Also, for RealityOne, to test your theory, here are some backs unlabeled. If you guess all four you're a genius because I am trying to trick you.
Top row is Clubs, Diamonds and Spades
Second Row is a Joker.
I'm still working on values.
Also, for RealityOne, to test your theory, here are some backs unlabeled. If you guess all four you're a genius because I am trying to trick you.
Top row is Clubs, Diamonds and Spades
Second Row is a Joker.
I'm still working on values.
Actually, they are:The number system is a bit archaic. I know the first one is a King. I think the second one is a Queen and the third is an Ace.
I noticed today as I was taking the pictures that follow, the deck is also short side to side. That is, looking at the deck in landscape orientation, the reds are also shorter than blacks.
Hmmm. As Meatloaf says, three out of four ain't bad.
Can you post the back of a 3, 5, 6, 9 and Queen?
To me, it looks like the dots inside the circle change size with each one. On the right side of the octopus ("above' the big curvy tentacle). One dot is always bigger than the others.As requested, all of clubs.
Ah ok. So then yeah, that's the way the numerical system is marked (the way I said above).Unless I’ve made a mistake, the face up cards (from another poker-sized sticky-as-hell Bee deck) correspond to the back in the picture. Hard to take a picture of both sides at once. Which one is troubling?
RealityOne figures most of this out using four cards, and even when I tried to throw him off by quizzing him with a Joker, he got it. And you, sir, have completed the picture of the markings.
Now if we only knew why the red cards are shorter and less wide than the black cards, in a non-stripper deck, we’ll have beaten this deck.
BTW, I don’t know what standard-sizes Chinese cards come in, but these are a bit smaller than US bridge sized cards. I’ll have to figure how to work this into a routine. “I got these cards off an AirChina flight from an old man with a beard and two glass eyes...”
To me, it looks like the dots inside the circle change size with each one. On the right side of the octopus ("above' the big curvy tentacle). One dot is always bigger than the others.
The Queen has the First dot (top one) in the 1st column from the left, the 9 has the 2nd, the 6 has the 3rd, and the 3 has the 4th (bottom one). The 5 has the 3rd dot in the 2nd column. I think it's this:
There are 3 columns, the first 2 have 4 dots and the last one has 5. The bottom dots, from left to right are "3 2 1". You go up that column counting by 3s. So if you were to write out the column, they would look like this (Jack is 11, Queen is 12, King is 13, Ace is 1)
________ K
Q___ J___10
9___ 8___ 7
6___ 5___ 4
3___ 2___A
Try it out, or lemme know if you don't get what I mean.
Wait, I just realized the card and the back in one pic wont match up. What are the values of the face down cards?
First, new news about the deck: As I told you, the deck was short top-to-bottom, reds a little shorter than blacks. That is, in in portrait orientation, reds are shorter than blacks.
I noticed today as I was taking the pictures that follow, the deck is also short side to side. That is, looking at the deck in landscape orientation, the reds are also shorter than blacks.
I've no idea what that means.
Did you see the picture from the directions that I posted that had the octopus on it? Of course I can’t read the Chinese, but since they use Arabic numbers like us, I saw something below the picture that maybe is the explanation of the markings. I’ll try and sort it out, but it has something occurring in pairs and threes.
Interesting, the reference to the cards being trapazoidal indicates that it may also serve as a stripper deck. I think that what you thought was a long side short card was actually a stripped card. If the original set-up was to have the red and black cards paired so that the one way design is going different ways, that appears to be intended so that you could strip out all of the red cards. Check by holding the cards with the back going the same way and with the back going a different way.