2015 HOF Voting Thread (3 Viewers)

[Tommy]

Maybe a calendar is in order for this site. Just say'n!

We had one for 2014, had a couple of custom sets in it.
http://www.pokerchipforum.com/showthread.php/1563-2014-PCF-Calendar-Purchase-Info?highlight=calendar

If anyone would like to help do one for 2016, let me know. Thanks.

 

[courage]

Notes on "process." My opinion only.

My comments came from a chip enthusiast perspective that was disappointed with the way this process was done. No rules, criteria, or guidelines posted for the community and no rationale for why these were chosen. How did the committee settle on 21 sets? That's a odd number... If the process was explained or was transparent along the way that's one thing, but it's like bam here ya go. Personally I love poker chips and think that all sets should be celebrated for their story and uniqueness.

You and others have made the assumption that this was some kind of cronyism or that there were no criteria or guidelines. On the contrary, the committee discussed for DAYS attempting to define criteria by which to judge custom sets: mold, color combo, breakdown, is it a tribute set, what defines a tribute set, number of denoms, mixed manufacturer sets, what factor does group buy play if any, what degree the set owner is involved in design or even production, should owners be nominated for one set or more than one, etc. In the end it was discovered that we could not agree on any particular fixed criteria to determine a HoF set and we should leave it to the voters for intelligent discussion and debate, as misguided as that now appears. Yes, 21 is an odd number. There was a rationale that determined it. It's really not that important to the end result here.

I will not be participating either.

I don't support this exclusive approach as opposed to a broader celebration of the creativity of the whole of our community.

The committee members are great people. I know everyone personally, except for gopher blue, so I guess in fairness he may very well be a hooligan for all I know . I don't think they have bad intentions, their task is what I'm uncomfortable with.

It just feels wrong to me. When this issue first came up I gave the counsel to broaden the scope of inclusion, and I'm sorry that its gone the other way. Participating in this endorses the task and the outcome. I would feel the same way if I were the creator of any of the winning sets.

I respect this point of view. In one sense, all the chip pr0n is here for us to enjoy and celebrate. However, I don't think this process detracts from that. I also don't feel all sets are equal or that everyone deserves a trophy.

I sort of agree with Payback's thought that there may have been back-scratching, even if unintentional. The only way to avoid collusion, or the appearance of such, would be if the committee members voluntarily removed their own sets from consideration.

But that obviously wasn't the case.

Perhaps the committee truly feels that their chips are amongst the best ever made - we all think that. Perhaps the idea of committee collusion was so far off their radar that it never crossed their minds. Maybe it was so obvious to them that they suppressed the very memory of their collusion.

In the end, committee members whose sets are nominated by themselves should have an asterisk like home run records during baseball's juicing years.

That said, I voted. There are great sets here, and one committee member (but only one) has a nominated set that I believe belongs in the list. Moreover, jbutler does not have a nominated set. While I rarely agree admit to agreeing with jbutler, I believe him to be a man of principals over everything. You are not going to bribe, coerce, or threaten jbutler to agree to anything that he simply does not agree with. The whole nomination process probably lasted 2 weeks longer than it should have because he wasn't satisfied.

In short, I believe in this list because jbutler believes in this list.

I hesitate to respond to the accusations of collusion lest this line of senseless dialog persist, but I'll say two things, 1) mrtree addressed this, any committee of knowledgeable chip nerds will probably include some who own custom sets. Is it right that they be excluded? I don't think so. 2) this particular group are people of very high integrity imo; nothing against jbutler as an important member of the committee, but everyone worked very hard to refine a worthy list of nominees.

I think people should lighten up a little, and have a little more fun with this. No matter who is on the committee, or what the selection criteria is, its never going to be perfect. Hall of Fames are usually associated with Sports, where there are a number of statistics used as benchmarks. We are essentially judging Art which is 100% arbitrary and Subjective. No one should feel slighted that their custom set did not make the first list, and it does not mean they won't be included in future years.

Everyone who votes is voting subjectively as well. Some may be voting because they like the inlays, others because they like the spots. I personally did not vote for the Hitching Post, Redbelly or Boudoir sets, for the HOF, even though they are probably my top 3 favorites on the list. I believe that those sets are so great, because they were able to learn from some of the iconic sets before them, and I wanted to pay those sets their due in proper order.

I think the committee did a great job putting together a diverse list, and controlling a process that would easily spiral out of control if it were left to the entire community. I was glad to see JButler on the list, because he has a knack for remembering all of the classic sets that I lose track of. Those were some of the sets that convinced me to go custom.

Im sure no one on this committee would object to a Rival HOF committee coming up with a new set of standards and their own Top Ten....kind of like the Golden Globes vs. the Oscars.

Amen on all counts. This process is similar to sports and yet not. It's not like we're picking a HoF centerfielder or running back, it's more like determining the best team of all time, pretty subjective.

I like this -- The People's Choice Awards!

Yeah, no drama here -- even though I can think of three or four stellar sets that were not included, any of which would blow 90% of the nominated sets out of the water.

I've no objection to you leading another thread, Dave. You seem to have all the answers, don't keep us in the dark. What sets were missed? Please bear in mind you need to be able to produce pr0n of such sets. Much of it has gone missing from the blue wall and the committee had to resort to quite a few alternate measures to obtain adequate pics of many sets.

These chip sets are all beautiful--some more beautiful than others. Their are way too many fantastic sets that did not make this list. The chiptalk calendars would be a much more exhaustive list to draw from especially if you are going to seed the Hall with 10 entries.

I think every set mentioned so far ITT as to "why didn't it make it?" was on the list of committee members' at some point or another but did not secure enough votes for nomination. All committee members had sets they championed that did not make the initial cut, and I have at least two I wish were out there. There will be other years. CT calendars and a host of other methods were used to search for nominees.

Just voted. Some beautiful sets being displayed that I've never seen before. That's what this is all about anyways, the chips.

Amen. Thank you.

Reminds me of the Baseball Hall of Fame committee (writers) failing to initially select some of the old time players who more than deserved admittance. They got around to it. The iterative nature of this process ensures that worthwhile sets generally make it eventually.

- - - - - - - - - Updated - - - - - - - - -



^ this is the nature of an annual HoF voting process. I think the doubters will be surprised to learn that, at some point in the future, this will be a collection of great sets and will maybe inspire others to make custom sets.



There were sets that I'm fond of (including my own, obviously) that I didn't vote for because of the bolded text above. Everyone is going to have their own criteria and that's the point of this, so that's cool...but I had to vote for 2 sets that inspired me to make my custom set before I voted for mine.

I tried to find something to disagree with here, but couldn't. Label me a crony.

The problem with this idea is, new sets may wind up here, and not on CT. I seriously doubt the ChipTalk calendar will go through the amount of effort the HOF committee put forth, scouring 2 sites for the best sets ever made.

Agree, the calendar was a different process.

NOTES on SETS

The Contreras definitely need more love. They are byooootiful.

I think Contreras Landa has always been my #1 fav set. The $1 chip is so original and delicious. I'm sure I could eat a whole barrel.

Figuring out which sets up to 9 more to vote for will be difficult, but I'll say the committee process has given me new appreciation for some sets including the Cedar Room ASM version's color matching and Duy's Palace.

BTW, I have no objection to listing Suicide King Club under set owner ellased. There were only 2 sets made, his of 1000 and mine of 600, and we worked together with J5 for over a month on the inlays. ellased was quite busy and posted very little pr0n of it but his is the larger set.

 

[Mr Tree]

Contreras definitely has my vote. Need more love for my two favorites on this whole list though - both by toad94 - Silver Dust BCC and Cedar Room HHR. If Toad ever decides to have a meetup (not even sure where he lives) put me first on the list - he could switch out the chips every hour and still have an insane custom set in play at all times. Sooo jealous...

I had no idea how many amazing custom sets Toad94 has until we started doing this. I kept leafing through pages of sets and seeing his name over and over again.

 

[Mr Tree]

Ive always thought the Jockey Club was pretty cool. Your set is a fave and I hope I get a chance to play with it. .

Jeff, just caught this line. What night are you coming to S@PII? The Via Lacteas are going to be in play Friday night as the cash set.

 

[Poker Zombie]

We had one for 2014, had a couple of custom sets in it.
http://www.pokerchipforum.com/showthread.php/1563-2014-PCF-Calendar-Purchase-Info?highlight=calendar

If anyone would like to help do one for 2016, let me know. Thanks.

Try to remember this next winter. I would be down for a calendar!

 

[Mr Tree]

Reminds me of the Baseball Hall of Fame committee (writers) failing to initially select some of the old time players who more than deserved admittance. They got around to it.

I partially blame myself for this. I'm a relative Johnny come lately and part of the problem is when you are newer you assume others have been around a while. I think we really needed an Abby99 or someone with similar longevity in the community to nail down older sets. None of us felt a lot of comfort in diving into the legacy mother sets. Compounding the problem is the fact that after you go back about three years or so almost all the pic links are broken over at the blue wall so we just couldn't cull anything to work from.

 

[grandgnu]

voted! great sets..!

My 2 personal favs are Duys and Contreras Landa

Ditto, I just voted as well and I absolutely love the full chip printing, so fricken amazing on those chips. I am a sad panda that we can't get BCC customs anymore, would love to be able to do that someday with my Poseidons Palace concept

 

[abby99]

I partially blame myself for this. I'm a relative Johnny come lately and part of the problem is when you are newer you assume others have been around a while. I think we really needed an Abby99 or someone with similar longevity in the community to nail down older sets. None of us felt a lot of comfort in diving into the legacy mother sets. Compounding the problem is the fact that after you go back about three years or so almost all the pic links are broken over at the blue wall so we just couldn't cull anything to work from.

Thanks for the nod, Tom. Unfortunately, the timing was really bad for me. I am so honored that my Lady Luck Club BCC set was nominated for the HOF.

This might be a good time and place to bring everybody up to date on the broken links issue, seeing as how we're all interested in preserving the record of our hobby's full body of work. Because attachments were not possible in the earlier years, most members used third-party hosting sites like imageshack. Unfortunately, when imageshack started charging for its services and many members chose not to upgrade their accounts, links to photos on imageshack were severed and some members didn't upload new images to their gallery threads. Links to photos on other hosting sites (e.g., photoshop, imagur) break if the user reorganized their photos on those sites without updating the corresponding links on CT. Finally, some gallery threads include broken links to album photos. The album URLs changed as part of the recent upgrade, and redirects are in the works. In the meantime, these photos can be viewed in the albums themselves.

 

[pltrgyst]

I partially blame myself for this. I'm a relative Johnny come lately and part of the problem is when you are newer you assume others have been around a while. I think we really needed an Abby99 or someone with similar longevity in the community to nail down older sets. None of us felt a lot of comfort in diving into the legacy mother sets. Compounding the problem is the fact that after you go back about three years or so almost all the pic links are broken over at the blue wall so we just couldn't cull anything to work from.

I would hope that you all started with *all* the CT calendars and the single PCF calendar as references.

That said, I must admit that I am shocked to see that David P's ASM "H" mold Monopoly set didn't make the cut.

The committee's reluctance to establish rules or categories is a bit puzzling to me. I think that some basic HOF categories would make for more comprehensive and fairer recognition, such as a) "clay" (Paulson, ASM, BCC, etc.), b) ceramic, c) plastics (BJ, B&G, etc.), d) hot-stamp.

Without that, for example, I just can't see how ceramics will ever get the credit they deserve, or how any hot-stamp deserves overall recognition.

-- Larry

 

[Poker Zombie]

I hope that Tom and the other committee members don't take the many comments about the selection process too harshly. I know they made their decisions, and how to go about making those decisions, behind closed doors because this would still be in the planning stages if they didn't just take the ball and run with it. Even then, someone that logs in once a month would chime in that it was done wrong, or that a particular set was overlooked. I don't agree with all the selections, and I think there has been some great input after the fact (especially BGinGA's suggestion to only allow 50%+ votes into the HOF).

