Observation #1 - The Chip
Rack 10th Edition
following was posted by Jim on
Chip Board on June 25th, 2004
past when a new publication was released I would try to
write-up an objective review of my first impressions and
share them with all who cared to read what I wrote.
attempted to do it an objective manner. I assured myself
that what I was writing would be accepted by the
professional authors as my honest impression of their work.
I never intentionally degraded ANY book I reviewed even if I
did not agree with all of its contents.
honest, any reference book is a welcomed addition to our
hobby. It takes a great deal of work and the assistance of
others to put it together and out on the market.
It is a
finished product the authors have a right to be proud of it.
It takes BIG individuals to handle others impressions
without the discussion deteriorating to worthless dribble.
years back when Campiglia & Wells released their first
annual edition of "The Official U.S. Casino Chip Price
Guide" I decided I would review it and pass my impressions
on to my fellow collectors. I really liked the book. I
thought it was well done and enjoyed the opportunity to have
pictures of chips I had never seen. I also welcomed a
reference book that had, in my opinion, a more realistic
price spread than any other book of its type on the market.
mentioned in my review that I did not care for the
introduction of a grading standard for our hobby. I believed
than as I believe now our hobby did not/does not need a
formal type of grading system.
would have thought that what I wrote was equal to accusing
someone of "terrible things". There was a blow-up on this
board that I am sure once again resulted in destroyed
friendships and relationships. Many readers voiced their
input and before you know it the posts degenerated once
again into personal attacks. The authors who obviously
worked long and hard on their project, in my opinion, lost
the ability to discuss ANY aspect of their book objectively.
However, others on this board ALSO lost their ability to be
end I really wonder if anything was accomplished. Today I
like to believe I get along with the authors better than I
ever have. James laughs and talks with me at shows and we
seem to have a mutual respect for one another.
this observation is not about "The Official U.S. Casino Chip
Price Guide". It is not even a review for "The Chip Rack"
edition # 10. What this observation is about is a serious
disagreement I have with what is contained in this newly
authors of this new edition of the Chip Rack have published
an increase in value for chips that have been "repaired". Am
I dreaming? You mean to tell me and all of my associate
collectors that when an individual like Whalen repairs a
chip it has increased in value? Hey Chip Rack authors! -
What kind of message are you sending to new collectors and
those of us who have fought this battle since day one? How
on earth could you do this? Don't you understand the damage
this is going to do to our hobby? How come these "repaired"
chips are not listed as an "A" value? Don't you believe you
are encouraging the repair of chips by demonstrating through
a price increase the reward for having them fixed? I think
so and find this policy personally unacceptable.
next? Should we induct Whalen into our Hall of Fame?
"guys" this makes me sick to my stomach. I don't agree with
your policy and I believe it will cause 'GREAT" damage and
harm to our hobby for future generations.
one, except Pam G. (porkchop415) has even mentioned this
repulsive act. We find it easier to "attack" Joe for his
misguided statement involving our building fund as though HE
is guilty of some crime.
maybe we should all fiddle while repairing chips becomes the
norm, grading and slabbing comes back and we verbally beat
up "new" collectors because they did not ask a question IN
WHAT WE CONSIDER to be the proper format and words. People
"we" got much bigger problems than Joe's uninformed
statement about the building fund.