InPlay Clay review up at PokerChipReviews.com

TenPercenter · Tweet this Post! #41 09-19-2005, 05:51 PM

I need to get some of these in my hands before I make any serious judgements. But I can honestly tell you that I like the idea behind the "used" look and feel, that was a unique appraoch for a new chip when everything seems to have been done already.

The inlays? I really think they could have been done a lot better. That alone would improve this chip a lot. Maybe Johnny5 and I should offer our services?

MacGrad · Tweet this Post! #42 09-19-2005, 05:52 PM

You forgot the 4.5 he gave to the Egyptians $5000 plaque...

Frankly, I'd have to give the plaque a 6 or 7, since there's not really that much to compare it to on the market...

JM · Tweet this Post! #43 09-19-2005, 05:55 PM

Well pokerchipreviews does have better pics than those on your site, but they are still ugly colors with ugly inlays. No amount of good photography will change that.

MacGrad · Tweet this Post! #44 09-19-2005, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TenPercenter

The inlays? I really think they could have been done a lot better. That alone would improve this chip a lot. Maybe Johnny5 and I should offer our services?

You're going to give serious chip issues to the collectors here if you do ANOTHER limited edition chip...

(Not that some people don't already have issues... and I'm starting to get them. For the love of Paulson, DON'T DO IT!)

yeltzen · Tweet this Post! #45 09-19-2005, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny5

Anyone else have a hard time taking any of the reviews on this site seriously?

I have a very, very hard time taking his reviews seriously, especially with 35 different ads for poker chip sites on them. I mean, c'mon, I'm the biggest NJ fan around... I wanted to love those NJ clays... but look at my strongly biased review vs. his "unbiased" review. His review is just totally inaccurate for those chips and for many other ones, in my opinion. Using the NJ example, after reading that review, you have no clue as to whether they're worth the money or not. To someone who doesn't look at this or other boards, they would think they were the second coming of Paulson.

tripod22 · Tweet this Post! #46 09-19-2005, 10:11 PM

Just for old times sake...

I like boobs.

Brewster · Tweet this Post! #47 09-20-2005, 04:12 AM

If the inlays had boobs on them, they might actually be worth the price BPC is charging for them.

yeltzen · Tweet this Post! #48 09-20-2005, 06:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brewster

If the inlays had boobs on them, they might actually be worth the price BPC is charging for them.

No way. Softcore porn would still be a cheaper alternative.

tripod22 · Tweet this Post! #49 09-20-2005, 06:28 AM

At $2 a chip, a hooker is a cheaper alternative!

If buying a set that is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yeltzen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brewster

If the inlays had boobs on them, they might actually be worth the price BPC is charging for them.

No way. Softcore porn would still be a cheaper alternative.

bhb · Tweet this Post! #50 09-20-2005, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yeltzen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brewster

If the inlays had boobs on them, they might actually be worth the price BPC is charging for them.

No way. Softcore porn would still be a cheaper alternative.

Yeah, oldvegaschips has a sample set of 6 topless ladies on Paulson T&Cs for only $10 (thats one more chip for the same price, and it's a Paulson too).
I got a set because they are the only Paulson's on the old T&C mold the I could find for an almost decent price. Besides is gives a new meaning to 'lady luck' when you use one as a chip cover.

Later,
Bruce