Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 5:38 pm GMT by yeltzen
This sample set is probably the biggest money-saver of my life, cause there's no way I'll be able to buy a set of the NJ clays after playing with these suckers.
Surprisingly, the most annoying thing about the design (the "PAULSON CHIPS") didn't bother me at all seeing them in person. I didn't even really notice it except on the white and purple, the two ugly duckling chips anyways, in terms of color. The inlay, though, was even worse in person, which is hard to believe. Horrible, just horrible. The only chip that you can possibly overlook it on is the black. This is compounded by the fact that there is this coating over the inlay and the inner part of the mold. So the part of the chip that isn't the inlay or the outer edge has this shiny look to it that just looks completely out of place. They definitely need a mold that fits this inlay rather than using a bigger inlay.
Seeing them in person didn't make me like the design any more. Still boring-looking. The only ones that I really liked where the red $5 and the black $100. The rest were nothing to write home about. The quality of the design and the quality of the chip are just total opposite. The design feels very generic, manufactured... it doesn't make you say, "wow there's no other chip like this". The chip itself - the feel, the sound, etc - leaves no doubt that this is a one-of-a-kind chip. The NJ clays, in my opinion have the opposite effect. A design that feels one-of-a-kind on a chip that feels very generic and cheap.
They should clearly team up. Just for me.
So there it is. See, I'm not a biased jag off.
EDIT: Another thing I noticed... while the white portion where the graphic is located is centered perfectly (at least to the eye) on every chip, the graphic itself IS NOT centered on this area! On some chips, the Casino De Isthmus City logo is near the top of the white inlay, on some it's near the bottom. So these have centering problems as well, just of a different kind.
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 5:40 pm GMT by ALEN-TNT
Sound pretty bad, post soem pictures.
-TNT 
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 5:43 pm GMT by yeltzen
| ALEN-TNT wrote: | Sound pretty bad, post soem pictures.
-TNT |
There's plenty of pictures floating around here, much better than any I could take.
The chip is not bad at all, only the design. That's what makes it so sad. The chip itself is so good it's unreal. However, the design is as bad as the chip is good.
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 5:59 pm GMT by pokerchipreviews
Interesting note about the centering. I'll have to look at that closer.
John
www.pokerchipreviews.com
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 6:00 pm GMT by Nugzy
I noticed the off-center labels on other pictures that others have posted.
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 6:01 pm GMT by yeltzen
Here's the best pic I could take. You can see that the white inlay is centered on all of the chips, but the graphic is not centered on the inlay on all of them. The blue's graphic is too high, and the black's graphic is too low and to the left. The green and purple have centered graphics as far as I can see.
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 6:22 pm GMT by PocketRocket
I've seen the off-center inlays a lot on casino chips as well. I suppose they could say that the inlay is 'casino quality' that way 
| yeltzen wrote: |
Here's the best pic I could take. You can see that the white inlay is centered on all of the chips, but the graphic is not centered on the inlay on all of them. The blue's graphic is too high, and the black's graphic is too low and to the left. The green and purple have centered graphics as far as I can see. |
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 6:24 pm GMT by Mechanic
I must applaud your attention to detail. I thought I was anal and I completely overlooked that. My sample is similar but, even knowing it is there, I really don't notice it.
I, for one, think this is a "one of a kind" chip and I absolutely love the colors. The inlay having white as a base color accents the colors/edge spots well. The numbers are large enough to see easily but, being black, allow the chip to be the focus and not the inlay.
I like traditional chips and understand that many people like to see chips to enjoy the inlay. I like the chip, color and edge spots...the inlay is just a necessary evil. Since this inlay is tame and reserved it works perfectly for me.
For someone who like to look at a chip for the sake of enjoying the inlay.....these may not be for you. Someone along the lines of a chip collector perhaps.
Although I disagree with some of what you have said, I applaud your even handed review. I think appearance is even more subjective than feel/sound. Anyone who feels/hears these and doesn't say WOW....should not be allowed to play the game
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 6:34 pm GMT by yeltzen
Yeah, there's no discussion on the quality of the chip itself. It's awesome, to say the least. I just thought they could have done more with the design. The new mold (on Trademark) will help, but they could have done subtle things to make the design really unique. They could have used the same colors, for sure. The color combos are great. But I would have liked to see them mix up the edge spots (a la the original JBs or the NJ clays) to add some variety and uniqueness.
I guess the best way I can explain it is, when you look at the chips on dice702 and the ones on Trademark, switching the inlay doesn't really have an effect on the "feel" of the design. The design just doesn't feel exclusive, whereas if you tried to use the NJ design on the Martini Clubs and vice versa, it wouldn't look right at all. Those designs feel exclusive to that chip.
I need help.
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 6:36 pm GMT by yeltzen
| PocketRocket wrote: | I've seen the off-center inlays a lot on casino chips as well. I suppose they could say that the inlay is 'casino quality' that way
|
Oh, it really doesn't bother me either. I just found it kind of interesting that they were designed like that./quote
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 6:49 pm GMT by Mechanic
| yeltzen wrote: | | PocketRocket wrote: | I've seen the off-center inlays a lot on casino chips as well. I suppose they could say that the inlay is 'casino quality' that way
|
Oh, it really doesn't bother me either. I just found it kind of interesting that they were designed like that. |
/quote
Thanks again!! It is refreshing to see good genuine input instead of rants too often found on other boards. This board is great for valid criticism and insight....your thoughts are a fine example of that.
Here is to hoping you find that combo you are looking for!!
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 6:52 pm GMT by yeltzen
| Mechanic wrote: | | Here is to hoping you find that combo you are looking for!! |
Oh I already decided on my set months ago. Now that I have it, I'm just sampling all the other things out there for the hell of it. :D
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 6:58 pm GMT by ChkDeezNuts
When the new inlay Paulson comes out........I am on cruise control to a tourney set of 500.....
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:11 pm GMT by yeltzen
| ChkDeezNuts wrote: | | When the new inlay Paulson comes out........I am on cruise control to a tourney set of 500..... |
I thought they were going with a new mold, not a new inlay?
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:24 pm GMT by ledavatar
Ugh, to think, all of these Paulson home chip problems could have been avoided if the seller just came to the forums and spent a month discussing what people actually wanted...
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:28 pm GMT by yeltzen
| ledavatar wrote: | | Ugh, to think, all of these Paulson home chip problems could have been avoided if the seller just came to the forums and spent a month discussing what people actually wanted... |
C'mon, you can't expect these people to actually THINK, can you?
They'd have the market cornered right now had they done so.
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:30 pm GMT by breakbeat46
As an owner of NJ clays and not seeing the new paulsons in person I would just like to add that if the paulson chips had more variations of edge spots and a different inlay design then I would sell my NJ Clays in a heart beat. That's what I look for in a chip. Inlay desgin, edge spots, colors, quality. Off center inlays dont bother me. Ugly inlays on the other hand do.
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm GMT by yeltzen
| breakbeat46 wrote: | | As an owner of NJ clays and not seeing the new paulsons in person I would just like to add that if the paulson chips had more variations of edge spots and a different inlay design then I would sell my NJ Clays in a heart beat. That's what I look for in a chip. Inlay desgin, edge spots, colors, quality. Off center inlays dont bother me. Ugly inlays on the other hand do. |
Bingo. If a gun was held to my had and I had to buy a clay chip set, I'd get the NJs, no question. NJ should have Paulson manufacture the NJ and MC designs... then life would be perfect and there would be no debating.
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:53 pm GMT by TenPercenter
| breakbeat46 wrote: | | As an owner of NJ clays and not seeing the new paulsons in person I would just like to add that if the paulson chips had more variations of edge spots and a different inlay design then I would sell my NJ Clays in a heart beat. That's what I look for in a chip. Inlay desgin, edge spots, colors, quality. Off center inlays dont bother me. Ugly inlays on the other hand do. |
Once the group buy for the James Bond chips is done you should take a look at my new custom Paulson set. I haven't posted about them here yet but the JB buy should be over today or tomorrow. I hope my inlay designs are what you are looking for. Keep your eyes peeled...
Ten
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:57 pm GMT by breakbeat46
 I can't wait to see pictures. I hope you have a .25 chip or even better blank denoms.
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:12 pm GMT by vai777
Dose anyone even know what the new paulson mold will look like.
Everyone is assuming it will be better than the current mold yet I havent seen any pictures or even heard a description to back this up.
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:25 pm GMT by ChkDeezNuts
| vai777 wrote: | Dose anyone even know what the new paulson mold will look like.
Everyone is assuming it will be better than the current mold yet I havent seen any pictures or even heard a description to back this up. |
Go to trademark site.
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:27 pm GMT by ChkDeezNuts
| yeltzen wrote: | | ChkDeezNuts wrote: | | When the new inlay Paulson comes out........I am on cruise control to a tourney set of 500..... |
I thought they were going with a new mold, not a new inlay? |
BOTH.......and it's great......it has hat and canes with the denomination and the denomination spelled out also.....What a concept!!! It was about time.....
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:27 pm GMT by pokerchipreviews
Few things about these new Paulsons that I think many, but not all, are aware of...
Paulson did not allow the vendors (Apache and Trademark) to decide on the A) the mold B) the color/spot design of any of the chips and C) the size of the center inlay. Those were all 100% fixed by Paulson, (or GPI or whatever you want to call them).
Why would they do this??? Well, I'm fairly certain that the entire consumer Paulson chip thing for 2005 is going to make up well less than 1% of GPI's revenue. They have no real reason to cater to us 'underlings' of the world. Maybe we can all start a casino or something.... Casino THP....who knows.
That said...even with all the design weirdness, I still think the Home Paulsons are just completely awesome chips. If you're shopping chips at this $level$ you'd really be missing out if you didn't at least order some samples.
Cheers,
John
www.pokerchipreviews.com
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:39 pm GMT by vai777
that mockup on trademark poker has the exact same mold mock up as the ones from the apache pokerchips site.
