Why did master player sets change?

minnewis

When I first started using the registry, there were several variations of a card to fill a specific slot. Let's say it was a Mantle set. To fill the '68 Bazooka slot you could use the individual Mantle, a panel with Mantle, the box without tabs with Mantle, the box with tabs with Mantle, etc. This made sense because as long as you had the Mantle portion in some capacity, you had the slot covered. Advance to now, and the set is requiring one each of all of those. This doesn't even make sense. Why would I need to have the rest of the box/panel/whatever with random players when I'm putting together a Mantle set? How could we go about getting it changed to the old way which had a logical basis?

1951WheatiesPremium

@minnewis said:
When I first started using the registry, there were several variations of a card to fill a specific slot. Let's say it was a Mantle set. To fill the '68 Bazooka slot you could use the individual Mantle, a panel with Mantle, the box without tabs with Mantle, the box with tabs with Mantle, etc. This made sense because as long as you had the Mantle portion in some capacity, you had the slot covered. Advance to now, and the set is requiring one each of all of those. This doesn't even make sense. Why would I need to have the rest of the box/panel/whatever with random players when I'm putting together a Mantle set? How could we go about getting it changed to the old way which had a logical basis?

The idea is about including everything, increasing competition and driving prices.

It seems to be working and there is more movement on the list now than there has been in some time.

I’m thinking you could put together a ‘Basic Master’ set checklist and submit it and see what happens.

bobsbbcards

I agree completely with the OP. A master set should be one of every "card" of a player, not many copies of the same card with accompanying detritus (going to use that one in Scrabble this afternoon).

1951WheatiesPremium

@bobsbbcards said:
I agree completely with the OP. A master set should be one of every "card" of a player, not many copies of the same card with accompanying detritus (going to use that one in Scrabble this afternoon).

I was merely offering an answer to the question, not giving it a ringing endorsement.

I think everyone views things slightly differently when it comes to what the Registry is and should be. I use it mostly for tracking various Mickey Mantle issues but can’t afford to get everything graded. Plus, I have some items they don’t grade (yet) and I’m very proud of getting the spec created for:

@minnewis

Mickey’s my jam!

bswhiten

I can tell you that there is talk about removing boxes, especially low pop boxes, from the required section of master sets per PSA. PSA is already doing that with some Hostess boxes (see Dale Murphy Master).

I would vote for a compromise personally, where maybe only one of the particular item is required, but the box would carry the most weight followed by the panel and then the single.

Like that Grand Slam Mattress Tim!

PS I also like the 68 Bazooka the OP mentions

JoeBanzai

In my opinion it's a MASTER set, put it all in there! PSA has taken out several of my key cards and refused to add others that obviously should be in, but they then value the almighty "10" and rate an inferior set above a more complete one.

There are several options if you don't want to mess around with the foolishness of having eight of the similar card instead of one or two.

The Bazooka should (imo) really only need the individual card and the full box, the card with Mantle/Flood is on the full box, so to me it's a duplicate.

Then PSA decides to only allow one of the three (Killebrew) 1967 Punch-Outs in the Master set?!?!?!?!?