Spot progression is something made up by chippers, that nobody can agree on.
I'm happy to be educated on "spot progression," so please correct me if I got any of that wrong.
Since spot progression is a fiction, maybe we should just stop using those words? Whether we're evaluating existing sets, or we're discussing edge spots for a new set of customs we should be discussing it more broadly. Spots don't have to go from simpler to more complex, ascending with the denomination value. They can progress like that if you want (if you think you know the right order, of course, because nobody can agree on that.) But maybe you want the same spot pattern on each chip. Or maybe you want your favorite complex patterns on chips that get into play the most. Or maybe you have an artistic brain and can come up with ways that spots would interact together that I've never even considered. We should have a phrase that means "how the spots work together within the set," or something like that.
I know the recent polls are just goofy polls and I shouldn't take them too seriously. But we've been asked to evaluate chips based on a few factors, one of which is this mythical spot progression. And because of that, I see people lowering scores on beautiful chips, because they have no spot progression, WHEN THOSE CHIPS WERE NEVER INTENDED TO HAVE SPOT PROGRESSION BECAUSE SPOT PROGRESSION ISN'T A REAL THING, AND IT PROBABLY WASN'T EVEN MADE UP WHEN THOSE CHIPS WERE MADE. It's madness, and maybe we should stop.
I'm happy to be educated on "spot progression," so please correct me if I got any of that wrong.
Since spot progression is a fiction, maybe we should just stop using those words? Whether we're evaluating existing sets, or we're discussing edge spots for a new set of customs we should be discussing it more broadly. Spots don't have to go from simpler to more complex, ascending with the denomination value. They can progress like that if you want (if you think you know the right order, of course, because nobody can agree on that.) But maybe you want the same spot pattern on each chip. Or maybe you want your favorite complex patterns on chips that get into play the most. Or maybe you have an artistic brain and can come up with ways that spots would interact together that I've never even considered. We should have a phrase that means "how the spots work together within the set," or something like that.
I know the recent polls are just goofy polls and I shouldn't take them too seriously. But we've been asked to evaluate chips based on a few factors, one of which is this mythical spot progression. And because of that, I see people lowering scores on beautiful chips, because they have no spot progression, WHEN THOSE CHIPS WERE NEVER INTENDED TO HAVE SPOT PROGRESSION BECAUSE SPOT PROGRESSION ISN'T A REAL THING, AND IT PROBABLY WASN'T EVEN MADE UP WHEN THOSE CHIPS WERE MADE. It's madness, and maybe we should stop.