New Brand of Plastic Cards. Has anyone else tried them?

[Detroitdad]

I didn't want to post on here ripping the free cards i got, but I didn't really care for them either. I think the backs are great. The colors are very vibrant. I don't care for the appearance of the face of the cards. They are way to thick/sturdy for me. I simply prefer a thinner, more flexible card.

Not to discount your opinion in the slightest, but you're a Copag man, right?    Going from the thin flexibility of Copags to the very thick, unbendable Sharks is like going from a...nope, can't repeat that here.  Anyway, anyone who uses and/or prefers Copags, will most definitely not want to use these Sharks.  It's just too loose a fit.

You could say I prefer Copags. I own a couple of set ups.

B

I know that Rose, that is why I didn't want to rip on the cards to much, because it is a preference thing with me.

[Detroitdad]

I didn't want to post on here ripping the free cards i got, but I didn't really care for them either. I think the backs are great. The colors are very vibrant. I don't care for the appearance of the face of the cards. They are way to thick/sturdy for me. I simply prefer a thinner, more flexible card.

Not to discount your opinion in the slightest  Good, because its usually the right one   , but you're a Copag man, right?    Going from the thin flexibility of Copags to the very thick, unbendable Sharks is like going from a...nope, can't repeat that here.  Anyway, anyone who uses and/or prefers Copags, will most definitely not want to use these Sharks.  It's just too loose a fit.

[Midnight Rose]

Well, yesterday's game was a complete success.  The Sharks went over brilliantly, held up well, and garnered a lot of attention.  On top of that, I had an absolute blast dealing for those students; they were into the spirit of Casino Night big time.  That, plus the ease of winning big at roulette (they all started with $6 in casino tickets, and almost everyone who played it walked away with at least $75; way more, in many cases) made the .25/.50 NL tables basically $4/$8 NL tables. 

I'm calling the Sharks a good buy.  I'm tempted to not give Sharky these cards, but a promise is a promise and my hands will appreciate going back to bridge size decks.

Let me know when the bridge size version comes out; I'll definitely want to see how those compare.

[holdem75]

Rose, thanks so much for all of your thorough feedback. I was especially interested to hear feedback from people that are not card enthusiasts so that was very insightful.  We have fixed the face card issue – they look 100% better. In terms of the stiffness, they are definitely thicker than the Copags – no doubt about it. I think it comes down to personal preference. We are however, working with the factory on some really exciting new lines. These cards are not as thick and have more of a textured feel. I will let you know when they are out. We also have a really sweet case design to go along with the cards. I will share when I get final pics from the factory.
Thanks again to everyone for their feedback!

[kkbait]

I would be interested in a case as the card board box is not holding up well
thanks
kkbait

[Detroitdad]

Rose, thanks so much for all of your thorough feedback. I was especially interested to hear feedback from people that are not card enthusiasts so that was very insightful.  We have fixed the face card issue – they look 100% better. In terms of the stiffness, they are definitely thicker than the Copags – no doubt about it. I think it comes down to personal preference. We are however, working with the factory on some really exciting new lines. These cards are not as thick and have more of a textured feel. I will let you know when they are out. We also have a really sweet case design to go along with the cards. I will share when I get final pics from the factory.
Thanks again to everyone for their feedback!

If the new line of cards is more flexible and less thick I would be interested in a set up. Like I said, I really like the vibrant red/blue colors. Just the feel of the cards is horrible to me, sorry.

B

[holdem75]

No problem at all - i appreciate everyone's feedback.
It all comes down to personal preference, some people like the thickness, for some it’s too much - that’s why we are working on a couple different lines. I will let you know when we get final samples. Eventually we will have sharkcards.com up and running, but in the mean time..
If you are interested in thick plastic playing cards, we are on ebay:
http://stores.ebay.com/Shark-Plastic-Cards
If you are looking for cards that are not as thick (more like copag or gemaco), this line of Shark cards is probably not for you.
Thanks

[Guitrmn]

I've just purchased a set of these and although they have not been used in a large game yet, I have played and tested these a bit. I actually like the stiffness of these cards. Not too stiff like a paper card, but not as loose as a Copag. Kinda in between....

