KEM Arrow Black and Gold, Poker Size- Standard Index Playing Cards (Pack of 2) - 1017399

I've been playing cards for many years and decided to switch from Bicycles and Bees to cellulose acetate plastic; ie: KEM and COPAG. I purchased one set each of KEM arrows and COPAGs; both are poker (regular) size. I received the cards a few weeks ago and have had some time to play with my poker group and gauge opinions. Interestingly, our group voted 50/50 KEM vs COPAG. What I can offer is specific differences between the cards which you may find helpful. I've also included the specs of a Bicycle deck for comparison. KEM .014" card thickness .700" deck thickness, w/o jokers 2.5"W x 3.5"L deck dimensions 8.75" surface area COPAG .012" card thickness .625" deck thickness, w/o jokers 2.483"W x 3.465"L deck dimensions 8.604" surface area BICYCLE .011" card thickness .580" deck thickness, w/o jokers 2.48"W x 3.475"L deck dimensions 8.618" surface area As you can see, the KEM deck is almost 12% thicker and 1.7% larger surface area than the COPAG deck, and 21% thicker and 1.6% larger surface area than a Bicycle deck. 21% thicker than a Bicycle deck is a big deal if you're a smaller-handed dealer! Here are my personal thoughts; The COPAG's feel slightly better when shuffling as the deck is slightly smaller, less weight and easier to handle for short fingers (like mine). The KEM's numbering is smaller and much less blocky, and appear more like a traditional deck. The COPAG's have larger (not Jumbo) lettering which is blocky. Both decks have visually pleasing and symmetrical backing designs. Both slide easily on felt and are very easy to riffle/shuffle. The COPAG's have an attractive blue border around each face card picture, unlike the KEM's black border. However, the red ink used on the KEM's hearts and diamonds appear darker and a little higher quality than the COPAG's. My cut cards more than fit the bottom of my COPAG deck. The opposite is true of the KEM deck, as the cut card is just a hair smaller than the deck. Also, the COPAG's will fit inside any paper deck box, like Bicycle or Bee. The KEM's will definitely NOT fit in a standard deck box. If you're switching from a paper plastic-coat deck like Bicycles, Bees or Motors, you'll find the most physical similarities with the COPAG deck. Alternatively, you'll find the most visual similarities with the KEM deck. The KEM deck has a well-known image on the ace of spades and is probably the most recognizable deck around (ie; Rounders). Cost wise, I spent a few dollars more on my KEMs than I did the COPAGs. If I were to choose only one based on price, feel and aesthetics, I'd probably go for the COPAG deck. Oh, I asked my wife which she liked better (as an uninformed observer) and she couldn't really tell the difference between the KEM and COPAG decks. She did like the feel compared to a paper deck though. Then she beat my flopped straight by sucking out on the river with a low flush (I love you dear). Bottom line, choose either one and you'll be super happy you upgraded from the popular paper brands. I hope this helps in your decision!

Purchased as a premium gift, superior cards.

Love these cards. They hold up very well. Much better than even the best quality paper cards.

The cards feel very nice in your hand. One characteristic of many plastic cards is how slippery they are or how unruly they are when shuffling, you will not have any trouble with these. I've also read that the KEM cards smell bad. They do in fact have a plastic oder but it is not anything extraordinary, it smells like any other plastic product would smell and it certainly isn't anything extraordinary or intolerable. I actually bought several brands and types and they all have a particular odor, some more than others, but these are definitely the best overall in feel, handling and appearance.

Kem has been the gold standard for a long time. I recently bought a KEM poker set in standard Index and I love the quality. There was no break-in with these cards, straight out of the packaging they were so easy to shuffle (I usually table shuffle the cards casino style.) The printing on the cards was great, no marks or defects just colorful nicely detailed cards. I had a Kem bridge (narrow) set and a poker jumbo set I bought in the early '90s and although USPCC bought the KEM Co. the quality is about the same, I really can't feel the difference, I would not listen to people that say that old cards are much better, In my experience using older KEM cards and dozens of other cards paper and plastic, KEM is still producing the best. I added a picture showing the difference between KEM cards and the standard Bicycle cards, the KEM cards are much more detailed and colorful with a deeper color pallet and sharper image. The Standard Wide size is the best for playing poker the jumbos are ok but I like the classic look and full size of the JKQ's. I Also have a Copag Playing Card Set which is very nice and I like playing with them, but KEM's are much better and worth $10 more in price. So If you have been thinking of buying KEM's Just do it, You will have cards that can last Years (or decades) and know you have the best.

These cards seem like they are softer than DaVinci's. Nice and easy to deal, when a person tries to slam them on the table they are soft and will not make a loud noise. They are a bit darker than DaVincis, and take some time getting a little used to for eyes to adjust. Overall I like both sets KEMs and Vincis, if I had to pick a set I would prefer KEM, because of a softer feel and durability. I was twisting the corner of a joker and it was bendind like paper just wouldnt brake off.

These cards are defective and complete trash due to the coating on them. This is causing the paint to come off very easily. The feel of the cards and size of the stacked deck are very bad.

Very satisfied with these playing cards, and will be using for my regular poker decks. They arrived in good condition, including the plastic box. Pros: * Good feel for plastic cards, they shuffle well and are NOT overly slick as compared to some cheaper brands. * Excellent printing on both back and display sides of cards. Pattern on back is especially excellent and uniform. * Very durable!! I subjected the enclosed KEM card which is of equivalent thickness and construction to test abuse. Will NOT tear, did not crease with anything except actually folding in half. Cleans up well with no apparent loss of printing colour or intensity or smearing including testing with cola and 151 proof rum, even dried simple syrup & grenadine syrup washed off nicely with moderately hot water and dish soap. * Very flat and uniform. No warping or torsional twisting after repeated shuffling. CON * The STUPID looking nose picking fat joker is a MAJOR drawback. It is so annoying in appearance that I down rated to 4 Stars just because of it! For those who play silly new-age yuppie poker such as Texas hold'em and Omaha this would not be a problem so you folks can consider this a FIVE STAR review, but for traditionalists like me who play only 5 & 7 card stud and 5 card draw and with the standard ONE joker for aces, straights and flushes, this thing is an unnecessary annoyance. Same problem for other single deck games such as 7 & 10 pt Pitch and Euchre which use one or more joker The joker's are easily differentiated however so you can have high and low joker. You listening KEM?