Poker vs Bridge Size (2 Viewers)

[Isorg]

It’s one guy that instigates this. There is another obnoxious guy but he only acts that way ion the political threads.

i got eyes, and I can read...

You have only been here less than a year …which is very short time to make a judgement like that.

and that reeks of gatekeeping to me.

 

[RadicusScout]

Do you think the author of this article could have anticipated we'd fill 10 pages of content on the difference of 1/4 inch?

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

Do you think the author of this article could have anticipated we'd fill 10 pages of content on the difference of 1/4 inch?

Discussing how valuable an inch is, that was a risky click.

 

[RadicusScout]

Discussing how valuable an inch is, that was a risky click.

Ok fine. This is probably more appropriate for this thread.

 

[Tonysquander]

How about some real-world data points:

Retailer / Source	Metric Observed	Poker Size	Bridge Size	What It Shows
Amazon	Product rank & monthly sales indicator	#8 in “Standard Playing Card Decks”; 8K+ bought in past month (Bicycle 12-pack)	#841 in same category (Bicycle 12-pack bridge size)	Poker-size outsells bridge-size by a wide margin on the largest U.S. marketplace
Target	Bestseller label; reviews; “bought in last month” counters	Bicycle Standard decks labeled “Bestseller”, 4.8★ with 590–672 reviews; some show 17k+ bought in last month	Bridge size not featured as flagship bestseller	Target positions poker size as mainstream/high-velocity product
Walmart	Recent purchase velocity & review counts	Bicycle Standard (2-pack): 100+ bought since yesterday, 1,003 ratings	Bicycle Bridge: 1,353 ratings (strong historical demand)	Both popular, but poker size shows stronger current velocity
Costco	Bulk SKU format	Bulk Bicycle listing explicitly “Poker size”	No bulk bridge-size SKU highlighted	Mass-market bulk demand favors poker size
Walgreens	Stocked category emphasis	Category prominently features Bicycle Standard decks	Bridge size not emphasized	Convenience retail defaults to poker size
PlayingCardDecks.com (specialty retailer)	Catalog size	3,422 poker-size products	Bridge size exists but far fewer	Custom / enthusiast market overwhelmingly poker size
Magicians’ Poll (144 respondents)	Stated preference / usefulness	Not measured directly	35.4% would use bridge size; 38.9% no; 25.7% maybe	Even in card-focused niche, bridge size is not dominant

---

Conclusion​

Across every major retail channel and specialty supplier, the strongest objective indicators—sales velocity, bestseller flags, bulk SKUs, category emphasis, and catalog dominance—consistently favor poker-size playing cards as the more popular format in the U.S. consumer market. Bridge-size cards retain a meaningful niche following, but the commercial market center of gravity is poker size.

Undeniable that you small handed bridge card lovers are a bunch of niches...

 

[RocAFella1]

Undeniable that you small handed bridge card lovers are a bunch of niches...

Likely because the general public doesn't even know that bridge is an option. Dice chips are also the commercial market center of gravity for poker chips.

 

[Tonysquander]

Likely because the general public doesn't even know that bridge is an option. Dice chips are also the commercial market center of gravity for poker chips.

That argument gives the appearance of being slightly persuasive, but it is an apples to oranges comparison IMO.

Poker/Bridge are both readily available at the same price point from the same sellers and I highly question the proposition that the gen pop does not know both exist.

If the more obscure and less available Paulson/CPC/BCC/TRK chips were readily available from the same sellers at the same price point as dice chips, do you really believe dice chips would maintain their market dominance for very long and people would not "discover" the better product? I highly doubt it. Bridge cards have nowhere to hide, are readily available, same price, but still fall far behind with card buyers. Superior products sold for the same price will rise to the top, bridge cards have failed to do so.

 

[RocAFella1]

Poker/Bridge are both readily available at the same price point from the same sellers and I highly question the proposition that the gen pop does not know both exist.

Well that’s the misnomer part of the equation. People see poker size and think that’s the norm when in reality bridge size is the norm at least in casinos and card rooms. But realistically most people are buying the ubiquitous Bicycle paper cards which happen to be poker size. So I still stand by my argument that most people only know poker size.

 

[upNdown]

Well that’s the misnomer part of the equation. People see poker size and think that’s the norm when in reality bridge size is the norm at least in casinos and card rooms. But realistically most people are buying the ubiquitous Bicycle paper cards which happen to be poker size. So I still stand by my argument that most people only know poker size.

Yes! And if they saw that bridge was an option, they'd likely ignore it because they're not playing bridge.

 

[Tonysquander]

Yes! And if they saw that bridge was an option, they'd likely ignore it because they're not playing bridge.

Well, that’s all they’re good for

 

[owlbee]

That argument gives the appearance of being slightly persuasive, but it is an apples to oranges comparison IMO.

Poker/Bridge are both readily available at the same price point from the same sellers and I highly question the proposition that the gen pop does not know both exist.

If the more obscure and less available Paulson/CPC/BCC/TRK chips were readily available from the same sellers at the same price point as dice chips, do you really believe dice chips would maintain their market dominance for very long and people would not "discover" the better product? I highly doubt it. Bridge cards have nowhere to hide, are readily available, same price, but still fall far behind with card buyers. Superior products sold for the same price will rise to the top, bridge cards have failed to do so.

I was "gen pop" a month ago and had no idea the two existed. I would have assumed Poker size was used for Poker games in casinos. I think a fairer comparison would be to ask Broken Arrow which size is more popular in sales for them.

 

[upNdown]

Also worth asking the poker size users how many of them actually prefer poker size and how many of them buy poker size only because it works better in their shuffletecs.

 

[jamesjkim]

Also worth asking the poker size users how many of them actually prefer poker size and how many of them buy poker size only because it works better in their shuffletecs.

Great point. I was exclusively poker size when I had a ST. Now I'm exclusively bridge with the DM. For self-dealt, I'd still use bridge.

 

[Tonysquander]

I was "gen pop" a month ago and had no idea the two existed. I would have assumed Poker size was used for Poker games in casinos. I think a fairer comparison would be to ask Broken Arrow which size is more popular in sales for them.

I don’t know about them, but I added up the poker versus bridge size cut card purchases from the last big buy, and poker size was significantly ahead.

 

[RocAFella1]

I don’t know about them, but I added up the poker versus bridge size cut card purchases from the last big buy, and poker size was significantly ahead.

Hard to judge based solely off cut cards. Some people buy way more cut cards than they might actually need.

 

[Tonysquander]

Hard to judge based solely off cut cards. Some people buy way more cut cards than they might actually need.

That’s why I didn’t go by number of cards ordered, I went by types of cards ordered. There were 51 more individual orders for poker than bridge.

 

[RadicusScout]

There’s a poll right here in this thread.

 

[RocAFella1]

That’s why I didn’t go by number of cards ordered, I went by types of cards ordered. There were 52 more individual orders for poker than bridge.

Also meaning that not the entire pool of PCF was ordering. Maybe the bridge crowd has enough cut cards who knows but just saying hard to judge just off that metric.

 

[Tonysquander]

Also meaning that not the entire pool of PCF was ordering. Maybe the bridge crowd has enough cut cards who knows but just saying hard to judge just off that metric.

Agree 100%, but that apparently persuasive conclusion loses a lot of its weight IMO when you consider there were 181 unique designs, many of which had never been offered before, thus potentially lessening the argument that bridge players had enough cards and did not buy more. They might have plenty of cards, but might still be tempted by many of the new designs being offered especially for minimal cost. Also cutting into that conclusion is that there were quite a number of buyers for both bridge and poker sizes, with poker edging out bridge purchase numbers a significant majority of the time. That majority plus the addition that there were 51 more orders for poker only as opposed to bridge only indicates a clear preference.

