Chip cohesion test (1 Viewer)

Poker Zombie

Royal Flush
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
17,059
Reaction score
36,861
Location
Nashville-ish
I know there are a number of factors that come into play when stacking chips. The surface you are stacking them on, if any chips are spinners or warped, even cleanliness. So when I hear terms like "a slick chip" (Nexgens) I want to see how much "slickness" is really a factor when stacking chips on a playing table that may get bumped - which is a factor to consider when buying your first set of chips.

So I leveled the playing surface. I stacked chips 4 high (because I don't have more than 4 of some samples) on top of a piece of 2-sided tape to make sure 1 chip always remained immobile. Then I tilted the field...


From left to right:
  1. Casino Aztar hundos - they're really brassy or something, unlike any other Paulsons I've seen
  2. CPC FDLs
  3. CPC/ASM HHR. I'm not sure when @Racer96 had these made, but their base was the CPC HHR from the S@P
  4. CPS (Tower & Spear if you're BGinGA) chips, custom label by Palm.
  5. Milanos
  6. Nexgen/Lucky Bees
  7. Ceramics chips. I think these were all OWPS, but could be mistaken. They are ceramics though.
  8. Paulson Private Cardrooms
  9. Dice chips (I needed a control group)
  10. Random Casino used, excellent condition chips
It becomes immediately obvious why Nexgens are called slick. CPS chips followed quickly, then there was a nearly simultaneous avalanche of chips. When the avalanche settled, there was a brief pause, then the dice chips came down. Despite their plastic base, they have a lot of surface area and a lot of weight.

The clear winners were the chips that are most sought after on PCF - clay chips. The HHR and the casino used chips fell neck and neck, while the FDL with it's similar/same composition as the HHR held on a little longer, probably because it has a greater surface to surface area.

I replicated the test 3 times, all with similar results. The only difference being, that the CPS chips, if pressed down with a slight twisting motion "locked" in much better, and the stack held as long as the clays. All chips were pressed in the same manner during that test, but I chose not to upload that video, because that's not how anyone stacks chips.
 
Would be interested to see where Matsuis, RT plastics, Bud Jones, Super Diamonds (the good kind and the bad kind), and/or faux clays fare. It's interesting about the lucky bees...I never considered my Nexgens (Las Vegas style, ca. 2006) slippery. Hmm.

Anyway, thanks for the video. Fun little experiment.
 
I performed similar tests (a 'skid' test and a 'topple' test) in 2013 when I received the Sun-Fly polyclay samples (Lucid Diamond artwork on the diamond mold). Here are a few interesting and related findings from those tests:

1. Not all ceramics are created equal. The manufacturer, material, and the specific blank used makes a big difference in surface tension.
2. Not all clay chips are created equal. Again, manufacturer, material, and more importantly, the specific mold pattern can make a big difference.
3. Even otherwise identical chips are not created equal, because the amount of ~wear~ on a chip makes an immense difference in surface tension.

I posted a thread with partial results on CT, but here are some of my findings from memory:

Worst to Best, in terms of 'slickness':
8. new Sun-Fly ceramics, unprinted blanks
7. new Chipco ceramics, printed
6. new Sun-Fly ceramics, printed
5. used Paulson RHC mold w/inlays
4. new ASM MD-50 mold w/inlays
3. new Sun-Fly poly-clay diamond mold, printed
2. new Paulson RHC mold w/inlays
1. new Paulson THC mold w/inlays

There was a huge jump in observable surface tension between #4 and #3, and a significant jump between #2 and #1.

I should run another series of tests with an expanded selection of chips/molds.
 
I was afraid there was going to be a difference in ceramics, unfortunately, most of my ceramic samples mysterious in origin. The most recent I felt pretty sure they were all from the same manufacturer (no white Chipco ring), and I thought Tommy used OWPS, but I cannot find that actually written, so I may have dreamed it up.