I know about the inlay but what about the mold will it have the circle imprinted like the old paulson or will it just have a textured border that goes all the way to the inlay
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 8:41 pm GMT by TenPercenter
| breakbeat46 wrote: | | I can't wait to see pictures. I hope you have a .25 chip or even better blank denoms. |
how about both?  I have both planned. There will be an eight chips set, one of the denoms can also be ordered without a number and dollar sign.
Ten
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 9:19 pm GMT by circlencircle
| ChkDeezNuts wrote: | | BOTH.......and it's great......it has hat and canes with the denomination and the denomination spelled out also.....What a concept!!! It was about time..... |
I dont see a difference in the picture you posted; Its exactly the same as its always been.
Everyone keeps saying "they mold is different" or "they are changing the inlay". Yet we all know Paulson dictated the design of the entire chip to trademark/apache. The only thing that was allowed to be altered was the design of the inlay, not the size of it, or shape. So I don’t understand why everyone seems to think Paulson is going to make a new mold or allow a larger inlay. It seems to me that the only possible change there could be is trademark is redesigning the graphics of the inlay and that’s it... Or is it just me?
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 9:54 pm GMT by TenPercenter
| circlencircle wrote: | | Everyone keeps saying "they mold is different" or "they are changing the inlay". ... It seems to me that the only possible change there could be is trademark is redesigning the graphics of the inlay and that’s it... Or is it just me? |
Based on the quote on their site, I'd say they convinced Paulson to expand the mold to fit the standard inlay.
"Due do a mold improvement requested by our customers, we have been forced to move back "
Since I am so "sure" of this, my graphics design artist mocked up my custom Paulsons on the new mold as we "think" it will look like.
Ten
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 10:01 pm GMT by circlencircle
| TenPercenter wrote: |
Since I am so "sure" of this, my graphics design artist mocked up my custom Paulsons on the new mold as we "think" it will look like.
Ten |
Well, if it wasn’t coming from you I don’t think I would be so sure but if you're convinced, so am I. I guess I am just going to have to have two sets of Paulson’s then... :D
Posted Wed Mar 09, 2005 11:35 pm GMT by Mechanic
| TenPercenter wrote: | "Due do a mold improvement requested by our customers, we have been forced to move back "
Since I am so "sure" of this, my graphics design artist mocked up my custom Paulsons on the new mold as we "think" it will look like.
Ten |
You forgot the last line of what you are quoting:
"The design and art can be seen here:"
This is the last line before the same mockup pic that has been there from day 1. It certainly is possible that they forgot to modify this part of the quote but when I spoke to Trademark they were explicit about Paulsons requirements for this product.
So Trademark customes make requests to Trademark and Paulson completely reverses itself on a previous decision? Possible...but not likely.
The only thing I can see changing is the inlay size...but to change boats mid-stream because of a few customer requests....hard to imagine. Remember part of the reason Paulson stopped selling to the public was security issues expressed by casinos.
The new mold completely eliminates those concerns because the home chips are easily identified by the 'Paulson Chips' feature on the face of the chip. My guess is the inlay size is another dead giveaway by a mere glance at the chip....eliminating any security concerns.
I like the JBs so I am happy but I would have a plan B if I were designing chips around Trademarks "mold requests'.
Good luck Ten....hope it comes out A's
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 12:03 am GMT by TenPercenter
| Mechanic wrote: | | TenPercenter wrote: | "Due do a mold improvement requested by our customers, we have been forced to move back "
Since I am so "sure" of this, my graphics design artist mocked up my custom Paulsons on the new mold as we "think" it will look like.
Ten |
So Trademark customes make requests to Trademark and Paulson completely reverses itself on a previous decision? Possible...but not likely.
...
Good luck Ten....hope it comes out A's |
The reason I think they are changing the mold and NOT allowing a bigger inlay is for security. The casinos all want big inlays. So restricting all home chips to the small inlay is one more easily visible feature to distinguish them. So I'd lay money on a mold change, and we are still stuck with standar (small) inlays.
Ten
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 12:54 am GMT by Mechanic
Unless I was lied to...that can't be what happened. I called Josh (dice702) and told him I was not ready to buy yet and wanted to know if they were going to increase in price over time (few mos. ago when only mock up pics weres avail and Paulson generic sample pic). As part of the discussion I told him I did not like the Paulson sample chips that were then pictured.
They had a large inlay and thin face edge. He said the inlay was not going to be that size but, indeed, smaller. He said Paulson had dictated exactly what the chip could look like.
After realizing Trademark offered custom inlays, I immediately thought of a BIG grp buy here and called for details. They too described to me EXACTLY what the end product ended up looking like.
You are suggesting that Dice bought 250,000 w/o knowing what the final product looked like? This is his business. Did you buy the Egyptians without seeing them....of course not.
I think your desire for this to be a change you like has your emotions a bit high. There are many people here who like the JB Pulsons you are saying look "retarded". Isn't that a bit harsh?
I am not a fan of Chipco or Egyptian themes on...well...anything really but I would never say your chips look "retarded". Now you plan to expand that relatively modern type theme to a traditional edge spotted chip.....my taste?....no! Retarded?...certainly not.
Finally, you are also suggesting that Paulson was convinced to change to preserve the Paulson name.....you don't think there were meetings at Paulon headquarters approving this design? You can't believe these got out the door w/o someone saying 'do those meet Paulson standards?'...right?
Well I digress...I was not impressed with the inlay size at all from the pics but it has truly grown on me and am thrilled to see more of the chip. I hope you read this as intended, with all due respect. Again, I hope you get what you want in mold/look for these chips because they sound/feel incredible and are a MUST have imo.
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 1:35 am GMT by Dick Danger
I won't buy the current JB because I think they look retarded. They feel great, sound great, and it is a Paulson chip, but I still have to look at it.
Mold will grow on you if you sit still long enough.
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 1:53 am GMT by yeltzen
When do the new Super Diamond composites come out?
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 2:36 am GMT by TenPercenter
| Mechanic wrote: | | I think your desire for this to be a change you like has your emotions a bit high. |
No, seriously mechanic, I'm going off the quote on trademarkpoker.com that says "Due do a mold improvement requested by our customers." That's the big clue to me that there will be a mold change, not an inlay size increase. No emotion involved (maybe a little hope though).
Anyway, like you said Mechanic, no hard feelings I hope. Just discussing this inlay thing. It's an important topic, especially if I can get 100,000 chips ordered. I sure hope they are fixing the mold.
Ten
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 9:31 am GMT by yeltzen
| TenPercenter wrote: | | Mechanic wrote: | | I think your desire for this to be a change you like has your emotions a bit high. |
No, seriously mechanic, I'm going off the quote on trademarkpoker.com that says "Due do a mold improvement requested by our customers." That's the big clue to me that there will be a mold change, not an inlay size increase. No emotion involved (maybe a little hope though).
|
/quote
Is there really any debate about this? If you look at the pic on trademark's website, it's very obvious that the mold has been adjusted to fit a small inlay.
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:21 am GMT by Mr. Meaner
The Paulson mock up pics on Trademark have looked the same for 3-4 months now they have not changed the graphic to match the inlay.
Does anyone remember the mockup pics on Apaches site?? They looked exactly the same as the Trademark mock ups only difference was the graphic on the inlay.
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:44 am GMT by TenPercenter
| Mr. Meaner wrote: | The Paulson mock up pics on Trademark have looked the same for 3-4 months now they have not changed the graphic to match the inlay.
Does anyone remember the mockup pics on Apaches site?? They looked exactly the same as the Trademark mock ups only difference was the graphic on the inlay. |
It worked out ok, since people have now accepted the mold. I, for one, am hoping that the mold is being changed. I admit that even I have gotten used to the inlay. You get used to anything if you look at it long enough. I've been shuffling these things for weeks and I love the chips. But it's still a mistake, and a mistake that should be fixed.
Ten
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 10:58 am GMT by Nickmast
I am in the Paulson GB and I for one am overlooking the inlay size to mold ratio. I'm getting a great price on a great chip and that is enough for me to buy a set. (400 set) So its not like I'm dropping $1000 dollars on a set that I overlook the inlay on.
~nickmast
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 12:45 pm GMT by circlencircle
| Mr. Meaner wrote: | The Paulson mock up pics on Trademark have looked the same for 3-4 months now they have not changed the graphic to match the inlay.
Does anyone remember the mockup pics on Apaches site?? They looked exactly the same as the Trademark mock ups only difference was the graphic on the inlay. |
I'm glad at least one other person realizes this, I thought I was the only one.
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:39 pm GMT by Midnight Sun
New to the forum, tough, i've been reading up with great interest for a few days. This seems like a great forum.
I've ordered a somewhat small set of the new Paulsons, 350 chips in total. Planning on expanding the set later on when my economy allows. Tough, they havn't arrived yet, it seems to take forever to get 'em here to Sweden, where I'm from ( wich also may excuse spelling and grammar errors....you all are gonna have to live with that ).
Hell well, to the point. Since we don't have the same culture around chips over here, i hardly couldn't spot the faults you all are talking about at first, with the mold don't matching the chip. Okej, i see what you're talking about now, however, I don't think it looks funny at all. In my opinion, it's kind of nice and much more appeling with a small label than one that stretches over the entire chip, and the space that's "left over" between the label and the mold works alright for me anyway. So I'm looking forward to getting a great and nice looking chip, since I don't belive I'll be disapointed by the looks...
The downside, they dug a deeeeeeep hole in my wallet. If you belive they are expensive living in the US, i don't wanna tell you what they cost getting over here. More than I could afford anyway.  But the thing is, in my opinion it's still a great amount of money for the common dice and suited chip sets, and I'm more than certain that I wouldn't stick with those for a long time if I'd gotten them (I've played with them at tournaments, both homegames and somewhat larger ones, and they're okej but thats it really). And wtf, it kind of cool to be a snoob anyways, right?
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:56 pm GMT by jojobinks
about the paulson mold: i agree that it's weird. in fact, i'd never buy chips with that mold/inlay issue. here's a mockup of what the new mold might look like, from the "other board." this is another of Ten's pharaoh club chip plans.
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 4:57 pm GMT by texjustin
I talked to somebody at trademark poker today and they told me the mold is gonna be smaller not the inlay,it will still look very nice and a huge upgrade over the current james bond,imo.
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:05 pm GMT by ChkDeezNuts
| texjustin wrote: | | I talked to somebody at trademark poker today and they told me the mold is gonna be smaller not the inlay,it will still look very nice and a huge upgrade over the current james bond,imo. |
You mean "bigger" right?
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:23 pm GMT by nutn2lewz
Here is my review of these chips. The plastic over the inlay and center gives these chips a different feel than other Paulson chips.
http://www.homepokertourney.com/reviews/poker_chip_review_apache.htm
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:31 pm GMT by TenPercenter
| jojobinks wrote: | about the paulson mold: i agree that it's weird. in fact, i'd never buy chips with that mold/inlay issue. here's a mockup of what the new mold might look like, from the "other board." this is another of Ten's pharaoh club chip plans.
|
as much as i love the way this looks, alas i feel it will not come to pass.
i confirmed with trademark that the mold will not change, but paulson will now allow the grand inlay to fill the flat space.
this may be good news though, as i will now push for shaped inlays.
ten
Posted Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:34 pm GMT by vai777
what palstic over the center of the chip
Posted Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:05 pm GMT by TenPercenter
NEWS FLASH.
I'm told again today, that we were given wrong information. The new word from Trademark Poker is that the new Paulson chips will have a NEW MOLD, not a bigger inlay. Here is the quote:
| Trademark Contact wrote: | | First, I gave you some wrong information. We are having the mold changed and not increasing the size of the inlay. We are having the mold redone to accomodate the inlay not increase the size of the inlayt. |
Ten
Posted Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:00 pm GMT by vai777
Are these people serious with this.
I mean what the hell is going on.
Its friggin simple either the mold will be different or the inlay will be different which is it and what the hell is it going to look like.
Im getting sick and tired of these games.
Posted Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:13 pm GMT by Mechanic
| TenPercenter wrote: | NEWS FLASH.
I'm told again today, that we were given wrong information. The new word from Trademark Poker is that the new Paulson chips will have a NEW MOLD, not a bigger inlay. Here is the quote:
| Trademark Contact wrote: | | First, I gave you some wrong information. We are having the mold changed and not increasing the size of the inlay. We are having the mold redone to accomodate the inlay not increase the size of the inlayt. |
Ten |
good thing I held off on gloating
Seriously, I am happy for those who want a different mold. I am thrilled with mine and hope everyone can be as happy with theirs
Posted Sat Mar 12, 2005 6:24 pm GMT by trogdoraoeu
| Mechanic wrote: | good thing I held off on gloating
Seriously, I am happy for those who want a different mold. I am thrilled with mine and hope everyone can be as happy with theirs
|
Well said. See, they will listen to us if we belly-ache loud enough:) It is true, as several have said, that the consumer market is a small fraction of Paulson's over-all market, but I'm guessing the margin is a heck of a lot higher. I think someone posted here somewhere that casinos only pay thiry something cents per.
I have a set of the new isthmuses and will be slightly jealous of the new mold but not that much, really.
Posted Sat Mar 12, 2005 9:10 pm GMT by ramses
This is really frustating. I hate the fact I posted information that was totally wrong, and then they tell Ten the same thing, then two days later it's something else. Ten, if you keep on this could you keep us posted on what the heck is going on. I'm already in for 500 JB's, but if there is a mold change The Paroahs Clubs are awfully tempting. Good job so far on them Ten, keep it up!
Posted Sat Mar 12, 2005 10:16 pm GMT by yeltzen
Wow... if they really do change that mold, it's going to be really hard for me not to buy a set... assuming they change the mold for the JB inlay. They'd be worth going broke over.
Posted Sun Mar 13, 2005 12:27 am GMT by TenPercenter
| ramses wrote: | | Ten, if you keep on this could you keep us posted on what the heck is going on. I'm already in for 500 JB's, but if there is a mold change The Paroahs Clubs are awfully tempting. Good job so far on them Ten, keep it up! |
Thanks. I got it from the owner of Trademak/5star that the mold is not cast yet, so I forwarded our mouckup with concentric circles and asked him to submit it to Paulson (I know, dream on...). He will contact Paulson Monday I should have some answers Monday or Tuesday regarding the mold, shaped inlays, art charges, and other minor items. Our design process is moving along swimmingly.
I see no reason to pass on the JB buy. They're good chips too, and will hold their value extremely well.
Ten
Posted Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:31 pm GMT by yeltzen
Anyone who is planning on buying these - I would strongly advise against getting any white ($0.50) or orange ($1000) chips... I've had mine for about 4 days now, and these two both look like absolute hell just from handling and shuffling them. All of the colors have rubbed off on them. The same happened on some of the edge spots on the other chips (white, light blue, dayglo orange), but not enough to bother me.