Agree with you on additional metrics needed, which is why I have raised a few beyond the limited polling at the top of this thread.

 

[RocAFella1]

Agree 100%, but that apparently persuasive conclusion loses a lot of its weight IMO when you consider there were 181 unique designs, many of which had never been offered before, thus potentially lessening the argument that bridge players had enough cards and did not buy more. They might have plenty of cards, but might still be tempted by many of the new designs being offered especially for minimal cost. Also cutting into that conclusion is that there were quite a number of buyers for both bridge and poker sizes, with poker edging out bridge purchase numbers a significant majority of the time. That majority plus the addition that there were 51 more orders for poker only as opposed to bridge only indicates a clear preference.

Agree with you on additional metrics needed, which is why I have raised a few beyond the limited polling at the top of this thread.

I don't see how the number of designs carries any weight. I ordered 0 cut cards myself, in fact didn't even look at the thread. If there were 100 people like me who prefer bridge but didn't bother to order how does that matter or not matter?

 

[Tonysquander]

I don't see how the number of designs carries any weight. I ordered 0 cut cards myself, in fact didn't even look at the thread. If there were 100 people like me who prefer bridge but didn't bother to order how does that matter or not matter?

The point was I have plenty of cut cards but still bought more because of the new designs offered, not because I needed more.

 

[Frogzilla]

Look, it’s still trying to dodge explaining its genius 80BB/hour system

I’m late to this and dug a little to find whatever you’re replying to but just want to point out the very, very obvious fact that $80 at $1/$3 is 27BB/hr, not 80BB/hr.

Back to poker/bridge. I asked my 6 year old which is better for poker and she asked is this a trick question and I said no and she said ok then poker obviously.

. I average over $80 an hour at $1-3 for the last 4 years. I only average $12 an hour at my home game

 

[Old State]

i got eyes, and I can read...



and that reeks of gatekeeping to me.

Gatekeeping? WTF? . If you have eyes and can read than why would you make such a broad and sweeping comment…especially when you haven’t been here that long to even have proper perspective?

 

[chippitydoodah]

Hard to judge based solely off cut cards. Some people buy way more cut cards than they might actually need.

That's assuming they received them

 

[JustinInMN]

Conclusion​

Across every major retail channel and specialty supplier, the strongest objective indicators—sales velocity, bestseller flags, bulk SKUs, category emphasis, and catalog dominance—consistently favor poker-size playing cards as the more popular format in the U.S. consumer market. Bridge-size cards retain a meaningful niche following, but the commercial market center of gravity is poker size.

That’s why I didn’t go by number of cards ordered, I went by types of cards ordered. There were 52 more individual orders for poker than bridge.

I mean sure, the debate here is not about which is more popular. I am sure when you consider the mass market beyond pcf it's not that surprising that poker size has it in a landslide.

The debate is about why bridge size is ubiquitous in card rooms and has a lead in popularity among PCF readers in this thread. And that there seems to be a preference indicated among professional dealers that can tell the difference after repeated use that makes sense.

In pass the deal home games it probably doesn't make much difference, and maybe home games that use bridge size do so just to be another touch to imitate the public cardroom experience. And there's nothing wrong with that.

The only issue I have taken in this thread is with a poster that decided anyone of the opinion expressed by the professional dealers in this thread must be wrong even though he has no personal experience in this area, just his opinion that 1/8" inch can't make a difference.

I have use for both sizes in my home game. On the occasions that I center deal I do prefer bridge size and voted accordingly. I get it's not universal and it doesn't have to be.

But there isn't some conspiracy that casinos and pro dealers prefer bridge for a reason.

