Best progressive spot schemes (1 Viewer)

JeepologyOffroad said:
Progression is made up (@BGinGA), but we all have different tastes. I'd say everyone has their own eye for what flows best to them.

I personally like simple or no spots to start and getting more complex as you go a long. I could never have an 8v frac, but the sets that do are still cool to me.

If we are just talking about a set that is cohesive (I think this is what I mean by flow in a sense) then I like to use colors from other chips in the set along the way as long as it's not extreme and likely to result in really bad dirty stacks in play.

But there are lots of ways to obtain flow imo
Click to expand...

@JeepologyOffroad Out of curiosity what colour is that green?
 
JeepologyOffroad said:
Progression is made up (@BGinGA), but we all have different tastes. I'd say everyone has their own eye for what flows best to them.

I personally like simple or no spots to start and getting more complex as you go a long. I could never have an 8v frac, but the sets that do are still cool to me.

If we are just talking about a set that is cohesive (I think this is what I mean by flow in a sense) then I like to use colors from other chips in the set along the way as long as it's not extreme and likely to result in really bad dirty stacks in play.

But there are lots of ways to obtain flow imo

kCMgOJ2.jpg
Click to expand...
I think those are a great looking set for colors, spotting and progression.

For fracs, I like solids or half-pie or 1/4 pie. Something about a 1/4 pie for a 25c, or 1/2 for a 50c just feel right to me.
 
Taghkanic said:
SB cash works really well... Not sure why progression stopped with the higher denoms (not pictured). Image @The_dude

View attachment 654505
Click to expand...

I was kind of torn between trying to make a nice spot progression and making individual good looking chips. Its hard. What I realized is that most sets only have 1 or 2 stars of the show and the rest of the chips just kind of fill their roles without being that exciting. I was trying to find a balance and thats why some people think they are hot garbage which I understand.

I did briefly think about making the frac a solid red chip. I knew that would better fit the bill of making a traditional cali cash set (which was the goal) but I also just don't like solids that much. Well solids are okay but not when you have the opportunity to add spots. In hindsight there is probably too many blue shades overall. I didn't realize how similar Day Blue and Aqua would look. I also probably should have included a purple $25 chip to round out the set. But on the whole I am happy with the colors and progression, while not very traditional.

I am not sure what you mean by "higher denoms not pictured" The chips pictured here are all the cash chips. All the other 8v chips are tourney chips.
 
upNdown said:
We have different ideas of progression, because that 8v frac is not the most humble chip of the bunch.
But again, progression is very subjective.
Click to expand...

I just don’t find many sets where the progression goes strictly from simplest to most complex. See the OP, for example the ES/AS sets (designed I believe by some of the most experienced members of this community, no?).

Notice, for example, the pattern on the Jack Detroit 1K—I don’t remember the code—which seems to show up on a lot of high-denoms. It’s a little more “exotic” than a lot of standard spots but not especially complex. And sometimes it shows up on 5s or other low denoms, like the Jack Cincy snapper... So go figure.
 
Taghkanic said:
For those that care about progressive spots... What sets do people think have the most effective edgespot progressions?

Some possible nominees:

• Various Boat sets (Empress/Aurora)​
• Jack Detroit v1/v2​
• Protegés​
• PCR v1 / WTH&Cs​
• PCR v2​

What else?

[Note: Images swiped from TCR, @justincarothers, @Ischie , @ReallyGoodUsername et al. Will remove upon request]


View attachment 654492View attachment 654493View attachment 654494View attachment 654495View attachment 654496View attachment 654497View attachment 654499
Click to expand...
I've personally never understood the love that the WTHC chips get around here. As others have pointed out, repeating edge spots across multiple chips immediately disqualifies it from any consideration for set with best edge spot progression.

Out of the above sets, for me anyways, the Aurora Star cash set takes top prize and it's not even close. For me it's a shining example of simple to complex spot progression and the use of colours throughout the entire set is excellent. One of my all-time favourites.

In comparison, the ES set kind of jumps all over the place in terms of its spots - the chips alone are all fantastic, but as a whole they just don't work as well as a set like the Aurora Stars, imo. I believe the spot progression (or lack thereof) is a major reason for that.


Other sets that display excellent use of spot progression, in my mind, would include:

1. Starlite Cruises (photo credit: @WhiteMamba1646 )
1615565857287.png


2. Bill's Haus of Bluff @Chippy McChiperson
1615565925502.png
 
Lemonzest said:
I did briefly think about making the frac a solid red chip. I knew that would better fit the bill of making a traditional cali cash set (which was the goal) but I also just don't like solids that much.
Click to expand...
Plus 8v’s sell for a lot more than solids. I think this set was designed to be broken up and sold for relabeling, not as a cohesive set. It does have progressive denominations, so it’s cool for that. Just my opinion.
 
Taghkanic said:
@monkeydog Does spot progression always imply increased complexity from low to high?

I suppose one might interpret the word literally to mean that... or maybe that was the original meaning. But there are very few sets which progress like that, at least that I can think of.

I have mostly seen “progressive” used here to denote variation from chip-to-chip, across the whole set. You might have a higher denom with a less complex spot than a lower one.

(If not, what is your term for a varied spot scheme that does not go from low to high complexity?)
Click to expand...

By definition it would seem to imply increased complexity:

noun

  1. the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.

In realty, there is no agreement as to what it is or if it even exists in the chipping world.

I look at sets in a few ways...

Simple to Complex spots - progression set

All spots the same - cohesive set

Random spots that have a unifying characteristic (a colour, a spot pattern, etc.) - cohesive set

Random spots that look good individually, but not together - meth head set

When judging a set, I have three categories.

1. Holy &^#$ I want that!
2. I want that!
3. I'd only buy these to sell them

In seriousness though, I designed my custom set with progression in mind and in hindsight, I likely would have been more flexible with "rules of progression" to get some cool spots onto chips we use more frequently.

At the end of the day - buy what you like.
 
Top to bottom, I think the Protege lineup provides one of the best spot progressions in a non-custom set (aside from the head-scratcher $5k), but that's largely because it was designed by a group of chippers. TH&C / PCR are also nice, but just within the cash/tourney denoms (1-25, 100-5k), there is obviously the repeated patterns across the whole set.

For casino sets, the 2 big President Casino sets have awesome spot progression:

PNY:
1615565915632.png


PCA (secondary):
1615566074022.png


1615566082163.png
 
ekricket said:
Plus 8v’s sell for a lot more than solids. I think this set was designed to be broken up and sold for relabeling, not as a cohesive set. It does have progressive denominations, so it’s cool for that. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
It wasn't designed to be broken up and certainly not to be relabeled. I (wrongly) assumed people would mainly want complete sets and that informed the quantities created of each denom.
 
Irish said:
Top to bottom, I think the Protege lineup provides one of the best spot progressions in a non-custom set (aside from the head-scratcher $5k), but that's largely because it was designed by a group of chippers. TH&C / PCR are also nice, but just within the cash/tourney denoms (1-25, 100-5k), there is obviously the repeated patterns across the whole set.

For casino sets, the 2 big President Casino sets have awesome spot progression:

PNY:
View attachment 654549

PCA (secondary):
View attachment 654555

View attachment 654556
Click to expand...
Hard to argue with the PCA, aside from the fact that they messed up "mold progression" by including a RHC in there! :(
 
Progression is simply increased complication of inserts as denominations increase. This is more of a construct/fixation for chippers though, which is why it seems most good examples in the thread are customs, CPCs, and mixed/relabeled sets instead of casino ones.

To answer the OP and off the top of my head, however, I would say RVCLs are probably my favorite in this regard out of actual casino sets. Link to WW's RVCL set/pron.
 
monkeydog said:
Simple to Complex spots - progression set

All spots the same - cohesive set

Random spots that have a unifying characteristic (a colour, a spot pattern, etc.) - cohesive set
Click to expand...

The problem with this nomenclature is that it does not distinguish *at all* between a set with all the same spots and one with different spots for each denom. You’re using the same word to describe two totally different things.
 
monkeydog said:
the process of developing or moving gradually towards a more advanced state.
Click to expand...

This also does not work because it assumes that “more advanced” must mean “more complex.”

In many design fields, just the opposite is true.

In modern architecture, for example, a more minimal, streamlined, and stripped down building is often considered more “advanced” than one which is festooned with detail/decoration. (See Adolf Loos—“ornament is crime”—or Mies van der Rohe—“less is more.”
 
So, what other sets are out there which have model spot schemes?

The set which players in my home game seem to like the best is a mixed PCR v2/Avalon cash set. No duplicates, different spots on each chip, silver hotstamps.

My ideal I think would also have shaped inlays, different shape on each chip, though I do love the clarity and simplicity of hot stamps. Every element of the chip which helps promote recognition I think is a plus.

One thing that bugs me more than spot issues is base colors which run too close. Seems to happen most often with black chips mixing with purples, dark blue or dark green. That’s one problem where significantly different spot patterns and colors can really help avoid confusion.
 
Last edited:
Taghkanic said:
The problem with this nomenclature is that it does not distinguish *at all* between a set with all the same spots and one with different spots for each denom. You’re using the same word to describe two totally different things.
Click to expand...

cohesive​

(koʊhiːsɪv )
ADJECTIVE
Something that is cohesive consists of parts that fit together well and form a united whole.
 
Taghkanic said:
This also does not work because it assumes that “more advanced” must mean “more complex.”

In many design fields, just the opposite is true.

In modern architecture, for example, a more minimal, streamlined, and stripped down building is often considered more “advanced” than one which is festooned with detail/decoration. (See Adolf Loos—“ornament is crime”—or Mies van der Rohe—“less is more.”
Click to expand...

I don't know if I'd agree with the statement regarding architecture - where is it referenced that less detail/decoration is more advanced? More modern yes, more advanced? I don't know if that's true. Can you share some reading that backs that statement so that I can learn?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 72o
Taghkanic said:
This also does not work because it assumes that “more advanced” must mean “more complex.”

In many design fields, just the opposite is true.

In modern architecture, for example, a more minimal, streamlined, and stripped down building is often considered more “advanced” than one which is festooned with detail/decoration. (See Adolf Loos—“ornament is crime”—or Mies van der Rohe—“less is more.”
Click to expand...
Tastes take different paths of course, but they all refine. And most of the time I think those refinements all lead to near the same conclusion or at least the same general areas. You learn what works and what doesn’t. It’s that intangible element with a set. When you see a set and it just really is pleasing to the eye. It flows and looks like it was meant to be together. To me, chips are art. And when put together in the right combination and order it can be a beautiful masterpiece. Not easy to do and takes work, but that’s what makes it so great imo.

And then when you get them in play it’s another level of art. The crescendo of a big pot as the higher denoms hit the center of the felt and build upon the chips that came before them. Glorious..... or maybe I just look at this too in depth :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:
 
Lemonzest said:
I was kind of torn between trying to make a nice spot progression and making individual good looking chips. Its hard. What I realized is that most sets only have 1 or 2 stars of the show and the rest of the chips just kind of fill their roles without being that exciting. I was trying to find a balance and thats why some people think they are hot garbage which I understand.

I did briefly think about making the frac a solid red chip. I knew that would better fit the bill of making a traditional cali cash set (which was the goal) but I also just don't like solids that much. Well solids are okay but not when you have the opportunity to add spots. In hindsight there is probably too many blue shades overall. I didn't realize how similar Day Blue and Aqua would look. I also probably should have included a purple $25 chip to round out the set. But on the whole I am happy with the colors and progression, while not very traditional.

I am not sure what you mean by "higher denoms not pictured" The chips pictured here are all the cash chips. All the other 8v chips are tourney chips.
Click to expand...
Are all of the same spot patterns available on 43mm? For some reason I thought the spot patterns were more limited on that type of chip.
 
markleteenie said:
Are all of the same spot patterns available on 43mm? For some reason I thought the spot patterns were more limited on that type of chip.
Click to expand...

All the info is in the Paulson brochure that I think is posted on PCF somewhere in parts. There bigger you get with chips the less spot patterns are available. So 39mm. allow for all spot patterns and 50 mm. chips only have like 6 spot patterns available.
 
monkeydog said:
I don't know if I'd agree with the statement regarding architecture - where is it referenced that less detail/decoration is more advanced? More modern yes, more advanced? I don't know if that's true.
Click to expand...