All chips in the video were unplayed, with the obvious exception of the casino chips, which are all clean and in excellent to minty condition, and the Milanos, which have very few games (<5 tournaments) on them.

I will be interested to see when the Majestics come in. My hypothesis is that they will hold better than the crosshatched CPS chips, because of greater surface contact. It would be ironic, because the whole concept of crosshatching was to make them stack better (which they do under pressure).
 
I was afraid there was going to be a difference in ceramics, unfortunately, most of my ceramic samples mysterious in origin. The most recent I felt pretty sure they were all from the same manufacturer (no white Chipco ring), and I thought Tommy used OWPS, but I cannot find that actually written, so I may have dreamed it up.

All chips in the video were unplayed, with the obvious exception of the casino chips, which are all clean and in excellent to minty condition, and the Milanos, which have very few games (<5 tournaments) on them.

I will be interested to see when the Majestics come in. My hypothesis is that they will hold better than the crosshatched CPS chips, because of greater surface contact. It would be ironic, because the whole concept of crosshatching was to make them stack better (which they do under pressure).
I will tell you I have an old Sunfly set and a few GOCC sets and there is a MASSIVE difference. The sunfly set is virtually frictionless. I have a hard time stacking a barrel without them collapsing on themselves.
 
Thanks for the video. I wonder if cruise ships perform a similar test. :)

They could try, but all stacks topple at this angle...
Ship-sinking-will-cost-Carnival-millions-MERGOL8-x-large.jpg
 
There is one chip that will utterly dominate this test.........the magical suction Bud Jones chips. The entire stack will slide off the wood before any chips separate. I love everything about the Borgata except those goddamn chips. A chip shuffler's nightmare. I thought they had magnets in the inlays until I read a post about the suction. Got to hand it to the engineers who designed them though. They nailed it.
 
I want so badly to collect another Bud Jones. For the most part, the only casino chips I have are from casinos that I have won in, so my Bud Jones collection sits idly at 3. I suspect their cohesion will also vary according to mold types.
 
I want so badly to collect another Bud Jones. For the most part, the only casino chips I have are from casinos that I have won in, so my Bud Jones collection sits idly at 3. I suspect their cohesion will also vary according to mold types.

You're definitely right. The suction action is not something all casinos want. I guess their priorities were to cut down on chip noise and make them a bit easier for dealers to stack. It's gotta make craps a little easier with the leaning down etc. I'm sure there are other places that don't care/would prefer to cater to chippers. Next month I have plans to liberate a barrel of 1s from the Borg......not that I'll be able to shuffle them when I get home. I guess I'll just look at them fondly?

e: The above was purely speculation... I wonder what dealers actually think about handling the high end plastic suction chips vs clay chips. If you've been handling regular chips 8 hours a day for years, a weird suction effect might really throw you off. Dunno.
 
Last edited:
But not all Bud Jones chips are suction-y. I remember playing at the Colorado Belle in Laughlin, NV, and it was all I could do to keep stacks of 20 chips from toppling over -- and no, the building was not swaying.
 
It may just be my limited experience with casinos that use Bud Jones, but the ones I've encountered have resisted the hand goo much better than clay. If I were a dealer, i'd prefer less gunk. :sick:
 
But not all Bud Jones chips are suction-y. I remember playing at the Colorado Belle in Laughlin, NV, and it was all I could do to keep stacks of 20 chips from toppling over -- and no, the building was not swaying.

Casino niagara is the same. I had to keep stacks of 10 because any accidental touch had them toppling.
 
I wonder how the 4 China clays stack up against one another (Milanos, Pharaohs, Majestics and CPS).
 
Milanos and CPS are both in the video, and fared nearly identically. I have no reason to suspect other China Clays would behave much differently. CPS, with cross hatching fared much better than the Milanos when pressed with a slight twist, which it probably why the CPS is less prone to "barrel explosion" than the Milanos.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom