Player Set Registry

bengineno9 · January 17, 2003 8:32AM

I know this topic has been discussed before in the past. But has anyone else been waiting a long time to get their player set up and running on the website?
I requested the Ozzie Smith and Chris Pronger sets well over four months ago and it looks like the line is going nowhere.
I'm not complaining by any means, i'm sure there is a lot of work that goes into these.
Im just REALLY anxious and was wondering if im just the only one!
Ben

Virtualizard · January 17, 2003 9:35AM

Did you supply PSA with your suggested list of cards to be included and a weighting for each card (if applicable). I've never submitted a request myself, but, I hear that this speeds up the process.

JEB.

boggs301012 · January 17, 2003 9:00PM

I waited well over a year and a half.....Ok when I ask it wasnt even aval. So patience... ask for it and they will build it.

Kurt · January 17, 2003 11:24PM

<< <i>I waited well over a year and a half..... >>

Now that is being patient.

bengineno9 - As JEB said, you can speed it up dramatically if you create your own list.

gtbeaker · January 18, 2003 12:05AM

Ben- Providing BJ a checklist and a suggested weighting will GREATLY help your set get listed. I provided her with a list/weighting for the '76 Cincy Reds set and she informed me it would be posted next week. That might be your best bet in order to avoid the long wait.

I've been waiting at least 4 months for my Tony Perez and Joe Morgan player sets to get listed, but I'm sure I could speed the process along if I took the initiative and gave the folks responsible a "head start".

bengineno9 · January 18, 2003 3:13AM

Thanks for the responses.
If i provide PSA with a checklist should it be for every type of card that has been graded for this player?
A little confused about how the weighting of the set works.
Think i'll just have to wait a little longer.
Thanks for the input guys!
Ben

mikeschmidt · January 19, 2003 2:04AM

Ben:

It should not be too hard. Develop a list of every card from Ozzie Smith's playing days that has been graded by PSA. Look at other player lists (like Mickey Mantle, Mike Schmidt, etc.) to see how the weighting was done for those sets. Develop a short template in Excel, provide it to BJ -- and hopefully that will help facilitate the process.

Marc

Caramels · January 19, 2003 4:41AM

I'm sending in all my MINT San Diego Chicken cards to start a "mascot Registry" !

bengineno9 · January 19, 2003 12:06PM

Marc.
Thanks for the advice. Going to renew my membership soon and get to work on it. Thanks
Ben

AlanAllen · January 19, 2003 12:32PM

I think they are overwhelmed with set submissions. Or maybe BJ has taken some time off... look at the news page: only three sets have been listed all year, none of the player sets!

I requested a player set about 6 weeks ago with a checklist and proposed weighting, and I know for a fact at least one other person has put in a request for it too. That's cool though, I understand others put in their requests before me and I don't expect to jump line, but I'd like to see some progress by other player sets being listed. Maybe they need extra help or some semi-automated process.

Joe

rbeaton · January 19, 2003 9:17PM

When I sent BJ the checklist/weights for the Jim Palmer player set, it was added within a week.

Robert

bengineno9 · January 20, 2003 3:05AM

How did you guys come up with the weighting of your sets?
Did you come up with a formula to use on the population report of your certain player?
Just curious. Thanks Ben

mikeschmidt · January 20, 2003 3:18AM

Ben:

Use SMR for the weighting of your player set. Any player worthy of being in the Player Set Registry should have a sufficient population of core cards graded to make the particular population numbers somewhat irrelevant.

Though there are exceptions, I find them generally rare. One that I suggested for the Mike Schmidt Basic Registry was a much higher weighting of the 1975 Schmidt card over the 1974 as the 1975 is exceptionally difficult in PSA 9 whereas the 1974 is very easy. Both are very very easy in PSA 8.

MS

Cyphilissb · January 20, 2003 8:25AM

to my dismay i was informed that all weights are based on psa 8 standards. I submitted some revised weights to the 96/97 topps chrome basketball set registry, what i got back was an email that said they couldn't change anything basically because the kobe is worth 50x any other card in the set in psa 8. I said ok, who cares about psa 8? no one even collects that, there are only two serious sets being built right now neither even has an 8 in them. And they said that while they realize that is true the whole registry works off of psa 8's and they didn't feel comfortable making an exception. The long and short of it is, base your weights on psa 8, no matter what! So the 74 and 75 Schmidt should technically have the same weight, since it is based on psa 8s.