The only drawback I can see with these cards after shuffling and rifling a bit is the full bleed. Looks like the color can get scratched off and create tiny little white spots. I don't think they'll get big enough to clearly identify the card but still a small concern. I think it was mentioned a few posts ago that a border will take care of that.

[holdem75]

Great, thanks for the feedback. FYI.. im including a dealer button and cut card with every order. Enjoy
http://stores.ebay.com/Shark-Plastic-Cards

[Blaster]

 OK, I grabbed  a set off ebay a couple of days ago. 
  I await  delivery, so I can test them out ..   Modiano's are a favorite of mine, so I'm curious to see how they differ ...
 The Problem mentioned with the back color is a concern...... 
 I'll report once I have them in hand ..

[OldWestGambler]

okay here are some interesting pics and comparisons that I promised to post. I'll duplicate it in the other threads and hopefully the Shark card manufacturers will solve the back color problems in their next generation...

The cards shown here have been used in about ten to fifteen 6 hour tourneys so they have not been used nearly as much as some of the Copags (1546) and dal Negros (Freedom non-acetate) that I will compare them to.

[i'm using the spoiler button so that those of you with slow internet connections don't have to wait for all downloads at once]

Deck edges

(Click to show/hide)

what you see here is the color rubbing off the cards' backs. Now the actual durability of the cards themselves are not affected - it is only the back color affected. it is the same effect in the red cards.

Back of cards

(Click to show/hide)

You can see the wear is greater on the edges but also has spread to the center of the cards so a border instead of a bleed will not solve this issue. Also you will note later that this problem is not affecting the face of the cards so that quality of ink or inking process should probably be used for the backs.

King face sample

(Click to show/hide)

A pic of the faces showing that the ink here is not affected in the same manner as the backs and to show what one HPT member called the anemic state of the bodies of the royalty on the cards. That can easily be fixed. I compare this next to dal Negros and Copags.

dal Negro and Copag face comparisons

(Click to show/hide)

Note the differences between Copag and dal Negro faces.

Pip and color comparisons

(Click to show/hide)

Here you can compare pip differences and note that the material used in the shark cards is brighter than the dal Negros and Copags so it almost gives the cards more contrast making them look bolder and more colorful.

Texture and brightness comparison dal Negro to Shark respectively

(Click to show/hide)

I wanted to show a closeup of the texture differences between the dal Negro (ace) and the Shark (king)

Deck thickness comparisons Copag to Shark

(Click to show/hide)

Here you can see that Copags ARE THINNER than Sharks. No real shocker there because they are on different ends of the spectrum as far as stiffness or flexibility.

Deck thickness comparisons dal Negro to Shark

(Click to show/hide)

I found it interesting though that the dal Negro deck was thicker here even though they are substantially more flexible than the Sharks. Flexibility here obviously has a lot to do with the material used. I would liken the Sharks to a thicker rougher Royal plastic rather than being in the Copag or dal Negro camp.

Copag inconsistency

(Click to show/hide)

I wanted to show this here because I hadn't even noticed it until further inspection of this old Copag deck. I think it goes to the fact that the printing process of cards in general is a fine balancing act between ink, material, heat, process, etc.. So unless the Shark manufacturers choose to completely ignore the problems with the color on the backs they should be able to solve it and have a decent card.

I prefer dal Negro and Modiano flexibility and thickness to the extremes of Copag and Shark. But there are a few guys at my regular tourney that LOVE the Sharks.

The only problem I have found with these cards is that back ink problem. So as I mentioned before if Shark can address this problem they will have a popular card especially if they can keep their price low.

I hope this review helps Shark and those who are on the fence about purchasing them. for the current price they are great cards but they will only last as long as you can put up with that ink problem.