Monster Ball paint.

Mack.

Why even post?

To correct erroneous information.

You don't buy paint at wal-mart.

Correct.

And you obviously by your post don't know about monster ball?

How do you figure that.  I said I don't purchase it, I have no control over what other people purchase and shoot.  We have a couple of people that play with us regularly that use MB exclusively.  I have never had an issue being shot by them, nor has anyone else.

I guess proving your internet tough guy is all that matters.

TRANSLATION: <I am unable to refute your facts/logic so I will now resort to name-calling in an effort to disguise my shortcomings in this area.>

As you have the wisdom to recognize and acknowledge your position in regards to me, I am forced to admit that their may yet be hope for you young padawan.

I run a private field and have seen the issues that come from this paint.

Then you should institute a field paint only rule and not buy MB.  Problem solved.

You can discredit that all you wish . . .

I have no desire to do so.  (Although Ace did make a most amusing comment on the subject.)

but the fact is still the same, I know about monsterball paint, you don't...

I would have to disagree.  There is nothing in running a field that gives you a deeper understanding of a certain type of paint.  If you possessed such an exceptional knowledge of paintball related information, you would have avoided making blatantly wrong assertions such as how paintball is a dying sport and would have taken all the variables that can affect any given shot in paintball into account when trying to support your theories about MBs with anecdotal evidence. 

The fact is you have an opinion.  There is nothing wrong with that and you are welcome to it.  However, when you go out in public and try to state an opinion as fact you will very often find that others disagree with it because they hold different opinions of their own. 

You were apparently surprised to discover this when you posted your thoughts on MBs on this forum.  As happens in any case when opinions differ, facts and logic are used to support the differing opinions.  When confronted with facts and logic that supported the opinion opposed to yours (including documented refutation that certain claims you made were incorrect) you responded with name-calling and making statements along the lines of ". . . well this one time . . " or "I know because I run a private field."  Such statements are little more than the equivalent of saying "It's that way because I said so" and therefore carry little weight.  You should not be upset by this, you should just consider it a learning experience and perhaps in the future you will choose your positions more judiciously to ensure that they are actually supportable by facts and logic.

No need to pile on, guys.  Everybody is welcome to post their opinions here.

I'm sure we can all get along if we try.

Well . . . that sounds boring.

http://forum.specialopspaintball.com/index.php?showtopic=158 364

So a bunch of people on the spec-ops forum agree with you.  A bunch of people here don't.  Moreover, perusing the posts indicates that some of those who are in agreement have experience with MBs that is limited to what they heard or saw in the tech video as opposed to having really played with them.  (I do agree with the one poster about them gumming up marker internals badly.  It is the only paint that I have ever had jam up a Tippmann.)

http://www.amazon.com/review/product/B001715ID0?showViewpoin ts=1

So, two people posted negative reviews on Amazon.  I wonder what percentage of buyers that is?  This kind of ties back to my original point about the MB problem fixing itself if the paint is really that bad; if it was a significant issue, people wouldn't buy it and production would be halted. 

Related to this, since I'm not sure I made it clear earlier, I do consider it to be substandard paint.  But I consider it so because of issues such as gumming up markers and accuracy issues due to out of roundness/dimpling.  (Although the shape issues could be a result of shipping and storage as opposed to poor quality control.)  My experiences at the field have led me to conclude (based merely on personal observation) that MB has a shorter effective range than other paints due to accuracy issues.  (Something I'll have to test this weekend by swapping for some with someone at the field.)  I had never considered the staining an issue because I don't care that much about stains on my paintball clothes, but it is another strike against them.

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/allReviews.do?product_id=5774 956

Since the majority of the 30 reviews on this page at the time I used the link stated they would recommend the product, I'm not sure how this helps you prove your point.

above you can see lots of examples of the same stuff I was talking about.

I can see that everyone thinks they have a harder shell than most other paint.  (A significant number of the posters attribute this to shelf time and say it is true of all Wal-Mart paint for this reason.)  This is not something I have ever disputed.  What I have disputed is the contention that they are inherently more dangerous than any other paint which has been mishandled; something that you have failed to prove.  Frankly, I don't buy them because I consider more expensive paint to provide a better bargain in terms of what I get for my money.  Some people don't have that option and would be unable to play if it wasn't for the box stores stocking cheaper versions of the equipment/materials needed for this sport.

If someone is really worried about the possible additional pain from hits that don't break, they need to worry about more than one type of paintball.  They need to worry about people and dealers that don't properly maintain their paint, they need to worry about the guy shooting the paint that he found in his basement that was left over from last year.  They need to fear the idiot who takes tools on the field so he can kick up his velocity.  If all of this is to much to worry about maybe they should try this sport instead of paintball.

I'm done, you can have back your "forum"...

kthxby

continue piling on...

Snake6 wrote: Mack is respected a hell of a lot more than you will be around here. Therefore you have no right to say anything, why can't you just move on?

I love quotes like this. See the problem is, you don't know me... I see that you have very high regard for an arrogant blowhard like mack. But, why would that discount others opinions?

Because, as opposed to basing my arguments around referring to others with terms like "blowhard," I choose to base my arguments on logic and support them with verifiable facts.

Maybe you guys should make this a private forum, since all I get from you guys is attacks.

Didn't you leave?  I could swear that I remembered something along the lines of the statement below from earlier.

The Reaper wrote: I'm done, you can have back your "forum"...

Mack, when you said your niece was tougher than me, you started the name calling.

It's called humor.  Had I realized you didn't have a sense of humor I might have left that portion (true as it is) out.  (But probably not, as it says in the title, I have no impulse control.)

I guess in this little world no one stands up to you...

I debate points back and forth with various people on here all the time; they just tend to handle it in a more mature manner.

Sorry, I didn't know.

It's okay, you don't need to apologize.

But, you are full of it.

TRANSLATION: <Lacking an actual factual/logical response I will resort to generic statements indicating disagreement.>

Fact. You don't buy monster paint.

Fact:  I've tried pretty much every paint out there (including several of the crappy Wal-Mart brands*) and I don't buy MB anymore.  Not that this is an issue in this discussion as the "danger" is from being hit by it, not shooting it.  My main issue with all Wal-Mart paint is that it has been treated so badly that accuracy is effected during use.

*Which would be pretty much any paint they carry.  Even when they carried more mainstream paint, it didn't seem to survive their handling.  Plus, they don't like it when you want to open cases and inspect the bags.

Fact. You make huge assumptions based on few words, thinking you completely understand and therefore have the need to "disprove" others opinions.

Fact:  You said that MB was extremely dangerous and would kill someone.  I disagree and offered logical reasons based on your own points (and in some cases your own evidence) that opposed your supposition.  Yes, I am trying to "disprove" your point.  I am doing so because I think you are wrong.  It is a very similar process to how you are attempting (ineffectually) to "disprove" my opinion with this very post.  I see no problem with that and really do not understand how it is germane to the discussion.

Fact. You enjoy trying to make other people look bad. (which shows how insecure you actually are...)

Fact. You like to pretend you are a "excellent" debator. When in fact you just like to see your words on the screen and pat yourself on the back. You are great at debating what you "think" the argument is about, but you don't get the facts first...

TRANSLATION: <Since I still do not really have any type of facts or logic to support my position and have already used up my one good generic statement of disagreement, I will try to disguise my lack of successful refutation by returning to personal attacks.>

Lets go back to the beginning and I will lay out the issue so that you can repaste my comments and put up more garbage about the paint you don't use, and don't like, but are so busy supporting.

Fact:  I don't support MB.  As posted in several places above, I think it is substandard.  I just don't think it's dangerous.

Logical supposition:  Since I have stated my actual opinion of MB in several places and you do not (based on your posts) seem to be completely aware of it you are not bothering to read responses.  This would seem to indicate that you are quite close-minded on the subject and are probably impervious to facts or logic.

I don't know mike, and didn't paste his video. But, don't let the facts get in the way of bashing me, or aligning me with him.

I never said you knew mike.  Since you claim you are "not aligned with him," I will apologize for that assumption; however, although I did make that assumption, I never stated it as an accusation/argument.   It was however a logical conclusion based on both your thoughts/statements regarding MB and the fact that one of the links you used supporting your opinion was heavily influenced (judging from the comments within it) by his video.  Furthermore, you should realize that whether you consider yourself officially in agreement with him or not, by supporting the same position you could easily be seen as being "aligned" with him.

Look. I play paintball,

Me too.

(which should be enough to be "allowed" to post on here without attack).