 

[Old State]

How about some real-world data points:

Retailer / Source	Metric Observed	Poker Size	Bridge Size	What It Shows
Amazon	Product rank & monthly sales indicator	#8 in “Standard Playing Card Decks”; 8K+ bought in past month (Bicycle 12-pack)	#841 in same category (Bicycle 12-pack bridge size)	Poker-size outsells bridge-size by a wide margin on the largest U.S. marketplace
Target	Bestseller label; reviews; “bought in last month” counters	Bicycle Standard decks labeled “Bestseller”, 4.8★ with 590–672 reviews; some show 17k+ bought in last month	Bridge size not featured as flagship bestseller	Target positions poker size as mainstream/high-velocity product
Walmart	Recent purchase velocity & review counts	Bicycle Standard (2-pack): 100+ bought since yesterday, 1,003 ratings	Bicycle Bridge: 1,353 ratings (strong historical demand)	Both popular, but poker size shows stronger current velocity
Costco	Bulk SKU format	Bulk Bicycle listing explicitly “Poker size”	No bulk bridge-size SKU highlighted	Mass-market bulk demand favors poker size
Walgreens	Stocked category emphasis	Category prominently features Bicycle Standard decks	Bridge size not emphasized	Convenience retail defaults to poker size
PlayingCardDecks.com (specialty retailer)	Catalog size	3,422 poker-size products	Bridge size exists but far fewer	Custom / enthusiast market overwhelmingly poker size
Magicians’ Poll (144 respondents)	Stated preference / usefulness	Not measured directly	35.4% would use bridge size; 38.9% no; 25.7% maybe	Even in card-focused niche, bridge size is not dominant

---

Conclusion​

Across every major retail channel and specialty supplier, the strongest objective indicators—sales velocity, bestseller flags, bulk SKUs, category emphasis, and catalog dominance—consistently favor poker-size playing cards as the more popular format in the U.S. consumer market. Bridge-size cards retain a meaningful niche following, but the commercial market center of gravity is poker size.

Undeniable that you small handed bridge card lovers are a bunch of niches...

If this seems like a logical argument to you…I hope you aren’t a defense attorney. The average person buying cards doesn’t even know what bridge cards are and likely doesn’t know what plastic cards are either. Most of the cards sales are likely not even for poker play.

Dice chips outsell custom clay or ceramic chips by probably 10000000-1. Does that mean most people prefer Dice chips to custom clay chips?

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

Man this is boring.

 

[Tonysquander]

If this seems like a logical argument to you…I hope you aren’t a defense attorney. The average person buying cards doesn’t even know what bridge cards are and likely doesn’t know what plastic cards are. Most of the cards sales are likely not even for poker play.

It is data. Refute or rebut it with data if you can?

The average person buying cards doesn’t even know what bridge cards are and likely doesn’t know what plastic cards are. Most of the cards sales are likely not even for poker play.

Quite the leap. Source for these assumptions and assertions? Seems like argument, not fact, and not a legitimate or logical basis for rebuttal.

Already addressed the flawed dice chip argument.

 

[Old State]

It is data. Refute or rebut it with data if you can?

The average person buying cards doesn’t even know what bridge cards are and likely doesn’t know what plastic cards are. Most of the cards sales are likely not even for poker play.

Quite the leap. Source for these assumptions and assertions? Seems like argument, not fact, and not a legitimate or logical basis for rebuttal.

Already addressed the flawed dice chip argument.

It’s not simply the data. It’s the context. Also, exactly what percentage of the customers that bought poker sized cards from Amazon do you feel knowing chose them over bridge sized plastic cards? What’s would be your guess?

 

[Tonysquander]

It’s not simply the data. It’s the context. Also, exactly what percentage of the customers that bought poker sized cards from Amazon do you feel knowing chose them over bridge sized plastic cards? What’s would be your guess?

100% of the ones who can read.

Google search for “poker playing cards”. #1 hit is an Amazon link

Click that link and at the very top of the Amazon page is this:

Seems like Amazon customer are presented with sizing options immediately and bridge size cards are not being hidden or obscured from the marketplace. They just aren’t that popular, and that is OK. They are good enough, smart enough, and doggone it, some prople like them.