[pescetom]

I have always loved playing with brand new cards, especially thin plastic ones that slide effortlessly when opening the hand. At the beginning of the teams tournament on Friday, while I was enjoying this sensation suddenly half the room (or rather, the tent - we were playing under a circus tent) was groaning and screaming in disbelief "I can't see my cards!". I looked at mine, which were perfectly readable and very pleasing too: AKxxx x Axx Kxx. I shrugged thinking they must be complaining about the light, and soon I was Declarer in 4 spades as the grumbling subsided. Then the dummy came down and suddenly I understood: the right hand side of each suit was completely blank! They must be opening their cards towards the left, instead of towards the right like me.

This set me thinking about a few things.

Why do such cards exist? I realise that historically all cards had the rank only on the left, and I've seen it in some traditional European packs, but these were English AKQJ and compact format, simply without the rank and suit indication on top-right and bottom-left. Is there some other game that wants them this way? Or someone who wants to insert publicity on both faces? The club had bought them in internet because they were cheap, without attention to the layout.

How common is it to open the cards towards the left? It seemed about half the players were having trouble, so it is not simply linked to being right or left handed. I am right handed and I hold my cards on the left and open them towards the right, but that doesn't seem as common as I expected. I seem to remember mycroft commenting that he was right handed but did the opposite, but I wasn't paying attention as it didn't seem to make any difference in terms of practicality.

And is this pack legal? Our RA has nothing to say about the pack. The laws say that the RA may mandate that the cards are symmetrical, indicating that otherwise they may not be. But what does the WBF mean by symmetrical? I imagine they are thinking about rotational symmetry (the letter 'S') rather than relational symmetry (the letter 'B'). A standard English pack has rotational symmetry (more or less, as only diamonds are truly symmetrical: the other suits have the central suit pip in one vertical direction, which I guess could be used to signal during play). But I don't see any requirement to have the rank/suit at all four corners.

[johnu]

I never really thought about it, but I only remember seeing and using cards that have denominations on the upper left and lower right.

pescetom, on 2025-July-14, 09:17, said:

And is this pack legal? Our RA has nothing to say about the pack. The laws say that the RA may mandate that the cards are symmetrical, indicating that otherwise they may not be. But what does the WBF mean by symmetrical?

By symmetrical, I assumed that they meant the back of the cards, not the front of the cards since non-symmetrical back of cards could be used for illicit signaling. Fronts of the cards are usually not symmetrical, although they could also be used for signaling on defense.

[pescetom]

johnu, on 2025-July-14, 15:20, said:

I never really thought about it, but I only remember seeing and using cards that have denominations on the upper left and lower right.

That is (IIRC) what these cards had. But the issue is that people here are used to having them on all four corners, and those who spread cards to the right need it on the upper right. Are you really used to seeing only upper left lower right, or all four?

johnu, on 2025-July-14, 15:20, said:

By symmetrical, I assumed that they meant the back of the cards, not the front of the cards since non-symmetrical back of cards could be used for illicit signaling. Fronts of the cards are usually not symmetrical, although they could also be used for signaling on defense.

Law 1B WRT to symmetrical says "The face of the Cards", IOW the front.
As I commented, a standard English pack is almost symmetrical in a rotational sense, although the Ace of spades (at least) and the odd ranks outside of diamonds have a give-away at the centre that could be used for signalling on defence.

[johnu]

johnu, on 2025-July-14, 15:20, said:

By symmetrical, I assumed that they meant the back of the cards, not the front of the cards since non-symmetrical back of cards could be used for illicit signaling. Fronts of the cards are usually not symmetrical, although they could also be used for signaling on defense.

Of course, Fantunes proved that they could cheat even with symmetrical cards. I guess we need square cards with 4 identical sides.

[pescetom]

 johnu, on 2025-July-14, 20:46, said:

Of course, Fantunes proved that they could cheat even with symmetrical cards. I guess we need square cards with 4 identical sides.

Round cards might work better in this sense.

[barmar]

pescetom, on 2025-July-15, 01:39, said:

Round cards might work better in this sense.

I found round playing cards but they don't really solve the problem. The cards are physically circular, but the pips are the same layout as typical rectangular cards.