I have been following the "discussions" between you and David Spragg over the years. Basically, David shows in detail why he believes what he believes. You refute his findings because you were there, or knew people, or have been collecting longer. Do you disbelieve all historical research because the researchers were not present at the event? I guess you disbelieve all archaeological evidence too.a

I now expect that you will disagree with David now matter what he says or why. How does proof of purchase of a casino prove that no fake chips were made later? What proof do you have that Borland did NOT make chips after the casino closed. The evidence of the insert chip shapes is compelling. I don't know enough to know for sure, but without any counter-evidence, I am swayed by David's research. He has always explained his reasoning and it makes sense. Merely saying there were real chips does not show that the chips discussed by David are those real chips. Anecdotal evidence is nice, and persuasive in the absence of evidence to the contrary. How do you explain the existence of inserts that were never made until years after the casino closed?

Michael Siskin