chamber2skipped
High Hand
Here is my review of the Tina Web Mold poker chips from Broken Arrow Cardroom Supply and why I chose NOT to buy them.
Background:
First things first, I’m not an avid chip collector. I’m new to the hobby and new to the forum. I didn’t even know who Paulson was last year, and I’ve never held the well revered classic Paulson clay chips. What I am is a poker PLAYER. I play fairly regularly and was brought here because I want to set up a decent home game. The chip I know and love is the Paulson RHC. It is the chip that I’ve played with my entire adult life as it’s the chip all of the casinos around me use. The perfect chip for me is a chip that emulates the Paulson RHC chip as closely as possible.
Actual Review:
The Tina Web Mold chip is a high quality chip. I pretty much wrote off China clays after buying samples of Nevada Jacks and Nile Clubs as they had horrendous quality control. The Nevada Jacks and Nile Clubs were warped with endless spinners, had bad flashing, and were very slick. The Tina chips have none of those issues.
The Good:
The web mold design allows them to stack well. They probably stack better than actual Paulson RHCs. There’s also no “wobble”, by which I mean if you grab a stack of 10 and pinch the sides they compress on one side and fan out on the other (not sure if there’s an actual term for this). The weight is consistent on the chips when measured, though about half a gram lighter than I would like. There is flashing on the chips, but the flashing is a minuscule rounded dot and line that you have to actually look for. The flashing isn’t sharp and is not pronounced enough to count as a detriment.
The color and variety is amazing, you can get these in so many colors and designs, including custom designs, so no complaint there.
One of my concerns with the chip was the durability of the coloring. When I heard that these ceramics were white chips that were dyed I worried the chip color would rub away over time. Over the course of several weeks I would rub two chips together fairly hard while watching TV or a movie in the evenings. While this isn’t a perfect representation of normal chip wear I believe it is much harsher than what poker chips would see in a home game over several years. The chips held up very well with little to no discoloration. The labels are also durable. They’re a professional looking plastic coated style and didn’t come off when I tried picking at them.
For price these chips are in a decent spot. 50 to 60 cents a chip for the quality and various design options is a fine price.
The Bad:
With all those positives you may be wondering why I didn’t go with them, and there are two key reasons that I’ll expand on down below.
First, the chips are too hard. It may sound like a nitpick, but I don’t like the hard feeling of the chips. It gives them a fake feel that’s too off from the Paulson RHCs I know and love. The hardness also causes the chips to have a more plastic sounding shuffle that I don’t like.
Second, the edges are too sharp. The edges aren’t as sharp as some of the other ceramics I tried, but they’re sharp enough to make chip maneuvering and shuffling feel awkward. Given that the plastic is so hard I don’t expect the edges to wear down over time.
Final Thoughts:
That’s it! Those two small downsides were enough for me to go with Milano over Tina. As a player the hard feel and shuffleability were deal breakers for me. I do understand why most people will like the Tinas more, and in a lot of ways they are higher quality. The chips aren’t for me though.
Background:
First things first, I’m not an avid chip collector. I’m new to the hobby and new to the forum. I didn’t even know who Paulson was last year, and I’ve never held the well revered classic Paulson clay chips. What I am is a poker PLAYER. I play fairly regularly and was brought here because I want to set up a decent home game. The chip I know and love is the Paulson RHC. It is the chip that I’ve played with my entire adult life as it’s the chip all of the casinos around me use. The perfect chip for me is a chip that emulates the Paulson RHC chip as closely as possible.
Actual Review:
The Tina Web Mold chip is a high quality chip. I pretty much wrote off China clays after buying samples of Nevada Jacks and Nile Clubs as they had horrendous quality control. The Nevada Jacks and Nile Clubs were warped with endless spinners, had bad flashing, and were very slick. The Tina chips have none of those issues.
The Good:
The web mold design allows them to stack well. They probably stack better than actual Paulson RHCs. There’s also no “wobble”, by which I mean if you grab a stack of 10 and pinch the sides they compress on one side and fan out on the other (not sure if there’s an actual term for this). The weight is consistent on the chips when measured, though about half a gram lighter than I would like. There is flashing on the chips, but the flashing is a minuscule rounded dot and line that you have to actually look for. The flashing isn’t sharp and is not pronounced enough to count as a detriment.
The color and variety is amazing, you can get these in so many colors and designs, including custom designs, so no complaint there.
One of my concerns with the chip was the durability of the coloring. When I heard that these ceramics were white chips that were dyed I worried the chip color would rub away over time. Over the course of several weeks I would rub two chips together fairly hard while watching TV or a movie in the evenings. While this isn’t a perfect representation of normal chip wear I believe it is much harsher than what poker chips would see in a home game over several years. The chips held up very well with little to no discoloration. The labels are also durable. They’re a professional looking plastic coated style and didn’t come off when I tried picking at them.
For price these chips are in a decent spot. 50 to 60 cents a chip for the quality and various design options is a fine price.
The Bad:
With all those positives you may be wondering why I didn’t go with them, and there are two key reasons that I’ll expand on down below.
First, the chips are too hard. It may sound like a nitpick, but I don’t like the hard feeling of the chips. It gives them a fake feel that’s too off from the Paulson RHCs I know and love. The hardness also causes the chips to have a more plastic sounding shuffle that I don’t like.
Second, the edges are too sharp. The edges aren’t as sharp as some of the other ceramics I tried, but they’re sharp enough to make chip maneuvering and shuffling feel awkward. Given that the plastic is so hard I don’t expect the edges to wear down over time.
Final Thoughts:
That’s it! Those two small downsides were enough for me to go with Milano over Tina. As a player the hard feel and shuffleability were deal breakers for me. I do understand why most people will like the Tinas more, and in a lot of ways they are higher quality. The chips aren’t for me though.
Attachments
Last edited:
