• PCF is an Amazon Associate and an eBay Partner. If you make a purchase through one of our links, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Thank you for your support!

Controversial Chip & Poker Opinions (13 Viewers)

grandmeme said:
There are many new faces on the classifieds selling harvested LV chips. While more chips on the market are obviously better, "VG/EX" harvests seem to have taken on a different meaning these days. Especially with a heavy premium on top.
Click to expand...
Not controversial, I think that’s plenty fair.

That new guy seems super nice. He absolutely doesn’t mean anything wrong by it, he doesn’t know better.

But selling “mint” chips - $2s that have orange instead of pink spots from play, racks with chips scraped or bruised. But much like I would’ve thought 10 years ago, by mint he means sharp edges, not “unused” as it’s meant to be.

Just the norm when we don’t have objective definitions. If I cared a lot I’d let him know privately. I was writing a comment just to say “hey bud I dig the chips just letting you know one of us will eventually be annoying about your mint description” but then it’d get deleted anyways and I’d have a mod pm.
 
Cratty said:
View attachment 1521753

youtube bomb GIF
Click to expand...
You Are Dumb Better Call Saul GIF
 
BarrieJ3 said:
Not controversial, I think that’s plenty fair.

That new guy seems super nice. He absolutely doesn’t mean anything wrong by it, he doesn’t know better.

But selling “mint” chips - $2s that have orange instead of pink spots from play, racks with chips scraped or bruised. But much like I would’ve thought 10 years ago, by mint he means sharp edges, not “unused” as it’s meant to be.

Just the norm when we don’t have objective definitions. If I cared a lot I’d let him know privately. I was writing a comment just to say “hey bud I dig the chips just letting you know one of us will eventually be annoying about your mint description” but then it’d get deleted anyways and I’d have a mod pm.
Click to expand...
I'm not particularly fussed myself since I usually eye up chips from the pictures to see condition. It might be more difficult for a new chipper to realise though.

If you want my real controversial opinion though, I think that misleading condition on a sales ad are the exact same thing as selling a fake chip ;). Especially when a mint rack would go for $8 a chip while bike tires go for $2.
 
Cratty said:
View attachment 1521753

youtube bomb GIF
Click to expand...
Obviously, everyone has a right to their opinion, but there are quite a few serious flaws to this "ranking table."

First category - all the Paulson chips I have arrived at my house within 3-4 days of paying for them. Paulsons are available every day in the PCF classifieds. It's simply not factual to state that they are 10 times more difficult to acquire than dice chips. A little more difficult? Sure. Change those last three rating to something like 8 6 4. I would also strongly disagree that this is the third most important category.

Price? You get what you pay for. Are dice chips at 5 cents each a better price than leaded THCs at $5? Well, In spite of how inexpensive they are, I have zero dice chips in my extensive collection of chips, so my answer is no. I suspect the answer is also no for almost 100% of everyone else here on PCF except you. This is one category where you actually greatly undervalued CPCs. For dice chips, I guess you get what you pay for, so give them a 5. Tina's at 7 is fair. RHCs are a 5. Mint THCs at 4 is good. Leaded THCs, I'd say 3-4.

Grip? What the hell even is this? How is Grip different from Feel? And why do CPCs rank significantly higher than Paulsons? I have no clue where you are even coming from in this category.

Weight - Why are Tina hybrids not the same score as CPCs and non-leaded Paulsons? You must not have ever weighed any of them. They come in just over 9 grams. Just as good as any other non-leaded chips. In fact, a lot of CPCs are closer to 8g so they should score lower than Tinas and Paulsons. And weight being the second most important category is a joke.

Feel - You got this one all messed up. But I guess feel is about as speculative as you can get. Nothing else even comes close to the buttery feel of nicely broken in leaded Paulsons. To rank mint non-leaded Paulsons above leaded Paulsons is total insanity. You gotta be the only person on PCF that thinks this way. And the Importance is way too low.

Durability - Another cluster-fuck. Dice chips are 10x more durable than Tinas? Hilarious. More than twice as durable as Paulsons? What is your basis for any of these rankings? Paulson chips stand up to years of daily use in casinos. They are extremely durable. No way that dice chips could stand up to that many years of daily abuse.

Looks to me like you built a table in order to prove to yourself that the chips you like best, and least, rank the way you want them to. Whatever floats your boat, but I doubt anyone else in this forum agrees with even most of this. No worries though. That's why we have a "Controversial opinions thread."

I did enjoy reading and responding to this, so cheers!
 
TX_Golf_N_Poker said:
Obviously, everyone has a right to their opinion, but there are quite a few serious flaws to this "ranking table."

First category - all the Paulson chips I have arrived at my house within 3-4 days of paying for them. Paulsons are available every day in the PCF classifieds. It's simply not factual to state that they are 10 times more difficult to acquire than dice chips. A little more difficult? Sure. Change those last three rating to something like 8 6 4. I would also strongly disagree that this is the third most important category.

