Spot pattern progression/regression (1 Viewer)

[Nogbert]

I know it is common for the spot patterns on chips to become more elaborate or complex as the value increases, but I'm wondering if anyone has ever seen the opposite?

Are there any practical reasons why this would be a bad idea?

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

Your fracs will be the most eye catching, while your $100s+ will be solids? Why would you prefer that? Just curious.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

Bad idea from CPC would be that you need the most of your workhorse chips, so I'd rather make the higher denoms fancier and more expensive, I need less of them lol

 

[upNdown]

your $100s+ will be solids

And that would be a disadvantage, play-wise.
Edge spots exist so we can more easily estimate the chips in an opponents stack. Solid fracs or solid $1s are fine - who cares how many of those are in your stack? But there are times when it’s important to know how many hundreds are over there.

 

[Josh Kifer]

Bad idea from CPC would be that you need the most of your workhorse chips, so I'd rather make the higher denoms fancier and more expensive, I need less of them lol

And that would be a disadvantage, play-wise.
Edge spots exist so we can more easily estimate the chips in an opponents stack. Solid fracs or solid $1s are fine - who cares how many of those are in your stack? But there are times when it’s important to know how many hundreds are over there.

These points are dead on.

 

[RagingAZN]

Your fracs will be the most eye catching, while your $100s+ will be solids? Why would you prefer that? Just curious.

It's not something I've thought about but a good thought. You want the chips you have the most of to look nice right?

Nice $100's or $500's hiding away in racks is no fun for anybody!

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

It's not something I've thought about but kinda makes sense right. You want the chips you have the most of to look nice right?

Nice $100's or $500's hiding away in racks is no fun for anybody!

Sure. Make them the most expensive, the most obvious, and the most easily differentiated. Plus they want normies to walk by the high rollers and really want those fancy chips!

 

[Coyote]

These points are dead on.

Another dead-on point is that your workhorse chip should be your sweetheart, whatever the cost.

 

[AlbinoDragon]

Spot progression as most people think and do here is something we as a group (here and previously on CT) made up. My first custom sets I did this and have come to regret it. My earliest sets were tourney driven, but this meant my highest value chips saw the least time on the felt (or were value-holders until they were really needed later in the tournament).

I'm not saying the highest value chips in a set (particularly customs) need to be extra flashy. Looking at any casinos current lineup (doable to a degree with the ChipGuide) and you won't necessarily see crazy spots in the highest denominations. Golden Nugget immediately comes to mind. MGM Grand as well. They only have to be different enough to stick out, but definitely don't need to use elaborate spots.

I have become a proponent of the "Gaussian Progression" (name based on the Normal Distribution in statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution ). Your most commonly used and workhorse chip is the most elaborate as far as spots go as it's the one that gets the most use and will spend the most time on the table. The chips on either side of that (lower and higher value) get less flashy and fancy spots. I used this when I built my Devil's Nest set a couple years ago. I knew my $1 chip (100 cenz in the set) would be the workhorse in the set and built around it.

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/a-d-s-devils-nest-cpc-customs.78031/

Of course, this is just a wordier way of saying what @Coyote said above. Workhorse chip is your favorite.

 

[Nogbert]

im not proposing solids anywhere. what im imagining is the spots themselves get more elaborate but fewer in number. heres a really crude idea i just threw together:

personally, i really think the single spot 100 would be so awesome to see and i love the pie variations on higher values even though they are usually seen as pedestrian. just wondering if its been done before

 

[RagingAZN]

Ultimately, at the end of the day, if you're making a custom set, you can do whatever the hell you want.

Although its good to get feedback/ideas, if you like it, I wouldn't worry about what the rest of us think (unless they're helping you to pay for it!)

 

[joeyshin]

I agree that you make whatever you want. I like workhorse chips to look the best but I’ve also made a set with a general spot progression. Do as you want (or as your budget allows)


No real spot progression. I just liked these chips

Spot progression

 

[Coyote]

Centre-weighted minimal progression

Discreet Progression

Basically No Progression (but look carefully)

NO PROGRESSION

 

[improviseallday]

im not proposing solids anywhere. what im imagining is the spots themselves get more elaborate but fewer in number. heres a really crude idea i just threw together:
View attachment 1194925

personally, i really think the single spot 100 would be so awesome to see and i love the pie variations on higher values even though they are usually seen as pedestrian. just wondering if its been done before

The 1TA316 has a good looking face but makes it harder to count a stack.

The pies will work.

 

[chippitydoodah]

Just finished making my Diamond Jacks fracs....turned the DJ $500 into $.50. Will my group care? Nope. Do I care? Nope. It always sucks that the higher denoms don't come out of the case because of our cash game stakes.