How should cards be weighted?

gtbeaker

Sorry if this has already been posed before, but I was just browsing through the weights for the Johnny Bench master set, and I was wondering if I could get some people's input on how to properly weigh a set. For instance, should value (or more appropriately a price a card might fetch on eBay) be a determining factor? Or should it merely be restricted to scarcity? For instance, if you look at the set composition for the Bench master set, the 1971 NL HR Ldrs. has a weight of 2.5. An example of this card recently sold on eBay for almost $700. A 1977 Topps Cloth Sticker also has a weight of 2.5, and I recently purchased on for $57 on eBay. I understand a weighting system isn't perfect, but shouldn't it be a little more equitable?

Southsider

I'm also curious about weighting. I'm trying to put together a set proposal and would like to weight it.

I'd think that rarity and/or importance should factor higher in a card's weight than simply price.

mikeschmidt

For better or worse -- the standard to be used is SMR. As all player collectors know -- this arrangment does not always seem to make the most sense. Nonetheless -- that is how the standards are currently set, and I do not believe they will be changed anytime soon. You can, of course, keep Joe Orlando and crew updated on price changes of certain cards. To the extent that that would ever affect the SMR pricing -- it may ultimately be incorporated into the set weighting.

JeffVN

Schmidty hits another one out of the park. The SMR is the standard grading method. But, if you can convince Joe Orlando (that's who had to evaluate my proposed changes to that weighting system for several of my Reds Team Sets) that your proposed set weighting is better (be it current selling price, low overall pop, 1st card in the set etc), you can get the standard weighting changed.

Aaronman

Right now the weigting is done primarly on SMR value in a PSA 8. What I think you will see over time is that the weighting process will become more scientific. I could see SMR value, population, grade and total submissions (per card or per set) eventually become part of the weighting. Of course, this is just speculation on my part.

Wabittwax

I think the weighting system, while important, doesn't need to be all that perfect to be effective. Even if a couple cards are weighted improperly, all the set participants are playing on the same field. Overall, it will still show who's set is ranked the highest, even if the weights aren't perfect.

Southsider

So, if I submitted a set proposal, the weighting would be done by those in charge of the set requests? Or would I be able to weight my proposed set my way?

mikeschmidt

If the proposal has not taken hold in the Registry yet, it will probably expedite matters if you submit a proposed weighting that is reasonable and based off of SMR.

Southsider

Ok mikeschmidt, thanks.

gtbeaker

Folks-

I think what I'm going to do is work on an "enhanced" weighting system, which will incorporate SMR value, population, grade distribution, etc. into the system. I would appreciate any input people may have, since this is something we're all going to have to live with. Of course, it will then have to be blessed by the registry "powers that be", but I think as long as it's reasonable (and doesn't require a PhD in quantum mechanics) there shouldn't be too much contention.

Scott

JeffVN

<< <i>but I think as long as it's reasonable (and doesn't require a PhD in quantum mechanics) there shouldn't be too much contention. >>



If only that were true.


Rock on and lets see what you have in mind (I personally do'nt like the pure SMR price system - given its inherent erros when compared with real market pricing). I'll withhold judgment on your proposed scale until I see the work product - others may not be as generous as me.