Price? You get what you pay for. Are dice chips at 5 cents each a better price than leaded THCs at $5? Well, In spite of how inexpensive they are, I have zero dice chips in my extensive collection of chips, so my answer is no. I suspect the answer is also no for almost 100% of everyone else here on PCF except you. This is one category where you actually greatly undervalued CPCs. For dice chips, I guess you get what you pay for, so give them a 5. Tina's at 7 is fair. RHCs are a 5. Mint THCs at 4 is good. Leaded THCs, I'd say 3-4.

Grip? What the hell even is this? How is Grip different from Feel? And why do CPCs rank significantly higher than Paulsons? I have no clue where you are even coming from in this category.

Weight - Why are Tina hybrids not the same score as CPCs and non-leaded Paulsons? You must not have ever weighed any of them. They come in just over 9 grams. Just as good as any other non-leaded chips. In fact, a lot of CPCs are closer to 8g so they should score lower than Tinas and Paulsons. And weight being the second most important category is a joke.

Feel - You got this one all messed up. But I guess feel is about as speculative as you can get. Nothing else even comes close to the buttery feel of nicely broken in leaded Paulsons. To rank mint non-leaded Paulsons above leaded Paulsons is total insanity. You gotta be the only person on PCF that thinks this way. And the Importance is way too low.

Durability - Another cluster-fuck. Dice chips are 10x more durable than Tinas? Hilarious. More than twice as durable as Paulsons? What is your basis for any of these rankings? Paulson chips stand up to years of daily use in casinos. They are extremely durable. No way that dice chips could stand up to that many years of daily abuse.

Looks to me like you built a table in order to prove to yourself that the chips you like best, and least, rank the way you want them to. Whatever floats your boat, but I doubt anyone else in this forum agrees with even most of this. No worries though. That's why we have a "Controversial opinions thread."

I did enjoy reading and responding to this, so cheers!
Click to expand...
I'm not going to fully defend/argue any of it, as I put maybe 5 seconds of thought into the overall table and don't even believe the outcome. I just saw a good opportunity for chaos here after I saw the result. Ha

But each category is also stretched to the extremes - lowest had to be 1, highest had to be 10, and the weighted composite calc would generally rightsize.
  • Grip is slipperyness (Might be wrong, my thoughts from my sets/samples)
  • Feel is largely subjective.. molds or mostly in my view edge sharpness.
  • Durability I know Tinas can wear color wise-over time, and when they chip youre left with an unusable chip. I put RHCs lower than THCs because if flea bites. Paulsons lower than CPCs because of softer clay (low heat compression) and warpage
  • Weight is the second least important category (10 is highest). They were gut checked off samples, but agree likely wrong.
  • I viewed leaded chips as worn (VG)
  • Weight was gut checked based upon samples, ha
  • I'm probably wrong in half of my ratings

I think the rating scale in the end really amounts to nothing, since each set I have was made with a unique lens and the prioritization is different. I started this for fun for myself, but realized more than anything how it articulates how many variables there are and overall subjectivity there is to it.

Mostly I just wanted to give someone a hernia here. Ha.. I love my RHCs. But did think it might create some fun dialog too (love your response).
 
Last edited:
Cratty said:
I'm not going to fully defend/argue any of it, as I put maybe 5 seconds of thought into the overall table and don't even believe the outcome. I just saw a good opportunity for chaos here after I saw the result. Ha

But each category is also stretched to the extremes - lowest had to be 1, highest had to be 10, and the weighted composite calc would generally rightsize.
  • Grip is slipperyness (Might be wrong, my thoughts from my sets/samples)
  • Feel is largely subjective.. molds or mostly in my view edge sharpness.
  • Durability I know Tinas can wear color wise-over time, and when they chip youre left with an unusable chip. I put RHCs lower than THCs because if flea bites. Paulsons lower than CPCs because of softer clay (low heat compression) and warpage
  • Weight is the second least important category (10 is highest). They were gut checked off samples, but agree likely wrong.
  • I viewed leaded chips as worn (VG)
  • Weight was gut checked based upon samples, ha
  • I'm probably wrong in half of my ratings

I think the rating scale in the end really amounts to nothing, since each set I have was made with a unique lens and the prioritization is different. I started this for fun for myself, but realized more than anything how it articulates how many variables there are and overall subjectivity there is to it.

Mostly I just wanted to give someone a hernia here. Ha.. I love my RHCs. But did think it might create some fun dialog too (love your response).
Click to expand...
Gotcha! Wouldn't be the first time (yesterday) that someone made a post as a joke, and I took it more seriously than it was meant to be. Right @BarrieJ3 ? :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:

I think the problem here (my problem) is that this is exactly the kinda stuff I do myself. As in seriously. I put together tables like this when I'm making decisions. I'm a numbers guy, (retired tax accountant) and more than a little OCD. So I just assumed you were doing the same. I actually do like the idea of putting something like this together. In fact, I almost put all your data into Excel so that I could re-do it with my own numbers. Probably would have if it hadn't already been well after midnight!

