Baca's Mailbag, Dec 16

December 8, 2011 - Proposed standard ASTM WK34588, Practice for Operation of Low Impact Paintball Game Fields, enables those in paintball industry to create low-impact games for potential players who might like to try paintball but are initially intimidated by its intensity. According to Paintball Training Institute president Bob McGuire, standard outlines game organization, management, and safety protocols that slow down the game and limit shooting proximity to increase enjoyment for inexperienced players.

Would the 50 cal paintball be part of this in the future?

The short answer is: could be. But it isn't yet and the proposed standard isn't about 50 cal, it's much bigger than that.
Too cryptic? Re-read the statement. It means what it says and that means 50 cal might be part of that process. The concept is about expanding the boundaries of what it means to play paintball—and at the core of that is something called the “welt factor” and pre-existing ASTM standards with respect to age. Those standards are the reason that 10 years old is the current age minimum that insurers won't underwrite below. But what if paintball could be played by 8 year olds in a more compact environment without the existing “welt factor” (and pain) as part of the equation? Does a broader definition of what paintball is make it more inclusive, potentially more popular? Does a new and expanded demographic create more future, long term paintball players? Does paintball finally get the girls to join in if the “welt factor” is substantially reduced?
See what I mean about bigger than 50 cal alone. The fact is however that a small(er) ball could easily be part of the equation—and low impact paintball isn't a new idea. The initial industry interest seems to pre-date the PMI merger and may have influenced their purchase of RP Scherer but was cut short by the economic necessities that drove the merger with National Paintball Sports. And it's unclear (at least right now though Mr. C is on the case) how much if any of PMI's interest carried over but it appears there is still some measure of industry interest. I might even be inclined to suggest it's quite a lot of interest but I only have that feeling based on what sources wouldn't talk about. I mean if it was a non-issue everybody would say so, right? (Okay, the good liars will say anything, and do, but even though we's talking paintball, not everyone is a good liar.)
I know what your thinking. GI Sportz, d'oh! Hold on. Yes, GI tried to make a big 50 cal push a couple years ago (how time flies) but their focus (apparently) was less about low impact and more about competing with and replacing 68. Seems to me there's some overlap there but rumor has it the low impact community—yes, there seems to be one—wasn't universally on board with that effort. It seems there are some major paintball interests that see low impact paintball as a viable gateway to general paintball play. And, no, I don't know what the ins & outs of that are/were? be but it's intriguing, isn't it? It also seems 50 cal isn't universally viewed as the ideal small ball size from the low impact side of the equation but that the economic advantages held sway. (And now all the major manufacturers have the dies to convert to 50 cal if it comes up again.)
Does HydroTec's paintball fit into the low impact equation? The answer appears to be not at this time. It seemed to me that a paintball that was mostly water with a shell thickness that could be very precisely controlled might be ideal for this kind of application but it seems HydroTec hasn't made any overtures to the ASTM. Yet. (Although my ASTM contact is reticent to discuss any matter other than what they are working on—like the obvious tie-ins to various industries that might have an interest in the outcome of their efforts.) But that got me thinking—and call me crazy (I'm used to it)--but look at some of the, I hate to call them trends, that VFTD and others have reported and/or commented on in the past. Industry conferences aimed at paintball field owners including Airsoft & laser tag. Tippmann introducing a laser tag variant using their paintball-based equipment. And toy giant Hasbro with their expanding universe of Nerf stuff that both mimics paintball but is also safe enough to play virtually anywhere. How much more low impact can you get?

And the ultimate question—for today anyway—is low impact paintball a counter to all these other shooting and tag games? Or are they all best seen as potential gateways to future paintball play?

Small Ball Assault

Facefull has the skinny on a massive deal between Syder 50 cal and Giant Paintball Parks, which operates SC Village, Hollywood Sports, Cali Paintball & San Diego Giant Paintball Parks and affiliates. Throughout the debate about small ball it has been suggested the real hurdle isn't today's player but the big recreational sites and with the purchase of 4K markers Giant Paintball Parks has made a--yes, I had to do it--giant commitment to small ball in their future operations.

Tomorrow--breaking down the latest in the paintball wars.

Over the weekend, VFTD restructures the penalty system for Race 2 competition paintball.