Posted Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:40 pm GMT by pokerchipreviews
Rubbed off? That's doesn't make much sense. All the colors, including the edge spots, go completely through the chip. Dirty???...yes...I can see. Rubbed off??? Can't see where you're coming from on that one.
Cheers,
John
www.pokerchipreviews.com
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 9:27 am GMT by Mr. Meaner
It's pretty self explanitary when shuffling different color chips together the colors rub of on each other. My white chips and orange chip are discolored from the other chips. Now most likely in a home game you will not be shuffling chips between colors. I have been shuffling the JB Samples along with 5 other chips from the Mirage and Bellagio and the darker blue is most prominently being rubbed of.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:14 am GMT by yeltzen
| Mr. Meaner wrote: | | Now most likely in a home game you will not be shuffling chips between colors. |
Probably not, but you will be tossing them in the middle of the table with other colored chips. I handled and shuffled my NJ samples the same exact way and the light edge spots don't have colors from other chips all over them.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:03 am GMT by Lumpy
Here are a few pics of the chips from other sources after use.
Pics
More Pics
I would love to know why this is the case. I have not noticed other clay samples do this.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:08 am GMT by tomb1
Interesting comments and pictures about light-colored chips getting dirty. I don't have any so I haven't seen it personally.
With new clay chips I've had, there was always some dust and "open pores" (I don't know how else to describe it) after they were just manufactured. The colored dust seemed to rub off easily at first.
But lightly applying some mineral oil always "sealed" them up so they were brighter and also more protected. I never had problems with oiled chips.
So I wonder if any of you oiled your chips before encountering these problems? Or if you oiled (after cleaning) the samples, would you have the same problem?
Just my 2¢.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:28 am GMT by yeltzen
Mine look like those in the second post. I think that's a little ridiculous for just having shuffled them. Again, my NJ samples didn't do this, my old TH&C didn't do this, the modern clays didn't do this, etc,etc.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:38 am GMT by TenPercenter
| tomb1 wrote: | But lightly applying some mineral oil always "sealed" them up so they were brighter and also more protected. I never had problems with oiled chips.
Just my 2¢. |
This makes a lot of sense. I oiled mine up soon after I got them. I've shuffled them for weeks now, all day long, and they're not NEARLY as dirty as some of those pictured. Maybe oiling them is the way to go...
Ten
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 1:12 pm GMT by TechGuru
Mineral oil as soon as they arrived, and shuffled a stack of 100's together for a few days.
Mind you, most of the players at my tourneys don't do an extreme shuffling like this and I doubt would be a problem in the long run
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 1:26 pm GMT by yeltzen
Paulson definitely needs to address that. Jesus.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:01 pm GMT by tomb1
Vewwwwy intewesting. So much for the oil idea.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:19 pm GMT by Nickmast
WOW! those look like shit!!!! got me worried about it now. I'm in on the Paulson GB. What about using a spray on them like some have done with the NexGen with labels???
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:28 pm GMT by circlencircle
In one of the pictures the guy said they had been in the trunk of his car for 3 weeks - not really what I would consider reasonable conditions, certainly not what they were designed for. If hand dirt is a problem, people might try washing their hands once in a while...at least -once- a day. As for the chips rubbing off on each other I agree with Ten, normally chips are shuffled with their own colors verses a stack of samples so its not a problem.
Chips rubbing together in the pot is a slight issue but for god sake, one of the primary reasons for buying Paulson's is the sound and feel; this is due to them being particularly soft. The disadvantage to this is they more easily mark each other. What comes to mind is the adage, "sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees." In other words, sometimes the details of a particular situation are so cumbersome and our focus is so narrowly on those details, that we miss the bigger picture. If a few smudges are that much of a problem then individuals should analyze their priorities and buy what suits their needs rather than getting hung up on the name "paulson", because, again, it is characteristic of them to do this until they have a chance to absorb some oil, whether its from your hands or by putting mineral oil on them and even then, all things being equal, they will be more likely to do it than other chips. The reason Bluechip doesn't have this problem is it is a much harder chip. TRK doesn't do it because the inlay covers the entire chip face. If you try hard enough however, both BC and TRK will mark eachother. There are positives and negative to each of the three afore mentioned chips and people should understand the characteristics for what they are rather than making blanket comments and miss representing the over all quality/character of ANY given chip. For someone to say that Paulson needs to address it is not only arrogant (a typical comment from Yeltzen) but is also to suggest that Paulson should change the character of one of the most sought after chips on the market (meaning paulsons in general), why would they do that? Just my opinion...
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:34 pm GMT by Nickmast
By the way, TRKing chips do this also. My black $100 chip looks like $hit from rubbing up against the white(which is actually grey) chip.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:40 pm GMT by Midnight Sun
Wtf?!? Those chips don't look all that great. 
Oh, well, I got mine earlier today. And I must say that I'm totaly blown away by how great they look and feel. Having only played with cheaper kinds of chips, you know, metal insert "dice" and such, there is really no comparison. Not at all, not even close. Stacking, shuffling, handling in general...just amazing.
