer]

oh and is there anyone know why Labyrinth Hsieh closed his blog of Hidden Secret of White Lions  i really missed that site

It's still there.  I found it while I was looking for the old White Lions marking system.  We have links to it - go to the forum home page and search "white lions marking system" and one of the topics you hit will have the link you're looking for.

[crazyfandecks]

hmm, maybe because of my ISP blocked all blogspot, i forgot that, now i can only access his site by webcache.

anyway, after reading the "reversed court cards" trick of Jordan in Encyclopedia of Card Trick, i think i found out DB's have re-design the court cards with more than 3 have 1way face  if anyone can showed them first in here will be great because i won't touch the black lions again until next weekend due to my exam 

[fenderdemon]

Just received my bricks, along with lots of other goodies, in the post, today, and the first deck I opened, was.................. traditionally cut! 😏

[Magic_Orthodoxy]

 bing bing bing! Yea, I asked my friend to open his and he confirmed as well

Anyone else found the 5H reveal on the tuck back?

[fenderdemon]

Anyone else found the 5H reveal on the tuck back?

Under the lion's whiskers... 😉