Does Small Ball Still Have A Future? (or) Rise of the Evolt

I heard a story this past weekend. It sounds like science fiction. I'm unwilling to even call it a rumor at this point so let's just say it's speculation. But I give it credence for a couple of reasons; the technology exists and it comes from the same source that gave me the original 50 cal story--which nobody believed at first--and the JT Sports for sale story--which JT denied vociferously until the deal was done.
For the VFTD record on small ball type "50 caliber" into the search box and you will get a good selection of past posts going all the way back to the original post from May 15, 2009, 'The Ultimate Paintball Conspiracy.'
With a vocal element of the paintball community suspicious months before the official release and a firestorm of competing claims and "scientific evidence" as samples of 50 cal became available the mood of the marketplace did not (and does not) appear to be particularly receptive to small ball. Add industry resistance from companies like Tippmann and what we know of real world pricing where 50 cal paint is available and it's easy to conclude the whole effort is a likely bust. But that could be a very premature assessment.
VFTD is on the record as suggesting the only market that matters is the recreational rental market. If small ball can make real inroads there the Caliber War will be on. But that too seems unlikely when a company like Tippmann won't play ball and the current economic environment isn't encouraging when it comes to refitting rental markers and carrying additional inventory for two sizes of paintballs. But even so...
Take a look at this. Do you remember what it is? It was called the Evolt. It used an 18 volt battery to generate an air pulse that fired a paintball without an air tank. A production model was never released. Probably because it was bulky and slow.
But imagine a streamlined, up-dated version of the Evolt. One that no longer has to propel a 68 caliber paintball. One that has taken advantage of advances in battery technology. One that only needs to be able to shoot a projectile a fraction of 68 caliber paintball's weight and mass. One that can be delivered to the marketplace at a price point that suits the rental market. Would a rental gun that needs no airfills grab the attention of the rental market? Would it be enough to overcome resistance to the small ball?
I don't know but we may find out sooner rather than later. Is it a hoax? Could it possibly be real? I'm told it's release may only be months away.
I know how this sounds but I'm told the Evolt project was never shelved and that the development work continued. And between the marker's potential and the significant weight & mass savings of the small ball that the combo is a reality and coming soon. If so, will it change everything or prove to be only a niche oddity?

The Further Adventures of Small Ball

Or, the Rise or Demise of Joy Division?

You may recall after Phoenix I reported on a conversation I had about small ball and more specifically GI Milsim's future plans. At that time the North American focus looked to be aimed directly at the mil-sim market--which still seems to be the case.

But Euroland looks a bit different. A new French team Boost Air Rennes joined the SPL--bought their way in--were handed an open spot--whatever--sponsored by Paint Distribution, the French distributor of GI Milsim in order, one presumes, to give 50 cal paint and guns a boost. (Yes, I did that on purpose.) They appear to have played one match and I'm quite certain that short of a podium finish, SPL or not, nobody cares. (Although I suppose it's conceivable that French forums are full of Boost Air Rennes watchers--but I doubt it.)

Which is where Joy comes into play. (I am assuming the Nanos in question are of the small ball variety although I have yet to receive official confirmation. Far as I can tell GI Milsim do not produce a 68 cal version of the Nano.) It's a no-brainer that Joy has the profile to make their use of small ball and the Nano marker a story of interest regardless of results--and they have a history of being one of the CPL's top teams as well. That makes Dark Sports interest obvious and standard operating procedure for a new company intent on promoting its products. On the flip side this could be a make or break situation for tournament small ball. If Joy don't continue with their consistently high results won't small ball get the blame, deserved or undeserved?

Of greater interest (to me) is what it says about Joy (and Angel Paintball Sports) and sponsorship in the present environment. Over the years no team has shown greater brand and sponsor loyalty than Joy in their relationship with Angel but the present realities (at both Angel and Joy) are compelling changes. It's swell to say Joy will continue using Angels in non-MS events but the simple fact is the MS is Joy's showcase series and the majority of fans will only follow those results. And how does a team of Joy's rep and longevity start a season without a paint deal? And how is it Angel allowed things to come to this pass? Doesn't this mean that either they simply aren't able to support Joy the way they once did or that they couldn't justify making that level of commitment?

Tourney ball doesn't need anymore cautionary tales. What we need are some new success stories--which leaves me a little torn when it comes to the future of small ball in the competitive paintball arena.

UPDATE: Sems there's some contradictory info out there. For links and the latest check out the comments.

Small Ball Chat

Had a brief conversation about small ball with somebody who knows while sitting under the refs tent at Phoenix waiting for our semi-final match on Sunday. (See? I'm getting better. I can type the word "Phoenix" today. Who knows what's in store for tomorrow.) I brought up the subject of small ball.
There were two elements to the conversation I found interesting. I enquired about release of product to the North American market and was told things were going so well in Euroland it was gobbling up everything the GI Milsim peeps can produce--but that the American market wasn't being forsaken.
I was aware that product was moving in Europe--if you mean being ordered and filling shelf and warehouse space. What I have yet to see is much indication of actual retail sales. Of course there could be more of that than I'm aware but the sales end of the equation doesn't seem to be going great guns, product or otherwise.
Of greater interest to me were comments regarding the U.S. market. I asked if there would be a presence at HB and the answer was no, certainly nothing big and showy. Tourney paintball wasn't the primary market. (Now that comment may only reflect a retrenchment or recognition of present resistence but I was pleased to hear it.) The big efforts will target some of the biggest of the Big Games looking to connect with a different (and more appropriate?) demographic where they play. If so I suspect small ball proponents will not be confronted with the same intensity and negativity they have been even prior to release of sample guns and paint at World Cup '09.

If Bob Says So I Believe It

No, not really--if I worked for the TSA I'd profile Jesus for extra security attention--but it sounded sufficiently jingoistic to be right for a post on small ball, don't you think? The kids at ProPaintball have posted a video of Bob huffing and puffing and blowing a plastic tray down using a 68 cal Victory and a modified 50 cal Victory for comparison purposes.
Best I could tell Bob was advancing 3 basic ideas; small ball shoots and breaks fine at short to medium-ish range (75 feet), small ball can shoot through brush, tree branches and other woodsy obstacles more effectively than 68 cal and small ball delivers less impact at similar velocities. Given those factors 50 cal deserves at least consideration as an alternative to 68 cal in some situations, like games with younger players or new players where the difference between a good time and never again is the potential pain involved.
The first idea is fine as far as it goes but it doesn't go far enough--and elsewhere in the video Bob admits the range is reduced compared to 68 cal and the paint is more susceptible to factors like wind--so kudos for being straight on the observed effects. I just didn't find it particularly persuasive, nor does it motivate me to reconsider the virtues of small ball.
I'm not buying the second notion at all. The video example was not shooting through brush. It was shooting through gaps. Back in the day the VM 68 (and later the first gen clamshell Timmy) punched holes through dense Florida palmettos. You didn't need to see your target. Just start railing and if you hit something, or somebody, you were rewarded with a satisfying yelp unless, of course, you were simply stripping the bark off trees.
But I am buying into the whole reduced impact argument though there is a caveat; breakability. The paint has to break as consistently as a 68 cal paintball, grade of paint for grade of paint. While I find Bob's concern for the children who are our future both uplifting and personally gratifying I also find it more than a little ironic given--how to say this, Bob's past association with guns of dubious legality.

On a completely separate subject one of the first things I did when I heard about 50 cal was to explore the possibility of producing a generic retrofit kit (or two) to convert 68 cal guns to 50 cal. It became apparent in short order that while not hard to do every kit would have to be gun or manufacturer specific and that if 50 cal looked good the manufacturers would jump on it. One other thing concerned me: the possibility of Dye modifying their eyepipe patent. They do have one, don't they?

Comments on Richmond Italia / Tom Cole podcast interview

Hit the link to drop by Blast Radius Woodsball Podcast. Their latest is an interview of Richmond and Tom hosted by Wayne. Wayne does a solid job and even takes a stab or two at some tougher questions though it's clear he found it a bit uncomfortable. Overall it's interesting, informative and long. Check it out. (H/T to a VFTD correspondent for the head's up.) For the rest of you lazy slackers here's a link to the podcast. [ http://cdn2.libsyn.com/brwp/BRWP132.mp3?nvb=20091214012442&nva=20091215013442&t=08c455c0bec811fe4de5a ] (Don't include the brackets, doh!) Given that competitive ballers are barely 1% of paintball (Is that retail or wholesale?) I guess the Blast Radius kids won't notice a tiny blip of extra visitors so you can probably slip in and slip out on the down low. Just don't tell any of your friends. Not that there's anything wrong with woodsball.

With apologies to Tom most of my comments will focus on things Richmond said during the podcast. Tom was repping Kingman which will also be making a substantial move (like GI Milsim) into the 50 cal arena in 2010. However, the impetus and much of the controversy has revolved around GI Milsim's introduction of 50 caliber paint and Richmond's remarks addressed a number of hotly debated issues. Given the length of the interview I'm just picking out a few of the highlights.

Richmond is glib, engaging and, I suspect, used to getting people to see things his way and I'm going to try hard (and perhaps fail) to avoid too much nit-picking but there were a few having his cake and eating it too moments. Like being a manufacturer of hammers so that every problem looks like a nail. Like intimating issues in the paint industry are all the responsibility of forces from the "Orient." (I didn't know anyone used that word anymore but I kinda liked it. Score one for Richmond for not being PC.) Like decrying the detrimental pricing policies (and paint wars as it were) without taking any responsibility for his time at Procaps. Playing the white knight returned to save paintball from the forces of fear and propaganda (while basically accusing anyone with questions or concerns about 50 cal of some ulterior motive.) And, remembering his venue thought it was about time the minuscule portion of paintball that plays competitively (The One Percenters) should stop telling everybody else how to play and with what equipment. [Not exactly Henry V but if there were stage directions that's the place everyone would murmur and shake their torches and pitchforks.] Okay, enough, you get the idea, I'm sure.

Up first is cost of play. Clearly, cost of play--predominantly the paint cost--is killing paintball and 50 cal will be cheaper. At least 30% cheaper according to Richmond. (More later on this point.) But as it turns out other things are killing paintball, too. Like the pain--or should we say discomfort? 50 cal addresses that issue too. Cheaper and less painful. It's a no brainer being opposed primarily by other (backward) paint producers who know they can't compete in the modern world what with new-fangled computerized gizmos up against chains and pulleys and the grunt of slave labor. (I added the colorful bits.)

Given that economizing is a 50 cal claim Wayne asked about related gear expenses and specifically conversion kits. Spyder is planning on leaving that to aftermarket producers by and large while Richmond suggested it was a decent transitional option. Not as good as a made for 50 cal marker which will be more internally air efficient. (Besides, conversion kits don't really fit the marketing scheme or the future GI Milsim bottom line. Just saying.)

A more difficult topic was performance where Richmond focused on breaking consistency relative to similar grades of 68 cal and travel distance. Generally however he insisted real world performance was so close that most players wouldn't notice a difference. He was also only ballpark when it came to demonstrating knowledge of the numbers and ratios involved. (Pay no attention to the science, if you haven't shot a 50 cal paintball for yourself you can't know what the result will be --and if you have and disagree you're an agent of fear & propaganda. He didn't actually say that--this particular time but the implication remains. And I like saying agent of fear and propaganda.) Tom's comment about performance equivalency went something like "a seven foot drop difference over 200 feet is negligible compared to all the benefits of 50 cal paint." [An admitted paraphrase but it's close.] Elsewhere Richmond did admit that tourney grade paint still needed improvement but that rec and field paint were ready to go.

There is no intention on GI Milsim's part to raise the allowed FPS above 300 as one of the advantages is the lesser sting of impact. Besides, there's no need since performance is so close already.

When asked if he expected 50 cal to eventually dominate the market the way 68 does now Richmond didn't want to say that as it would reinforce the whole Pinky & the Brain world domination meme but, hey, if it's better in every way it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume it just might, you know, replace 68 at some point. So, yes, he expects it will but it's not a nefarious plot.

When asked about specific pricing Richmond couldn't give any actual prices yet but suggested that when it does hit the market widely it should be around 30% cheaper or else you're being ripped off. From comments throughout Richmond seemed to imply that regular players and local fields should both see the reward of cheaper paint though exactly how that would be accomplished he wasn't asked.

Fairly early on, around the time of the introduction of dark forces from the Orient, Richmond discussed, in some detail, elements of paint manufacturing. This was in relation to cost, to a lesser degree, and the functionality of the 50 cal paintball now when compared to the past. The claim was the dark forces wouldn't be able to compete and see similar cost savings at their end due to obsolete outdated equipment they didn't want to have to replace. With respect to the 50 cal ball itself current technology allows more control over shell thickness than in the past which answers concerns about the smaller sphere, breakability, etc. and even materiel costs in part. I have no objection to any of this and it could be absolutely correct for all I know--but that's why I consult my paint guy on stuff like this. His take was that the Chinese are by and large all using the same equipment used by the big boys here though he couldn't vouch for India. Further, he suggested the drying process is as important to breakability characteristics as any variant of shell thickness the current equipment can manage. I don't have an opinion on this one, I'm just putting it out there.

And finally we come to safety issues. Initially Richmond played the energy card. 50 cal is way safer 'cus there's way less energy involved so not to worry. Safe as can be. Wayne followed up and asked about the weave in some commercial netting--since the safety issue isn't about energy, it's about scale and it turns out that in particular the lighter weight weave the PSP uses for netting above 12 feet doesn't contain the 50 cal paintball. However, Richmond didn't think many local fields used that netting and besides, Cossio has discontinued making that grade available but it is something responsible field owners ought to check. Fair enough.

That's way more than enough but hey, don't take my word for it (as I'm apparently an agent of fear and propaganda--I wonder if I can put that on a business card?) listen for yourself. As I said, it's informative and worth the listen if you're interested in the subject. (I skipped the tail end listener call-in Q&A and there may be some good stuff there, too.) While you do that I'm gonna check my bank accounts for any recent, unexplained deposits. Here's hoping. Fingers crossed.

Agenda, Agenda, Whose Got An Agenda?

In the comments section to the post entitled, More Pros & Cons, Mr. Stephen Baldwin, a founder and board member of the Millennium Series, objected to, I think, what he read between the lines given the way the post was structured and subsequently denounced VFTD as having an agenda and being rubbish. One man's rubbish is another man's treasure so I will, as always, post to my satisfaction and leave you lot to decide what's rubbish and what isn't. With respect to the agenda claim however I think a few words are in order.

On the subject of the 50 cal paintball I have posted in excess of a dozen times and probably more than two dozen times ( search 'small ball') and I am comfortable suggesting that my point of view is comprehensively expressed across the sum of those posts. Having an opinion is not the same as having an agenda. But for those coming late to this party I will try to state my views simply and succinctly. My concern regarding the small ball is that there are no checks or balances in place protecting the game and as a result the limited number of industry power brokers are able to push change from the top down. There is nobody in a position to act on paintball's behalf who doesn't also have a monetary stake in the outcome of any significant move or decision. It wouldn't (it won't) be hard to press the major leagues into acceptance and then whatever faults the small ball might have the game will be expected to adjust (again) accordingly.

On the general subject of agendas Dictionary.com says, "a list, plan, outline, or the like, of things to be done, matters to be acted or voted upon, etc." That implies both action and the capacity to impact the outcome. Much as it pains me I have no illusions about VFTD altering the paintball landscape. And, again, an opinion is not an agenda. As regulars well know I'm not shy about expressing opinions. VFTD is commentary and observations about the paintball news of the day as it effects competitive paintball but VFTD doesn't make the news or drive the news. Finally VFTD isn't beholden to anyone in paintball, industry or otherwise, so this site doesn't support or secretly promote anybody else's agenda either. Now all of that is easy to say but hard to prove. Keep reading and make up your own mind.

In the meantime the interview is moving along smoothly. Mr. Baldwin has sent in round 1 of his responses and I am currently drafting a "final" form for the interview for him to pass off on. Hopefully it will be up in the next day or so.

More Pros & Cons

But mostly pros. You know, the whole who supports small ball, who doesn't. It looks like the Millennium board has another supporter, besides Laurent Hamet, in Steve Baldwin. VFTD isn't sure it understands all the ins and outs yet but this is more fun than a barrel of monkeys.

Here's what there is so far. There is a UK-based company called Manic Paintball that distributes Procaps. Whether they are strictly UK or also move product in Europe isn't entirely clear. (They self identify as the exclusive UK distributor but there are some who think they operate beyond those borders.) At one time Mr. Baldwin was sales director for Procaps Europe though what his current relationship is with Procaps VFTD doesn't know. There is also the new company called Dark Sports which was incorporated last April. It claims to be the UK & European distributor for GI Milsim and small ball. Here's the fun part. Mr. Baldwin is a director and equal shareholder in Manic paintball with the owner of Dark Sports, Mr. Scott Hazeldine.

Mr. Curious would love to know how much Procaps knows about all this given their unwillingness to produce small balls for GI Milsim and their relationship with Manic.

UPDATE: Apparently Mr. Baldwin finds this post objectionable although his solicitors found it very interesting. Can't please all of the people all of the time. VFTD has invited Mr. Baldwin to correct any factual errors. See the comments for more.

Heavy Water?

Word on the street is that KEE now has a heavier fill formula for the small ball and will be shipping samples soon. Word too is that it may be prohibitively expensive and/or eat up the cost savings between small ball and a regular 68 cal ball.

Btw, today's scheduled post has been delayed. It's written but I can't decide whether I want to post it or not. In the meantime I'll see about coming up with something else. Perhaps it's time for the Year In Review.

The Pros & Cons of Small Ball

There's lots of heat and lots of opinions but not a lot of clarity on the subject of the 50 caliber paintball--depending on who you're inclined to give credence to anyway--but that poses a separate problem. Who to believe. Who to take at face value, if anyone, and how to judge what they tell you about the 50 cal small ball.

So who is on which side? Let's start a list.

The pro small ball crowd includes the obvious suspects in GI Milsim, Smart Parts (such as it is), the Millennium Series (and certainly Laurent Hamet--can a Facefull editorial be far behind?), Kingman and, I'm told, PBL--a big Canadian retailer and Dark Sports in the UK. One might also include the P8ntballer website as supportive but not biased in content.

The con crew, last I heard, includes Tippmann, Dye, Badlands--the other Canadian retail dynamo, and the PSP. There's at least one or two other possibles I'm not yet prepared to list. But the territory here is ripe for speculation. For example, is Procaps con? How to explain the fact KEE, not Procaps is producing GI's paint? And after the long and close association of the PSP with Smart Parts and the brothers Gardner isn't it something of a surprise to find them at odds over this?

Of course not everyone is choosing sides. The kids at Planet Eclipse for example appear to be hedging their bets just waiting to see how this all shakes out. If small ball is a go they're ready, if not, no real harm done.

Clearly this isn't a comprehensive list but it's a start. Who else belongs on the list?

Show Me the Money

The Millennium Series, impeccable masters of timing that they are, announce a confirmed Germany event date (but not a location) in the aftermath of a massive riot police raid of an indoor German tournament this past weekend and with no fanfare and even less surprise announce the introduction of 50 cal as a legal paintball for series event use. The letter sent to teams can be seen here on the P8ntballer website. As discussed here (at VFTD) one of the MS owners, Laurent Hamet, was (and is) a proponent of the 50 cal paintball. One interesting question is why?

The Millennium kids tell us why. "As a result we will open up our events to new companies ..." New sponsors prepared to pay. Of course they also say, "There is a growing demand to allow other calibers to participate in The Millennium Series ..." So I guess we are left having to pick and choose what's true and what isn't. Unless you've heard or been part of the growing demand to allow other calibers--in which case please fill me in 'cus I missed it. All kidding aside this sort of, let's call it hyperbole, is the stock and trade of paintball promoters and industry and anyone who has been around the competitive game for any time at all knows how this particular game is played. Now nobody with a modicum of sense begrudges either industry or promoters a profit -- unless of course they are delivering a shoddy product. (I'll leave deciding that part up to you.)

What concerns me about this move is a couple of things. One, it opens the door for the other big leagues to make the jump and "blame" their acquiescence on the other guy. "Hey, would Millennium allow this if it wasn't okay?" And, Two, as far as I know there still hasn't been any definitive effort made to test the 50 cal balls against the current ASTM standards. On that basis alone the safety issue is an unknown.

Beyond that just how are the two calibers going to be integrated? If 50 cal performance is inferior at "normal" velocities is the MS gonna allow higher velocities for the small ball? Can a 50 cal team carry twice as much paint as a 68 cal team? The questions are almost endless. But my biggest question is -- Does anybody responsible for this decision actually give a damn about competitive balance and fairness? On its face it sure doesn't look like it.

Burning Question

How much "support" are the forces behind 50 cal offering the Big Leagues to accept an unproven product?

50 Cal Update for Mr. Curious

In a follow-up I didn't want to get lost in the comments of an old post here's what VFTD regular Frederick Rodrigues from France put up in comments yesterday. (Thanks, Fred!)

A little update about pricing. Laurent Hamet - Millennium, Sup'Airball and Facefull owner announced on a french board that the .50 cal box will be 50% cheaper than the actual .68 cal. Yes you got it, 50% cheaper!! It means that tournament players could buy their high grade tournament paint at a range of 24€ to 30€ ($36 to $45) Since few weeks now, the french market is suppressed with the whole .50cal marketing process. L. Hamet claims that the .50 cal is the only way to save paintball, Profusion - official GI MilSim dealer in France, broadcast tests about accuracy and new range of products, Kingman, Dye and Eclipse also joined the party. Oh! And last but not least, L. Hamet let us know that the Millennium Series could feature both of caliber on his fields in the upcoming season.

History Lesson

The Big Bullet has posted an excellent history of the 50 caliber paintball as part of the site's editorial take on the push to bring the small ball back. Well worth the read if you missed 50 cal the first time around. The link is in the title. Check it out.

Responding to Mr. Curious

It seems Mr. C.'s curiosity struck a nerve or two yesterday. As a consequence VFTD feels obliged to pass along some info and continue the 50 cal conversation--at least for another day. Among the info received was a retail price comparison that suggests 50 cal prices could undercut current 68 cal pricing anywhere from around 15% up to around 40% for tourney grade paint. These prices apply to a particular market and might not be matched across the board but provide a place to begin. I am not dismissing that 40% difference out of hand in part because my paint guy suggested some months ago the manufacturing cost reduction could easily go as high as 40%--not that the two circumstances are equivalent. Be that as it may the other consideration is the pricing given for comparison was msrp and at least in my neck of the woods msrp doesn't mean a whole lot. What would be really interesting to discover is the mark-up given the 50 cal prices quoted relative to the 68 cal mark-ups. That would give us a clearer idea of a couple of things. For example, is the 50 cal paint a money maker or is it a means to an end? (Remember, at this point GI Milsim is not a paint manufacturer. Their paint is being produced for them so my question is: Are they taking a mark-up in distribution and if so how much does it affect the retail profit margins?)
In addition it would seem that at least all the GI Milsim 50 cal is PEG based. (I don't know if everyone producing 50 cal is PEG also or not.) Simply put this means the present results are based on the most expensive variant of paint production. That doesn't leave a lot of room for improvement but, then again, it may not matter.

Btw, should GI Milsim or anyone else involved wish to dispute anything posted with respect to 50 cal etc. VFTD would be happy to post, unaltered and in its entirety, any authorised communication in an effort to give readers a full & fair view of the subject. That, of course, goes for any other topic as well and applies to teams, players, industry and paintball-related organizations who wish to make a public statement regarding VFTD content.

While the promotional tactics and claims offered by the 50 cal crowd have a certain odor about them I'm not particularly bothered. As a cynic I suppose that's what I expect. And if the 50 cal peeps can convince enough field operators and retailers to make the move it probably won't matter whether or not it's cheaper for the customer, it'll happen eventually anyway. I can even see it being welcomed amongst the milsim members of the scenario crowd and siphoning off those rec players motivated by playing war games--all well and good. But a couple of things do concern me. One is safety and the other is a short-sighted view that allows another "new idea" to sweep in and alter the competitive game--again--without taking the time to think through the consequences. On the safety front it seems as if almost nothing has been done to test the 50 cal ball within the environment it will be used and with the current equipment. We don't even know what velocities are either practical and/or safe (300 fps gives significantly reduced performance compared to a 68 cal ball) yet it's full speed ahead. Apparently the paint passes thru the loose weave upper half of field netting and I'm hearing that it does the same with the venting on some goggles. Is any of this stuff a concern or just an excuse to re-make the entire market?

Mr. Curious

The whole 50 cal business has Mr. C. flummoxed. He's so confused. He doesn't know where to begin. Before one question gets answered satisfactorily somebody else is making a new claim about the benefits of the 50 cal ball and the whole process starts all over again. Mr. Curious isn't an unreasonable guy and he's willing to consider a product with some potential trade-offs but all he wants to know right now, today, is what the price of a case of 50 cal paint is gonna be. Up front, not whispered to some likely dealer with nothing written down. Disseminated to the public at large in black & white because if the 50 cal paint isn't going to be decisively cheaper for the consumer the rest of the conversation is a waste of breath.

Shooting the 50 Cal Paintball

This week's Monday Poll will be posted on Tuesday. (Mostly 'cus I spent a huge chunk of the day traveling home from Vegas and my priorities once I got home didn't include a blog post--for once. Oh, and this one doesn't count as it's an easy one to crank out. 10 minutes tops.)

A reliable source--you'll just have to take my word for it--has shot close to a case of the currently available paint in an xball field setting. This paint was shot at approx. 280 fps and carried end to end and corner to corner with a small adjustment (to barrel elevation.) Overall it seemed pretty close to the 68 norm. [Although I gotta say it didn't seem like a real competition situation which might alter player perception.] It was also shot at players to see what would happen and the anecdotal view is that it didn't sting as much, marked well and broke at better than a 50% rate. Though I'm unclear if that means a 40-50% bounce rate or what. Still, that may not be too bad given the available formula isn't supposed to be the final tourney grade fill.

One of my concerns was confirmed though (apparently) as the small ball went through the upper half netting on a PSP standard field set-up. You know, the lighter weave stuff at ten feet and above.

I don't think it means a great deal (but if confirmed the netting issue is big) or answers all the questions but it is an interesting addition to information we have about the small ball.

UPDATE: Today's word, boys & girls, is 'reading comprehension'. Okay, that's two words but try to stay focused. First, when I say "reliable source" it does not mean infallible or even necessarily disinterested. It means someone I know who would not blatantly lie. And when I say 'anecdotal' I mean precisely that. This is not about facts, it's about impressions. Was the expressed viewpoint skewed or swayed or shaded? Possibly but what we do know despite all else is that current netting will NOT contain a 50 cal ball at even a presently legal velocity. We know that the current formula used to display the product breaks maybe half the time--at best--in something like a real world situation and at the very limited ranges involved in playing xball aiming is NOT the same. Maybe you read that as a stirling endorsement, I did not.

Has the Bandwagon Broken Down?

You know, the one heralding the 50 caliber revolution. Yeah, that bandwagon. Now before you start accusing me of being an ignorant hater let me say I'm not opposed to the idea. I get the potential advantages. Heck, I'm sold on price alone--all other things being equal. The key words here being--potential and equal. Thing is I'm not good at wishing will make it so or blindly following the latest marketing sleight of hand. My problem is I've got a brain and it works--most of the time.

For the sake of argument let's grant the 50 cal flies as straight as a 68 and breaks as well as a 68. Even if true there are still more than a few issues to resolve. Like actual retail pricing. Marking ability. Distance traveled and/or velocity. And impact. For starters. Beginning with pricing all manner of savings, mostly as a percentage of current prices, have been floated and they seem reasonable (if still hypothetical) based on the relative size and weight differences and manufacturing efficiencies from one to the other. However, real numbers seem in short supply. (Or nonexistent.) And here is where the rub begins. (Is it a hit or an attempt to wipe?) It seems to me that various of the desired properties of the 50 cal paintball are in conflict with each other.