However, it's kind of concerning to look at those chips posted right above...especially since they cost me a shitload of money. But right now, they got such beutiful colours. The green one is just so dead on with what I want in looks for a chip. Hmm...wonder how I'm gonna work out the blinds scheduel so that they'll never have to be coloured up in my games.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:45 pm GMT by yeltzen
I have the older TH&C chips that do NOT do this from shuffling... so it's not characteristic of a Paulson.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 3:13 pm GMT by circlencircle
| yeltzen wrote: | | I have the older TH&C chips that do NOT do this from shuffling... so it's not characteristic of a Paulson. |
It would have been more accurate to say "…they are characteristically more -susceptible- to it...” I'll give you that.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 3:35 pm GMT by TechGuru
For comparison purposes... $100 Palmas (ASM) chips with much more shuffling time on them.
As someone mentioned earlier in the post, Paulson's are much softer than most other manufaturers. This is not a bad thing and probably what makes them so great. I admit the new JB's are some of the nicest chips available (and I am in the "please improve the inlay" camp).
ASM are very hard.
I doubt the average home tourney user will ever replicate the wear and tear that a casino would.
I would not hesistate to get them.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:04 pm GMT by R Deckard
Hey, TechGuru, you could probably sell those dirty JBs on eBay now for $120 each--just say they're extremely rare, authentic vintage chips that were actually used in the legendary (now closed) Casino de Isthmus City (Panama?)
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:25 pm GMT by PanthersHUTCH15
CirclenCircle
How did they look after using them in your home game?
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:18 pm GMT by breakbeat46
So why are the new paulson chips so great then. I have lost all interest. Now I wish I had the money to buy some 'old' paulsons on ebay back when they were resonably priced.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:32 pm GMT by TenPercenter
i'm not saying there's not a problem, but look at what mine look like....
i bet i've shuffled mine just as much, or more than most. so much that my wife asks me to stop because she gets so annoyed.
granted, i very have clean hands most of the time because i have a new baby. my wife has me washing my hands 10-20 times a day.
but that doesnt answer the "clay rubbing onto the other chip" theory. why hav't mine done that?
ten
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:36 pm GMT by breakbeat46
Hopefully it's a 'first' batch isssue or something...Cause I really am interested in your non den chips.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:43 pm GMT by PanthersHUTCH15
Something seems strange. Some of the pictures of the chips look aweful, yet Ten's look only slightly used, which is what I expect them to look like after continuous shuffling. Those other chips look like someone poured glue on the chip then kicked around the floor for awhile. Hopefully it is just a first batch problem cause I have 400 on the way. I don't regret buying them because I think I will be pleased.
PaulsonChips, if you read this maybe you can comment on the subject since I assume you have handled many sets of paulsons, both new and used. Are those really dirty pictures a common occurance or any ideas?
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:47 pm GMT by ramses
Maybe Ten is on to something. Maybe everyone needs to just wash their hands. :D
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:49 pm GMT by R Deckard
| breakbeat46 wrote: | | So why are the new paulson chips so great then. I have lost all interest. Now I wish I had the money to buy some 'old' paulsons on ebay back when they were resonably priced. |
If you have your own samples and have handled them yourself and have lost interest, then that's fine. But if you don't have your own samples yet, you owe it to yourself to check these out in person, IMVHO. It is so worth the $11 or so for the sample set--other people's pictures, comments, etc. only go so far. If I didn't have my samples, I probably would be thinking twice about buying these, too. But comparing the JBs to all the other samples I have, I can see a big difference.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:53 pm GMT by TechGuru
Vineyards get dirty too...
But clean-up very nicely...
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:54 pm GMT by breakbeat46
| Quote: | | If you have your own samples and have handled them yourself and have lost interest, then that's fine. But if you don't have your own samples yet, you owe it to yourself to check these out in person, IMVHO. It is so worth the $11 or so for the sample set--other people's pictures, comments, etc. only go so far. If I didn't have my samples, I probably would be thinking twice about buying these, too. But comparing the JBs to all the other samples I have, I can see a big difference. |
I understand that BUT it just seems to me that there are inconsistencies with people's samples. AND now theres all this talk about mold changes and such and the fact that i personally dont like the JB inlay. SO im just saying at the present time, i've lost interest. What i am hoping is that by the time ten's chips are ironed out so will all these inconsistencies. AND then i will be interested again.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:19 pm GMT by circlencircle
| PanthersHUTCH15 wrote: | CirclenCircle
How did they look after using them in your home game? |
The $5 was used in play for about 4 hours. The $1000 hasn't been played at all but was shuffled with 9 other $1000's for about 12 hours or so. These both were the worst two of that particular denomination and are representative of any given chip out of the 500 though most were not even as bad as these two. As always click to view and click again after it goes to the host to really blow it up.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:19 pm GMT by TechGuru
| ramses wrote: | | Maybe Ten is on to something. Maybe everyone needs to just wash their hands. :D |
Ten just shuffles chips much smoother
Ten... My wife says the same thing regarding my chip habit.