But there isn't a single "bad" set in the nomination group. I think by looking at the unfinished (at the time of this post) voting there are some clear standouts (Redbelly, Hitching Post, and Lady Luck). So I applaud the committee for doing the thankless job of developing the HoF. Sets like the Monopoly set will clearly make the Hall someday. Thats the beauty of making this an annual project. Comments here may influence next year's committee, without stagnating the project - because the inaugural nomination class has been selected, and over 60 people have voted. Even then, something will get missed, or someone will not like how the process was handled. They will make their suggestions, after year 2, and then year 3 will be even better.

 

[Mr Tree]

I hope that Tom and the other committee members don't take the many comments about the selection process too harshly. I know they made their decisions, and how to go about making those decisions, behind closed doors because this would still be in the planning stages if they didn't just take the ball and run with it. Even then, someone that logs in once a month would chime in that it was done wrong, or that a particular set was overlooked. I don't agree with all the selections, and I think there has been some great input after the fact (especially BGinGA's suggestion to only allow 50%+ votes into the HOF).

But there isn't a single "bad" set in the nomination group. I think by looking at the unfinished (at the time of this post) voting there are some clear standouts (Redbelly, Hitching Post, and Lady Luck). So I applaud the committee for doing the thankless job of developing the HoF. Sets like the Monopoly set will clearly make the Hall someday. Thats the beauty of making this an annual project. Comments here may influence next year's committee, without stagnating the project - because the inaugural nomination class has been selected, and over 60 people have voted. Even then, something will get missed, or someone will not like how the process was handled. They will make their suggestions, after year 2, and then year 3 will be even better.

Thank you PZ and spot on. That's why half the committee rotates out each year. Also we required 60% of the committee to nominate a set to take it to voting.

The list of sets that ALMOST made it is over twice the length of the list that did. All of the sets that have been mentioned (Mabuhay Bay, Via Lactea, Monopoly, etc.) all came up. As a matter of fact for the Monopoly set one of the other members actually lobbied us to reconsider it and I had five pounds of pressure on a six pound trigger to add it to my list of nominees (which would have brought it to voting.) so blame me lol.

Our overriding philosophy was we would rather have sets that didn't make it to voting that deserved to than have sets that did make it to voting that didn't. In a subjective environment like this that is no small task. Next year half the committee will change and there will also be new sets so there should be some fresh competition.

 

[Mental Nomad]

The sets are beautiful. I may not vote because I can't decide on which to exclude.

I'm sad, though, not to see any ceramics make the nominations.

 

[Tommy]

The sets are beautiful. I may not vote because I can't decide on which to exclude.

I'm sad, though, not to see any ceramics make the nominations.

I didn't look at that way and I didn't use all 10 votes either. (7 or 8 maybe) I picked the chips that I liked the most, ticked the check box, and clicked submit. : (Maybe the PCF Tourney chips will make in next year. )

 

[spikeithard]

 

[Puggy]

Done. Thanks for the organizers. This was really tough.

 

[bmichaelhorn]

I don't mean to offend or start a debate as much as become informed... I've seen "the old orchard" set on multiple best of lists and always been a little confused by its inclusion as it doesn't quite grab my aesthetic attention. It's definitely a set before my time so im wondering if it broke some new ground at the time? I do appreciate the fading inlays, and old timey feel and it is a very cohesive set. I would like to hear someone who was around when it came out tell me about the discussion surrounding the set. Like I said its a set that doesn't immediately strike me aesthetically so legitimately interested in others take on it and some of its history. Thanks!

 

[atomiktoaster]

I don't mean to offend or start a debate as much as become informed... I've seen "the old orchard" set on multiple best of lists and always been a little confused by its inclusion as it doesn't quite grab my aesthetic attention. It's definitely a set before my time so im wondering if it broke some new ground at the time? I do appreciate the fading inlays, and old timey feel and it is a very cohesive set. I would like to hear someone who was around when it came out tell me about the discussion surrounding the set. Like I said its a set that doesn't immediately strike me aesthetically so legitimately interested in others take on it and some of its history. Thanks!

FWIW, I find the inlay design exceptional. It's well balanced, and has a lot of detail while remaining perfectly legible. I'd probably put it second to the Hitching Post chips. I can see your point about the chips as a whole though, especially outside the $1 and the dime.

I only voted for 5 sets (and the Old Orchard wasn't one of them), all of which are doing very well in the totals. I guess my taste isn't all that unique.

 

[chipjoker]

Took me a little while, but I finally voted....

 

[bmichaelhorn]

FWIW, I find the inlay design exceptional. It's well balanced, and has a lot of detail while remaining perfectly legible. I'd probably put it second to the Hitching Post chips. I can see your point about the chips as a whole though, especially outside the $1 and the dime.

I only voted for 5 sets (and the Old Orchard wasn't one of them), all of which are doing very well in the totals. I guess my taste isn't all that unique.

Agree re inlay. Some of the color choices on the chips seem awkward but inlay by itself is strong.

 

[jbutler]

I don't mean to offend or start a debate as much as become informed... I've seen "the old orchard" set on multiple best of lists and always been a little confused by its inclusion as it doesn't quite grab my aesthetic attention. It's definitely a set before my time so im wondering if it broke some new ground at the time? I do appreciate the fading inlays, and old timey feel and it is a very cohesive set. I would like to hear someone who was around when it came out tell me about the discussion surrounding the set. Like I said its a set that doesn't immediately strike me aesthetically so legitimately interested in others take on it and some of its history. Thanks!

i love that set. it may be one that i championed during the nomination process, but i can't recall specifically. i can give the background on why the set might stand out in some members' minds as notable and i'll also say what i personally like about the set.

it was among the first sets produced on the hourglass mold. i know that mold doesn't get a lot of love, but its debut was a huge deal and occurred very close in time to the opening up of the spot patterns available to consumers. this set took advantage of both openings.

perhaps the above still causes me to give the set a little more credit than i would otherwise. my honest opinion is that it doesn't, but i don't expect anyone to credit my self-assessment as i rarely credit others'. even now when i look at the set, though, i adore that inlay. the slogan up top is great, the artwork is flawless, and the fade-out color-matching gives it a really professional look. i also think the chip base and spot color choices are extremely well-done. the $5 is a stone cold classic for me and the quarter is close behind. the 3A14 spot pattern is also underused imo - probably because it's difficult to use a four-color chip with such a simple pattern - but works extremely well here.

there are a couple other sets that could have been contenders for "legacy" admission into the HoF if the committee had chosen to take up such a task (perhaps next years' will) which will not likely get in otherwise: C U Next Tuesday, Red Room (TRK). that's too bad imo, but i understand how those sets might not be as appealing as some of the more recent extravagantly-designed sets. but to me, the Old Orchard and Cedar Room (ASM) sets both hold up against the best of what we've seen over the past couple of years.

 

[Mr Tree]

^^^what Jack said.

Inlay design is huge for me and I think this set has an almost perfect inlay.

 

[Mr Tree]

This also circles back on legacy sets again. I like the idea but no one was comfortable with defining them. Is Old Orchard a legacy set? The Red Room?

If we were comfortable defining them I would have said we could send a couple straight through without voting as they are handicapped against modern sets with level 10 spot patterns.

For reference my definition of a legacy set is a set that occurred before many modern options were available and that had fundamental and seminal design ideas which have echoed down through to modern sets.

We just didn't have anybody that felt too comfortable saying exactly which sets these were.

 

[courage]

I echo most of what jbutler said regarding The Old Orchard, the quarter and $5 are my fav chips. Perhaps it's a happy coincidence, but I doubt it: apple growing is a seasonal activity so the hourglass mold was perfect for this as well as other themes. I'm not sure I'd want a big set on the hourglass mold but even if doing these today it's one of those must-have elements for the theme! The color matching gradient always has an impressive effect on this set as Jack described.

The set has always struck me as classic and simple and an awesome tribute to a game/place loved by the owner.

You can see split spots in the combos from before ASM refined all the difficult issues of production. Does not detract for me in the least on these, breaking new ground. [emoji1]

 

[jbutler]

This also circles back on legacy sets again. I like the idea but no one was comfortable with defining them. Is Old Orchard a legacy set? The Red Room?

If we were comfortable defining them I would have said we could send a couple straight through without voting as they are handicapped against modern sets with level 10 spot patterns.

For reference my definition of a legacy set is a set that occurred before many modern options were available and that had fundamental and seminal design ideas which have echoed down through to modern sets.

We just didn't have anybody that felt too comfortable saying exactly which sets these were.

i agree with your definition of a legacy set and would say that the Old Orchard doesn't qualify. imo the "modern" options began when ASM started letting folks use the 3V pattern. as i said above, i think the Old Orchard gets a bit of a bump in the minds of some because it was one of the first to make use of modern patterns, but i think what handicaps it now is simply time. most folks are accustomed to thinking a lot about the current classic sets and the Old Orchard just doesn't appear on their radar as often so they're less likely to vote for it. not much we can do about that and i don't think the HoF should try to tell people what they should like.

that last sentiment is the one that keeps me from being totally on board with the idea of legacy admissions, though i'm definitely open to persuasion. if we were to look at legacy sets, the first ones that come to my mind are: C U Next Tuesday, Red Room (TRK), and Casino Antarctica. i'm sure there are some big ones i'm not remember, though, so i'd want someone with a really thorough historical knowledge of customs to give some guidance.

 

[grandgnu]

<----- still can't believe Duy's Palace isn't getting more love. those chips look SO freaking beautiful

 

[pltrgyst]

<----- still can't believe Duy's Palace isn't getting more love. those chips look SO freaking beautiful

Yep. Still my all-time favorites, and hands-down most beautiful chips ever.

-- Larry

 

[bmichaelhorn]

i love that set. it may be one that i championed during the nomination process, but i can't recall specifically. i can give the background on why the set might stand out in some members' minds as notable and i'll also say what i personally like about the set.

it was among the first sets produced on the hourglass mold. i know that mold doesn't get a lot of love, but its debut was a huge deal and occurred very close in time to the opening up of the spot patterns available to consumers. this set took advantage of both openings.

perhaps the above still causes me to give the set a little more credit than i would otherwise. my honest opinion is that it doesn't, but i don't expect anyone to credit my self-assessment as i rarely credit others'. even now when i look at the set, though, i adore that inlay. the slogan up top is great, the artwork is flawless, and the fade-out color-matching gives it a really professional look. i also think the chip base and spot color choices are extremely well-done. the $5 is a stone cold classic for me and the quarter is close behind. the 3A14 spot pattern is also underused imo - probably because it's difficult to use a four-color chip with such a simple pattern - but works extremely well here.

there are a couple other sets that could have been contenders for "legacy" admission into the HoF if the committee had chosen to take up such a task (perhaps next years' will) which will not likely get in otherwise: C U Next Tuesday, Red Room (TRK). that's too bad imo, but i understand how those sets might not be as appealing as some of the more recent extravagantly-designed sets. but to me, the Old Orchard and Cedar Room (ASM) sets both hold up against the best of what we've seen over the past couple of years.

Thanks! This is the kind of background info I was looking for.

RE courages comment about the hourglass and time passing / orchard being a seasonal thing; that never occurred to me but works well.

 

[bmichaelhorn]

Yep. Still my all-time favorites, and hands-down most beautiful chips ever.

-- Larry

Agreed. I think that if a quick blurb or description of this set was included Duys palace may be doing better.

Guys....the creator of this set illustrated each of his male family members personally and iconified them in the way of roman leaders ala Atlantic city ceasers palace chips. Oversize inlays to show off his skills and amazing color selections.

 

[atomiktoaster]

Agreed. I think that if a quick blurb or description of this set was included Duys palace may be doing better.

Guys....the creator of this set illustrated each of his male family members personally and iconified them in the way of roman leaders ala Atlantic city ceasers palace chips. Oversize inlays to show off his skills and amazing color selections.

If the picture of all the inlays had the same resolution as the shot of just the $500, that would help a lot. Even with your blurb, I had to really go back and squint at the pic. I'm not a fan of oversize inlays, for whatever reason (though I'll make an exception for PNYs).

 

[bmichaelhorn]

If the picture of all the inlays had the same resolution as the shot of just the $500, that would help a lot. Even with your blurb, I had to really go back and squint at the pic. I'm not a fan of oversize inlays, for whatever reason (though I'll make an exception for PNYs).

I know I wonder if the pics on ct got eaten they were a lot better