Disagreement is not an attack.  You stated an opinion and I stated and supported a counter-opinion.  Everyone is allowed to post here; but they do not have the right to automatically have everything they say accepted as truth.  If people disagree, and they will, then discussions will ensue.

I have an opinion.

Me too.

I started the thread.

Yes, you did.  The way you say that makes it sound like you think that since you started the thread you are allowed to control the opinions stated within it.  If this is what you believe, then I must inform you that you are wrong.

On my private field (a little over 50 acres in my backyard) I have run into issues with this paint.

I've run into issues with various paints over the years . . . doesn't make them potentially deadly.

Yes, I banned it from my field . . .

Good for you.  You took a stand for what you believed in.

. . . as most fields have done now.

Given what I've read on the internet, "most" is an exaggeration.  Yes, some fields have banned it.  Some of these may have done so because they considered it dangerous.  Others have done so because of the staining factor.  What you don't see is the myriad of fields who have not done so because threads relating to "such-such-field did not ban Monster Ball" are not going to be posted for every one of them that didn't. 

The reason why is because it doesn't break consistantly. Which increases the impact exponentially.

No, it does not increase the impact "exponentially."  It doesn't increase the impact at all.  Kinetic energy (impact energy) is based on the equation E=1/2mv^2 (Where E=Energy, m=mass and v=velocity).  The only way to "increase the impact" would be if MB's somehow sped up or suddenly became heavier when they didn't break; both are physical impossibilities.  What happens is that the hit feels harder when a paintball doesn't break because of the way the energy is directed.  (The breaking creates a "splat" mark with the spray of the paint in all directions being fairly indicative of where a portion of the kinetic energy is going.)  The standard muzzle energy of an average (weight 0.002 lbs) paintball fired at 300 fps is approximately 90 lbs/sq. in.  This is sufficient to be rather painful no matter what the paint type at close range.  (Which is why many fields have the "10-foot rule."  At this point the kinetic energy has already decreased to less than 70 lbs/sq. in.)  In this case, given the nature of the equation, the impact energy actually does change exponentially with range; although it is a decrease as opposed to an increase.

As paintballs are designed to be safe when fired at or under 300fps and BREAKING when impacting.

Actually no.  The 300 fps rule was developed approximately 20 years ago by Bud Orr after consultation with an orthopedic surgeon.  It was developed with non-breaking paint taken into account because there was no quality control on paint at that time and field velocities were running between 350 and 400 fps.

If the paint doesn't break, the danger of serious injury goes way up.

I believe that if paint doesn't break, the danger of injury in general is increased as well.  But "way up" is an exaggeration; as is all of the hype (not necessarily yours) about MB being potentially deadly.

I don't pretend that I am the only one who has seen the danger of these paintballs (as you do mack, I guess its easier to ignore the guy that had his finger broken by the paint on this very board...) But, I like to fix things.

I've had fingers broken as well.  It doesn't take a lot of pressure to do so.  The potential for broken fingers is present in any paintball game from any paint whether it breaks or not.  More important than the type of paint is the velocity, the direction of the impact and the use of safety gear (gloves).

This paint issue could be easily fixed if enough guys contact the manufacturer and wal-mart and asked.

Possibly, it never hurts to ask.  Of course, manufacturers sometimes change things that are perfectly safe just to keep their customers happy as well.

That is all I was asking in this thread.

And some people (who have issues with MB) will probably will do so.

You took it to this whole different level.

Really?  How?  Because I had the temerity to disagree with you.  Shame on me; what was I thinking?  /sarcasm

Here is what I was thinking.

Say some mother goes out and buys a tippmann A5 for her kid from wal-mart. And she buys monsterballs at the same time.

Now, I know since you are "all knowing" that you will say this is rediculous. But, I had 4 brand new A-5's this year and ALL of them were shooting between 355 and 360 fps out of the box.

Actually, based on both personal experience and the input I have received from others, that seems to be fairly common with Tippmanns.

Take that and monsterballs and you have a recipe for disaster. It didn't have anything to do with me or my playfield it has to do with public health.

355 fps out of the box is asking for trouble with any paint.  I would be even more worried about Spyders (which used to be capable of 400+ fps out of the box) than Tippmanns.

Lots of young kids play paintball and their heads aren't as hard as yours. (pun intended).

I like puns.  That one was not too bad.