I don't visit here as often as I should, but I did see this thread and thought I could help. I looked at my earliest Russell & Morgan Printing Company sample book (ca. 1885) in hopes of finding that back, but it was not included in the book (see the scan of the sample book covers). I think you could reasonably conclude that the back was issued in late 1880's to 1890's. Someone might have a sample book from that era. Unfortunately, I don't.

That's a very cool National Bicycle back, Max. I have never seen it, and I do also collect non-USPC bicycle card back designs (of course). That one must be very rare, indeed.

(Yes, Don, it is me, Joseph.)

While I have seen many Bicycle knock-offs, and own some very funny ones, I have a different theory from Don's about this particular box. There were several Bicycle back designs that were exported to the United Kingdom, most famously the two color back designs (Saddle, Chain and Handlebar). A number of other decks also appear in the distinctive red UK sleeve boxes. But, Steve Bowling and I have also found a few decks--very few--that appear to have been sold in custom tuck boxes, made especially for the UK market. I believe this box is one of these. I own this particular one, and it came paired with a blue Auto No. 2 deck, not a red deck.

Next post I'll share another variation on the UK Bicycle box.

Just to clarify, the back that Gene Hochman called "Oak Leaf" is the 1880's US8a issue that is extremely hard to find (pictured at the top of this thread by JMRock and later with the joker and ace of spades by Tom). The Oak Leaf that most collectors have in their collection is the more common deck that Mrs. Robinson erroneously called "Leaf"  (pictured in many variations, above). It is always called "Oak Leaf" on the box and in promotional materials. I will, as promised, finally steam open my two sealed "Oak Leaf" decks and report back on whether they have the generic "Uncle Sam" ace of spades and joker, or the Bicycle version.

If it were up to me, I would hereafter call the earlier Bicycle deck with the oak leaf motif "Leaf," and call the newer one "Oak Leaf" to help avoid at least that aspect of the confusion about these decks. As long as I am annoying the spirit of one great playing card scholar (Gene Hochman), I might as well annoy two (Ruth Robinson). I'll start by making the change on my website: www.bicyclecards.org .

Antique cabinets are great, at least for the best display items. Here's a terrific one I found. I'm not sure what it was originally built for, but it's perfect for two rows of playing cards.

Yes, I concur with Tom: the earliest Bicycle issue, and definitely original. Your deck would actually have been issued in the "Extra" "Gilt Edged" box pictured below (and on the "US8" page of my website) because the deck has gold edges. Here's the joker, too.

For more information on your cards and other vintage Bicycle cards, please visit my website: www.bicyclecards.org (redirects to cypressfilms.com/bicycle). Click on "US8a" at the bottom of the page.

That is a wonderful photograph. I wonder if the layout of the cards can be identified as a specific game. Solitaire? Fortune telling? Whatever it is, she clearly does not approve!

Actually, the second card is also an example of rotational symmetry. Note that while the bicycle wheels are perfectly mirrored on both axes, the bicycle frames are not.

After a few moments on Google, here's what I know: Generally speaking, an object with rotational symmetry, also known in biological contexts as radial symmetry, is an object that looks the same after a certain amount of rotation. The degree of rotational symmetry is how many degrees the shape has to be turned to look the same on a different side or vertex.

The purple card, above, is an example of a dyad, or an object that must be rotated 180 degrees to look the same. Another familiar example is the yin and yang symbol.

The blue card, above, is an example of a tetrad, an object that must be rotated 90 degrees to look the same. Another familiar example is the swastika.

The Wheel No. 2 card in my earlier post (3rd card) is actually a combination of a dyad (the high-wheel bicycles) and a tetrad (the winged wheel in the center of the card). The Mobile No. 1 (4th card) is a combination of mirror symmetry on both axes (the background and motor cars) and a tetrad (the four tires in the center).

Some might think that this sidebar into the science of symmetry is a digression in this thread. I strongly disagree. Any designer of playing cards should understand these principles, as they are fundamental to the art of playing card design. All the examples above also show that it is possible to use these different types of symmetry, alone and in combination, for some very pleasing and successful designs.

Actually, the underbidder was unknown to me--not who you and I suspected! There are new people in this world of Bicycle cards, and they are not afraid to bid large amounts for rare decks.

I would love to see you and Judy and the rest of the venerable 52+J folks in my home town, but alas I will be out of town. Sorry to miss the event, but I will be seeing you all at the convention, I hope.

A great and brave post, Pound. Sorry to see that half the images have been removed. But it still reads well.

Here's something that no one has really touched on yet: symmetry, which actually relates to the broader issues of the history and science of playing cards. There are others who know far more than I do about how cards have evolved, but there are certain principles that are integral to what cards are today, and foremost among these is symmetry. Once upon a time, court cards were one-way and, as Don observed, this provided a tell to others when you turned the card right-side up in your hand. Often, back designs were one-way, too. The first trick I learned as a kid was if you simply turned a card around before returning it to a deck with a one-way design, you could easily find it. Discerning card players always insist on a symmetrical back design.

There are two kinds of symmetry in cards: 1) what happens when you draw something and hold a mirror to it, and 2) a more sophisticated interlaced symmetry, most commonly seen on court cards. Within category one, there are important variations. To my mind, the worst offenders literally draw a line and cut and paste the top to the bottom. Sorry, but that's what the Jaqk deck does, and I think that is the least pleasing form of symmetry for a deck of cards. The second variant of category one is the design that still passes the mirror test, but does so with a central design element. Here's a bold example, Bicycle Allwheel:
[http://www.bicyclecards.org/Bicycle/02_Allwheel/red.jpg]

But some of the best card back designs feature symmetry that does not pass the mirror test. Because this is what I am most familiar with, I will again cite Bicycle cards: Acorn, Chainless, Thistle, and Wheel #2. Cupid and Motor #1 accomplish this in a very subtle way. Mobile #1 is arguably the most freakishly spectacular.

I guess my message to prospective card designers is: be aware of all of the design elements of your deck, and, following on Don's advice, pay particular attention to those that are peculiar to playing cards. Know your history, which may well give you the freedom to boldly dismiss it and do something innovative and hugely successful.

Well said, Don, from beginning to end.

My vote:

Antique = 80+ Years
Vintage = 20 - 79 Years
New = Less than 19 Years

I endorse Don's notion of shortening Vintage, and also Tom's point about the necessity of keeping the definitions somewhat fluid for cards and topics that may overlap those benchmarks and suggest an occasional blurring of the lines.

I think all collectors will provide their own filters within those broad categories ("I only collect pre-offset cards" or "I go nuts for anything with the 'Bicycle' brand"), but for the purposes of organizing the forum, I think some general and generally agreed upon standards are appropriate.