Well, you’d be wrong. Unless your ideal home looks like something from a movie set in the Renaissance.

Can you share some reading that backs that statement so that I can learn?
Click to expand...

I cited two famous sources above, Adolf Loos and Mies van der Rohe; easy enough to Google them. (Mies actually cribbed the idea from his mentor, but is credited with popularizing it.) Here’s a (non-scholarly) magazine piece which shows the continued influence of such ideas on today’s architecture:

https://architizer.com/blog/inspiration/collections/ode-to-mies/

See also anything about the Bauhaus, Le Corbusier, etc. The giants of architecture for the last 100 years were almost all moving toward simplification, not complication. Or see more recently, the contemporary work of John Pawson, who has argued in favor of the idea of “plain” space.

Or just pick up any architecture mag at Barnes & Noble or wherever. You’ll see lots of sleek, minimal buildings featured; not a lot of Gothic Revival, Mock Tudor or Rococo.

In design, making something truly simple is often more difficult than making it complicated. For example, the reason why baseboard and ceiling moldings are used in a lot of cheap construction is less for decoration than to hide flaws in the construction. When you want something to be completely stripped down, every flaw shows unless it is perfectly level/even/plumb.
 
Last edited:
Taghkanic said:
Well, you’d be wrong. Unless your ideal home looks like something from a movie set in the Renaissance.



I cited two famous sources above, Adolf Loos and Mies van der Rohe; easy enough to Google them. (Mies actually cribbed the idea from his mentor, but is credited with popularizing it.) Here’s a (non-scholarly) magazine piece which shows the continued influence of such ideas on today’s architecture:

https://architizer.com/blog/inspiration/collections/ode-to-mies/

See also anything about the Bauhaus, Le Corbusier, etc. The giants of architecture for the last 100 years were almost all moving toward simplification, not complication. Or see more recently, the contemporary work of John Pawson, who has argued in favor of the idea of “plain” space.

Or just pick up any architecture mag at Barnes & Noble or wherever. You’ll see lots of sleek, minimal buildings featured; not a lot of Gothic Revival, Mock Tudor or Rococo.

In design, making something truly simple is often more difficult than making it complicated. For example, the reason why baseboard and ceiling moldings are used in a lot of cheap construction is less for decoration than to hide flaws in the construction. When you want something to be completely stripped down, every flaw shows unless it is perfectly level/even/plumb.
Click to expand...

The link you posted is the architectural equivalent of solid chips, not a bad thing, just not for everyone.

I didn't ask for examples of modern design, I asked for examples of work where people said that simple, modern design is more advanced than another design style.

I'd argue that all these "modern" designs are far more advanced than the empty rectangles you posted.

https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/buildings-redefined-architecture-past-5-years

Here's an example of simple progression...

Frac - Solid
$1 - 114
$5 - 214
$25 - 414
$100 - 614

It's really that simple and would be the way that "most" chippers would understand how it applies to chips.

I look forward to reading about the architects you quoted and will do some googling on them.

BTW - the reason that trim is used is more than to "hide the flaws", in it's simplest form, it is meant as protection to the structure. Baseboard is there to protect the wall from mopping/water damage, door casing is to protect from wear in high traffic areas, crown moulding is meant to cover the joint needed for seasonal truss uplift, chair rail is meant to protect the wall from chairs being pushed into, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 72o
Taghkanic said:
Here’s that very pretty Paris set I mentioned above, with various “18” (?) spots. Is this a partial inlay replacement set to match the $1s?

Anyway... Not sure why they didn’t go with 218 or 318 on the lowest denom, but the rest increase as you go along, until the $100 chip.

As I already said, this is a very elegant approach, but possibly confusing from a usability standpoint... The base colors are doing almost all the work here. Works as long as you’re not colorblind! [Photo: @BonScot I believe]

View attachment 654527
Click to expand...
Fuck sakes. You’re overthinking this.

Is it any wonder I spend all my time here on the derail and WTF thread? :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:
 

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.

Back
Top Bottom