yeah i saw this on their instagram too, im trying to figure out what exactly it will mean to partner directly with USPCC to make a deck...perhaps a mass sold bicycle deck? something tells me it might end up being a standard stock and finish type of release
Hmm..I will need to check this out. I have not gotten any DandD decks in sometime as I tired of their marketing. They do make good cards and perhapd it is time to leave my resentment behind.
wow im actually really pumped about these! i always hear good things about them and theyre hard to come across...i always love seeing old style backs come back
What made the original Steamboats unique was the very thin stock with a smooth finish that was actually good for fanning and lasted longer than the usual smooth finished decks before clumping. These were among the thinnest decks I've ever handled, but they still had good snap for such a thin stock.
I'm afraid these Steamboats will be made on regular Bicycle stock, then all we'll have is just a normal deck with a rather impractical full-bleed flower design on the back. Hopefully I'm wrong and they'll be able to reproduce the uniqueness the orginal Steamboats brought to the table. And since this deck is a collaberation with the USPC, hopefully we aren't going to get jacked on the price like we do with most D&D products......
alric wrote:What made the original Steamboats unique was the very thin stock with a smooth finish that was actually good for fanning and lasted longer than the usual smooth finished decks before clumping. These were among the thinnest decks I've ever handled, but they still had good snap for such a thin stock.
I'm afraid these Steamboats will be made on regular Bicycle stock, then all we'll have is just a normal deck with a rather impractical full-bleed flower design on the back. Hopefully I'm wrong and they'll be able to reproduce the uniqueness the orginal Steamboats brought to the table. And since this deck is a collaberation with the USPC, hopefully we aren't going to get jacked on the price like we do with most D&D products......
According to what they wrote on Instagram they are staying true to the originals. With the same thinness (is that a word?) and finish. Apparently.
"Being one of our favorite decks we convinced the USPCC to allow us to reprint these to their original specification with a smooth finish on ultra thin paper. We think the outcome is better than the original."
Wildereachday wrote:Here's the quote JP is referring to:
"Being one of our favorite decks we convinced the USPCC to allow us to reprint these to their original specification with a smooth finish on ultra thin paper. We think the outcome is better than the original."
My heart just sank when I read that - it looks like its just more D&D bullshit. With these guys, they can tell me Tuesday follows Monday and I' ll still have my doubts. I guess we can expect clumpy, smooth-finished deck like the Ace Fulton's with thin and flimsy stock. I'll compare them to the original Steamboats and see if the Bucks are full of crap or not on this release.
I remember buying 2 bricks of Steamboats about 9 years ago for my poker games. I like cards with full-bleed back designs for playing poker, and I got the bricks of Steamboats because they were a lot cheaper than Bees at that time. Shortly after that I switched to 100% plastic cards because they lasted much longer. I probably had about 20 sealed decks that I put away in a drawer and forgot about them for years until I got into cardistry and started practicing with them. I'm probably down to only 10 sealed decks left so I'm really hoping these reprints will be decent. Screw being better than the originals, I'll be happy if they just come close.......
No, the top of the original box says: STEAMBOAT POKER
You don't find the word "Bicycle" anywhere on the Steamboat tuck box. Also, the D&D Instagram pic that Evan posted shows the front of the tuck box, but it has the orginal back design on the front with the picture of a steamboat, so they put the back design of the originals on the front of the box on the reprints.
They significantly changed the tuck boxes on the Steamboats, no one's going to confuse these reprints with the originals, which may be a good thing. What was the point of reprinting the Fan Backs, there are plenty from the reprints of the Vintage Series still widely available.....
There seems to be something wrong with their site (big shock, I'm sure), the only shipping option available is express shipping for $44.00. Since these are produced in collaboration with the USPC, I'm hoping they will be available elsewhere with more reasonble shipping.
alric wrote:Or its just the usual hype....What was the point of reprinting the Fan Backs, there are plenty from the reprints of the Vintage Series still widely available.....
I doubt these are Q1 like the reprints (which are still much cheaper and they were limited!!)
Yep - usual hype. I will not profane my domicile by introducing a deck with "DD" on the bottom.
im actually pretty excited to get my hands on these. im sure D&D actually made sure to make them as much as a replica( not just bike stock/finish) as they can.im a fan of older decks reprinted to keep history alive... i just hope they handle good
which reminds me, is there actually a stock out there thats any thinner than bike stock? or is it thin solely because of the smooth finish?
darkinertia wrote:which reminds me, is there actually a stock out there thats any thinner than bike stock? or is it thin solely because of the smooth finish?
The machine that smooths (or embosses) has two rolling metal drums that can be set to different pressures. Higher the pressure the thinner the card.
$28.50/brick + ship for Cincy Q1.
D&D is $50.49/brick + ship. But, hey - this is what they say about these reprints "Never has a deck of Bicycle's looked so good!"
I think this is another reason I don't like these guys: "An original Bicycle® deck released over a century ago now back in print.", implying nothing happened in-between a hundred years ago and now.
Anyways - if someone does get these and compares, please post. (Almost curious about the "snappy" index....)