I told her that I am looking to incorporate chip shuffling into our "private time" repertoire 
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:31 pm GMT by circlencircle
| breakbeat46 wrote: |
I understand that BUT it just seems to me that there are inconsistencies with people's samples. AND now theres all this talk about mold changes and such and the fact that i personally dont like the JB inlay. SO im just saying at the present time, i've lost interest. What i am hoping is that by the time ten's chips are ironed out so will all these inconsistencies. AND then i will be interested again. |
Personally I think some of these pictures are bullshit and the photographer isn’t giving us the truth about what they did to the chips. I say this after CLOSLY examining mine as well as seeing the photos of Tens. Look at the ones at this link. It’s pretty clear if you look at the marks on the inlay. They are all in a circular pattern so this says to me the person took two chips and purposefully rubbed the crap out of them so they would do that. That absolutely did not happen from anything that could be construed as normal use. In my previous post with the pictures I had to take about 75 pictures in various lighting conditions to even show the marks on my $1000 and it’s still difficult to tell. Like I said it has been shuffle for at least 10 hours and I would guess more. I wash my hands once in a while because I have a baby in the house also but come on. Something isn’t kosher with all these pictures. The notion that it’s some how a partially "bad batch" of chips isn’t even a possibility in my mind.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=1914137&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&vc=1
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:41 pm GMT by yeltzen
| circlencircle wrote: | | Personally I think some of these pictures are bullshit and the photographer isn’t giving us the truth about what they did to the chips. |
It's a conspiracy, yo!!!
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:46 pm GMT by R Deckard
And the pictures with the oiled chips--well, I think the oil makes things look worse. Since they were new when he oiled them, I'm sure some residual dust from manufacturing was left in all the crevices. Add oil and voila, you have a nice grungy paste that will distribute itself all over everything. The dust produced from those factory-fresh, super-sharp corners getting worn-down is probably also clinging to the chips because of the oil. (The colors on these chips are so deep anyway, I don't think oiling is necessary.)
homietheclownvoiceYes, it's a CONSPIRACY! K, O, N. . .uh. . .spiracy!!/homietheclownvoice
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:03 pm GMT by circlencircle
| yeltzen wrote: | | circlencircle wrote: | | Personally I think some of these pictures are bullshit and the photographer isn’t giving us the truth about what they did to the chips. |
It's a conspiracy, yo!!! |
Nah... But someone with an agenda and a few other folks with a completely irrational concept of reasonable chip use have some how managed to cast doubt in a few peoples minds. Whatever though, for me it’s not a viable issue. I'm just saying think bout it logically and reasonably.
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:46 pm GMT by vai777
Circle
Bottom line is the chips get dirty pretty quickly while shuffling them. I dont know if they are picking up the dirt from the surface where im shuffling or if its from the colors rubbing off on each other.
I personally dont mind and they do clean up nice.
But it is kind of odd that the older paulsons ar not as easly marked as the new home Paulsons, its just really odd if you ask me
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:52 pm GMT by yeltzen
| circlencircle wrote: | | Nah... But someone with an agenda and a few other folks with a completely irrational concept of reasonable chip use have some how managed to cast doubt in a few peoples minds. Whatever though, for me it’s not a viable issue. I'm just saying think bout it logically and reasonably. |
And what agenda would this be? The people posting (including myself) seem to be people trying to convince themselves to buy a set.
I really don't see why you care so much. You have your chips, you love them... what's the difference if anyone else buys them? Will you feel personally gratified if everyone else has a set?
Posted Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:56 pm GMT by circlencircle
| vai777 wrote: | Circle
Bottom line is the chips get dirty pretty quickly while shuffling them. I dont know if they are picking up the dirt from the surface where im shuffling or if its from the colors rubbing off on each other.
I personally dont mind and they do clean up nice.
But it is kind of odd that the older paulsons ar not as easly marked as the new home Paulsons, its just really odd if you ask me |
They're definitely more susceptible to marking each other due to the apparently softer compound, -relatively- speaking. I just think its being misconstrued a little.
Posted Sat Mar 19, 2005 2:44 pm GMT by trogdoraoeu
| R Deckard wrote: | And the pictures with the oiled chips--well, I think the oil makes things look worse. Since they were new when he oiled them, I'm sure some residual dust from manufacturing was left in all the crevices. Add oil and voila, you have a nice grungy paste that will distribute itself all over everything. The dust produced from those factory-fresh, super-sharp corners getting worn-down is probably also clinging to the chips because of the oil. (The colors on these chips are so deep anyway, I don't think oiling is necessary.)
|
I think that is a good theory. I've shuffled the sam-heck out of mine and they look almost exactly like they did when I pulled them out of the box. The circular pattern of the marks ciclencircle pointed out could be consistent with some rough shuffling. I think the lessons to be learned from those pictures are these: 1. Don't oil them, or, if you insist on oiling them, don't over-oil them and let them dry for a long time before handling them. 2. Don't use these chips to learn to shuffle. Once you've had some practice shuffling should become almost effortless and no force should be required.
|
|