What makes a top tourney grade shell? It's brittleness. And the fill? It's opaque marking ability and viscosity. And what is the other principle characteristic of top tourney grade paint? It's price. If, because of its nature, 50 cal requires a more expensive manufacturing baseline some percentage of the proposed savings disappear. Or else all the qualities to be found in the current unfinished 50 cal paint will be eroded in cheaper grades. At which point questions about marking ability and impact arise.

Simple physics insist the smaller shell has superior tensile strength--all things otherwise being equal--compared to a 68 hence the need for the thin shell. Less surface area means the impact is spread over a smaller patch. Mitigating this is the fact a 50 cal paintball has roughly only 40% of the fill capacity of a 68. The current incarnations of the 50 cal paintball also weighs in at roughly 40% of a 68 cal paintball so with respect to actual impact the question becomes what is the surface area of impact ratio? While the principle variable is velocity on impact.

And here is where things start to go at cross purposes to each other. The smaller, lighter ball will not travel the same distances when propelled at the same muzzle velocity. The gains made in reduced surface area do not overcome the weight disadvantages. (For more detailed data check out the 50 Cal Forum at PBN.) The only way to modify this outcome is to add weight or increase velocity. Adding much weight is difficult because of dimensional limitations--small ball--and material restrictions (stuff like non-toxic and biodegradable, retaining fluid characteristics, etc.) and a significant velocity increase will have safety restrictions and flight characteristic degradation at some point. And, oh yeah, a heavier or faster ball carries more energy and will increase the impact. (And come closer perhaps to violating more restrictive firearms laws in Canada and Europe.) Throw in the rumor that in order to get a "good" mark the fill can't be too thick and you end up with different desired outcomes tugging this way and that.

On top of the present uncertainties where are the ASTM (or similar) certified testing results? I might have missed them but so far haven't seen any. I'm told at least one major league is concerned that the current netting will be insufficiently safe for 50 cal use. And how do current goggles hold up? If the final product ends up being heavier and shot faster? Will this effect the insurance premiums at local fields?

One other thing concerns me with respect to competitive paintball and that is the prospect of a radically shorter time to distance for the 50 cal ball if the velocity has to be dialled up in order to achieve other similar to 68 cal results. In the past high velocity was (and is) primarily a safety issue but in a competitive situation it is also a potential playability issue as well. The time it takes a paintball to go from A to B will alter the nature of the game we play. How much I don't know.

At a minimum there remains lots of unanswered questions with respect to the actual utility of a 50 caliber paintball and until there are real answers I suspect there will be lots of room on that particular bandwagon.

More Notes On The 50 Caliber Solution

My Paint Guy, who has yet to be mistaken, has an interesting take on the 50 cal rollout that I figured I’d pass along, not because I’m buying it 100% but because he has yet to take a wrong step. Hard to argue with getting it right.

Anyway, he’s all for the 50 cal small ball because he is convinced it will work with the current level of technology and that all the potential pitfalls can (or have been) overcome. And the resulting cost reductions at the manufacturing end will make paintball much more affordable across the board. This, it seems to me, remains an open question but we’ll see.
Of more interest (to me) he also thinks the Pro teams will be outfitted to compete using the small ball next season as a high profile way of introducing the new gear and paintball to the tourney marketplace. It makes enough sense that it could happen and given that the latest rumors keep projecting a small ball introduction at World Cup it fits the logistics as well. Again, we’ll see.

I still have a few questions about small ball, mostly related to performance; marking consistency, breaking consistency and, in particular, velocity. I don’t doubt the first two can be accomplished but I’m reserving judgment until I see the small ball in action. Velocity is another issue entirely however. In the background there has been speculation about some of the performance claims (more accurate, longer range, etc.) and just how that can be accomplished–or even if it can. The keys seem to be the weight of the small ball and velocity. If the small ball requires greater velocity in order for its dynamic characteristics to match the 68 cal ball or to exceed the 68 cal ball that could have a significant effect on the tourney game. Right now we are competing on a field where the dimensions, bunkers and equipment create a balance between the valued core elements of the game. A velocity change could (and if sufficiently different, would) alter the current game dynamics. Think movement and what will happen if the paintball is moving, say, 350 fps instead of 295 fps. (This isn’t a game breaker of course but if the potential impact of things like higher velocity aren’t considered in advance and accounted for the result could be unintended harm just when everything looked to be turning around.)

I also have some questions about how the ‘09 off season is going to change the Pro landscape, again, and small ball could have a big impact on that, too. Last off season saw another reduction in paint sponsorships and a scramble amongst the teams for the limited resources. Until the small ball rumor hit there was every reason to expect more of the same but a move to small ball might keep more teams in the game. (If there is a commensurate retail price reduction resulting from the projected manufacturing savings.) Or maybe not. More on this angle in the future.