So now everyone can have a good laugh at me! Ha Ha!
 
TX_Golf_N_Poker said:
Gotcha! Wouldn't be the first time (yesterday) that someone made a post as a joke, and I took it more seriously than it was meant to be. Right @BarrieJ3 ? :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:

I think the problem here (my problem) is that this is exactly the kinda stuff I do myself. As in seriously. I put together tables like this when I'm making decisions. I'm a numbers guy, (retired tax accountant) and more than a little OCD. So I just assumed you were doing the same. I actually do like the idea of putting something like this together. In fact, I almost put all your data into Excel so that I could re-do it with my own numbers. Probably would have if it hadn't already been well after midnight!

So now everyone can have a good laugh at me! Ha Ha!
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm not laughing. I recently did this for playing cards, with the highest score getting the highest rotation. Fields were Shuffle, Glide, Font, Ease of pickup, Misc notes (comments positive or negative from players), and cost.
 
Poker Zombie said:
Yeah, I'm not laughing. I recently did this for playing cards, with the highest score getting the highest rotation. Fields were Shuffle, Glide, Font, Ease of pickup, Misc notes (comments positive or negative from players), and cost.
Click to expand...
Well see...you left out GRIP so it's totally irrelevant. Start over.
 
TX_Golf_N_Poker said:
Gotcha! Wouldn't be the first time (yesterday) that someone made a post as a joke, and I took it more seriously than it was meant to be. Right @BarrieJ3 ? :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:

I think the problem here (my problem) is that this is exactly the kinda stuff I do myself. As in seriously. I put together tables like this when I'm making decisions. I'm a numbers guy, (retired tax accountant) and more than a little OCD. So I just assumed you were doing the same. I actually do like the idea of putting something like this together. In fact, I almost put all your data into Excel so that I could re-do it with my own numbers. Probably would have if it hadn't already been well after midnight!

So now everyone can have a good laugh at me! Ha Ha!
Click to expand...
No, no laughing at all - I liked your comments, moreso was just prepared for the fun level of hate I was going to receive (and laughter at me).

I put it together too because I was curious where my head might fall when I put all the variables on paper like this.. but the process more than anything just showed me how complicated a comparison is.. even to Barrie's comments on value retention, etc..

That all said... no surprise likely but I have a major love for CPC (and personally customization to me is #1).. which then also skews Tina higher too than for most.
 
LionPaladin88 said:
i would say for me my most controversial opinion is there is nothing wrong with low and micro stakes games.
Click to expand...
Seems like a much better way to learn to play than simply lighting money on fire. To play poker well, you can't care about the money in front of you. But it's one thing to be told that, and it's another thing to be able to actually try playing like that and see that it's actually true (compared to playing scared money.)
 
Kam said:
Vineyard poker chips. I don’t get the attraction? Seem to be in pretty high demand/ relatively high price for an oversized inlay chip.

Lion Attack GIF by Beast
Click to expand...
I like the story behind them but they have never intrigued me. I remember thinking similar thoughts about PNY's when they were all the rage. To each their own and thank God we all have different tastes.
 
Last edited:
https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/how-many-chips-do-you-own.133500

Made me think, what's the point of all these large collections (especially the secretive large collections).

I think if you have someone with 1 set, someone with 20 sets, and someone with 400 sets - and none of those sets ever see the light of day - then they're all equal.

If hundreds of thousands of poker chips are somewhere in a closet or vault, and noones around to hear them, do they even make a noise?
 
BPTDirector said:
Here’s one. A forum that chooses to minimize the goodness of Paulson RHC chips now lusts for WSOP Rio sets.
Click to expand...
It is funny for sure. But to be fair, Paulson is the one who minimized the goodness of RHC. We’re just playing cards.
 
Huskerchipper said:
I like the story behind them but they have never intrigued me. I remember thinking similar thoughts about PNY's when they were all the rage. To each their own and thank God we all have different tastes.
Click to expand...
I was enamored with giant inlay chips, then pushed back because of the slipperiness, and now I'm kind of interested in them again. I went through Olivia's, PNY, Vineyards, and Ritz but could never get the balance right, though the Livs were the most playable and one of a handful of sets I regret getting rid of.
 

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!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

PossomOfCards
Copag poker size vs bridge size what are your opinions?
Replies
25
Views
747
stuamurr
stuamurr
R
Opinions Needed: Poker Chip Breakdown
Replies
7
Views
1K
maxim_666666
maxim_666666
PocketAces
  • Poll Poll
Poll: the new generation of ceramics should have their own section on PCF
4 5 6
Replies
159
Views
11K
Coyote
Coyote
vegechops
Phoenix Cardroom China Clay thoughts and opinions
2
Replies
47
Views
4K
drdr
D
twosevenbluff
Chip set brainstorming
Replies
5
Views
520
twosevenbluff
twosevenbluff
Back
Top Bottom
Cart

Cart

Total -