Virtualizard · January 20, 2003 10:31AM

Cyphilissb,

I haven't submitted a request myself, but I hope that you are not correct about basing the weighting on PSA 8's (especially for modern cards). I could submit literally 1000's of modern cards from my collection for grading and pull 9's and 10's on a majority of them, stars and rookies included. I can see the logic behind this for vintage sets where the star cards were frequently traded among friends and handled quite a bit, pinned to walls/bulletin boards, taped on text books, or written on (yes I did all of these when I was a kid

). Today, everyone knows the value of collectible sportscards and handles them appropriately (i.e. placing cards in toploaders right out of the pack). This seems ridiculous to place the same weighting system on cards produced after, say, mid '80s ? (someone else may have a differing opinion on this and I'd be happy to hear it). I think all sets produced after mid '80s (again, just my choice) should not even be weighted.

JEB.

AlanAllen · January 20, 2003 2:06PM

<< <i>I requested a player set about 6 weeks ago with a checklist and proposed weighting, and I know for a fact at least one other person has put in a request for it too. That's cool though, I understand others put in their requests before me and I don't expect to jump line, but I'd like to see some progress by other player sets being listed. Maybe they need extra help or some semi-automated process.

Joe >>

And today, it magically appears! Thank you BJ and Joe. They changed the composition and weighting of the Marcus Allen sets I proposed pretty significantly, but I can't disagree with the final product, and now I can register.

Joe

MartinDihigo · January 20, 2003 11:10PM

I have to disagree with the idea that giving a set composition along with weighting speeds up the process. I requested a set a few months ago and gave the composition as well as weighting and it has been 2nd on the Request list for at least a month. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that I am very likely the only person in the known universe who wants to register this set.

And since it's only a 60 card set and there are less than 10 examples of any one card known, even if every single card from this issue that still exists found it's way into a PSA holder there would still be less total cards than any one complete set from the 70's.

I guess I can see why they're not in any rush.

Maybe if you guys all explain to them that you also plan on submitting all of your 1923-24 Billiken cards...

-Ryan

mikeschmidt · January 20, 2003 11:48PM

Ryan:

I am sure with your set that PSA probably has to verify checklists, etc. You are pretty much pioneering the vintage cuban cards -- and PSA probably does not want to make a database or list that is somehow incorrect. I don't know enough about the set you are trying to Register -- but is there any published source (e.g. SCD, Krause, etc.) that has a confirmed complete published checklist for your set? If not, I can understand why there might be some delay on PSA's part!

BJ · January 21, 2003 12:18AM

Hi Everyone,

No, I have not been on vacation. I have spent the last two months working day and night (literally) on the Canadian Coin Set Registry which I launched last week. And, the first two weeks of this year, I have been traveling to shows. Now I'm back in the office for a while and am concentrating on getting sets up quickly. (Note, we loaded two player sets just yesterday.)

The process for player sets is a long one for several reasons. First, we grab all the cards from our database that have been graded for a player within his play years. Then we have to format the file so that it can be loaded into the set registry. This takes time as the set registry is very tempermental and only accepts files a certain way. Then we find the highest grade graded for each card. Then we send the file to Joe Orlando who weights it and also determines which cards should be in the BASIC set. This can sometimes take weeks, as Joe has a very busy travel schedule. Once we have the file back into our hands, we break out the basic set, calculate the best possible grade, and then create two new .csv files for loading. Two sets are then loaded for the player, basic and master.

The fastest way to move your player set up the list is to supply what you think the BASIC set should consist of. And, although Joe doesn't always agree with suggested weighting, it does help speed up the process. That also goes for any company sets that are sitting out there not weighted. Email me for a spreadsheet and I'll send one to you that you can use for your suggested weighting. Weighting is based on PSA 8 pricing in the SMR and is on a 1-10 scale. You can use decimals if you feel appropriate.

We have a small staff for the set registry, so depending on our priorities and how busy we are (and we are very busy right now), it can sometimes take what may seem as an unusually long time to get to your request. A great portion of our time is devoted to customer service issues and many of those issues wouldn't exist if registrants were more diligent about updating their sets when they sell cards. Any suggestions on how we can encourage users to update sets right after they sell would be greatly appreciated! It would reduce at least 50% of our mail.

Thanks to all for your patience and understanding. Any help you provide us is always appreciated.

MartinDihigo · January 21, 2003 12:20AM

The set is listed in the 2002 and 2003 SCD. Of course, I got them in there so the checklist I gave BJ is the same as the one I gave Lemke.

I'm not sure exactly how they'll check on this issue, but I hope they are able to.

-Ryan

AlanAllen · January 21, 2003 1:26AM

BJ,
Thanks for letting us know what's going on. I'm sure I speak for all of us when I say I appreciate your hard work.

Joe

Player Set Registry

Comments