Awards question
Wayne8348
Posts: 769 ✭
I told myself I wasn't going to post this but what the heck.
Frank has an awesome 1975 baseball set but I can't seem to figure why it was set of the year. Like I already said, I shouldn't be posting this but it has been nagging at me. When you look at the 1973, 1974, and 1975 sets here are the statistics from the pop reports:
1973 5,446 psa 9's 131 psa 10's
1974 7,235 psa 9's 166 psa 10's
1975 6,651 psa 9's 164 psa 10's
Scott Wetzels 1973 set has a gpa of 8.88
My 74 set has a gpa of 9.02
Frank's 75 set has a psa of 8.82
The most difficult set to find psa 9's and psa 10's is the 1973 set and Scott has a gpa of .06 higher which equals about 60 upgrades from 8's to 9's or from 9's to 10's. He is also the only one to ever finish the 73 set in any grade.
My 74 set has .20 higher gpa and it would take about 200 upgrades to bring the 75 set up to this level. The 9's are slightly easier to come by and the 10's are virtually even.
In all honesty, the best 1975 set right now is probably Kurts 1975 set which is not too far from being complete and 8.97 gpa. All he would have had to do is finish it out in 7's and 8's and he would have surpassed Frank's set fairly easily.
Frank, this isn't a slam against you or your set at all - it's an awesome set. I just thought it would come down to a choice between the 73 or the 74 set since FB won it last year with his awesome 72 set.
I'm not upset by psa's choice, just wondering why. I also felt that the 64 topps giant set should have won the award over the 69 topps supers. No offense Bob - I just felt the other set was a tougher set to put together.
Wayne
Frank has an awesome 1975 baseball set but I can't seem to figure why it was set of the year. Like I already said, I shouldn't be posting this but it has been nagging at me. When you look at the 1973, 1974, and 1975 sets here are the statistics from the pop reports:
1973 5,446 psa 9's 131 psa 10's
1974 7,235 psa 9's 166 psa 10's
1975 6,651 psa 9's 164 psa 10's
Scott Wetzels 1973 set has a gpa of 8.88
My 74 set has a gpa of 9.02
Frank's 75 set has a psa of 8.82
The most difficult set to find psa 9's and psa 10's is the 1973 set and Scott has a gpa of .06 higher which equals about 60 upgrades from 8's to 9's or from 9's to 10's. He is also the only one to ever finish the 73 set in any grade.
My 74 set has .20 higher gpa and it would take about 200 upgrades to bring the 75 set up to this level. The 9's are slightly easier to come by and the 10's are virtually even.
In all honesty, the best 1975 set right now is probably Kurts 1975 set which is not too far from being complete and 8.97 gpa. All he would have had to do is finish it out in 7's and 8's and he would have surpassed Frank's set fairly easily.
Frank, this isn't a slam against you or your set at all - it's an awesome set. I just thought it would come down to a choice between the 73 or the 74 set since FB won it last year with his awesome 72 set.
I'm not upset by psa's choice, just wondering why. I also felt that the 64 topps giant set should have won the award over the 69 topps supers. No offense Bob - I just felt the other set was a tougher set to put together.
Wayne
1955 Bowman Football
0
Comments
Taking nothing away from the other sets that you mentioned...I agree!!!
The 1974 set that you put together is a beauty.
But I must say, I think the popularity of the 1975 set edged you out.
Carlos
I was a bit surprised myself... I had emailed Mike Castaldi and told him that I felt that I was going to lose Best Modern Baseball Set this year - probably to your 74 set. I had stayed pretty much even with you GPAwise until about 8.92. Then, you were able to blast through to 9.02 while I slogged my way up to 8.94 at award time. But, I can't fault a beautiful 75 set being chosen. If I wasn't already swamped working on the sets from 64 to 72, I might tackle the 75 myself.
I had figured that I could hold on to it if I could climb to 9.00 by the deadline. But, the lack of needed 9's and the ferocity of EOMINT's bids on cards that we both needed kept me short. But hey!!! There is always next year!!!!
Sets - 1970, 1971 and 1972
Always looking for 1972 O-PEE-CHEE Baseball in PSA 9 or 10!
lynnfrank@earthlink.net
outerbankyank on eBay!
Therefore, I propose that the peers have a say in the final Registry Awards.
If updates to sets are to be by October 30st, with the award going out on November 15th, then the "people" who actually have the sets on the registry can provide PSA with their comments on why the set should be number 1.
1st Finest Set - 1981 Baseball Fleer Master - Retired
1st Finest Set - 1955 Baseball Golden Stamps - Cleveland Indians - Retired
1st Finest Set - Mel Harder Baseball Master - Active
Mel Harder Showcase Set - Active
#15 on Current Set Registry - 1972 Topps Baseball - Retired
#23 on All Time Set Registry - 1972 Topps Baseball - Retired
Groucho Marx
<< <i>is Frank Bakka the owner of both the 72 and 75 sets? >>
No
For a long period of time I thought FabFrank was FB and then we cleared that up.
Then I thought FabFrank was Frank Smith(75 Topps Funky Frank) but then we cleared
that up.
Frank Smith is Late 70 Topps.
Any other Franks out there that we need to identify?
This reminds me of all the information I leared about 61 Topps that Marshall Fogel shared with me thinking he was talking with Rob McBride.For about 6 months I was wondering why the hell 61 Topps was a centerpoint of discussion between us.
My Auctions
Your instincts were correct...you shouldn't have posted on this. You are entitled to your opinion of course. I agree with PSA's decision and it really doesn't seem like a difficult choice to me. I expected his set to win and it did. It will be nearly impossible--despite what the certs may add up to-- to better the set that Frank has assembled. I stumbled across one of the freshest cut cases this past spring and found PILES of 9's and was hardpressed to upgrade a single card of his. It's all about the rare combination of means, expertise AND passion for the cards themselves. The 70s is my thing and that set is all there. A Monster.
It sounds like you have one heck of a set going as well and some may agree that it should have won that category. Regardless, Frank's '75 set is also deserving. Congratulations to you and everybody else who strives for more than certification numbers. This thing is fun...remember that.
dgf
While GPA is surely a factor, I hardly expect it was the only factor. I think is this fitting because GPA certainly doesn't tell the whole story of a given set. Unfortunately, too many collecctors only pay attention to the number on the flip rather than the card inside. I think the Registry feeds this mentality to a great degree. Other than grade, there really isn't anything else that the Registry can use to differentiate one set from another. If grades alone told the whole story, this would be perfect. Unfortunately, there's no way the Registry can differentiate between a set of "Razor 8s" and "Slacker 9s". I feel this is probably the most glaring weakness of the Registry.
I'm sure PSA/CU did not have an easy time choosing a top set in the "Modern" category as there were several which could easily have take home the prize - including all those you mentioned.
Mike
What do you know about "razor 8's"...who are you kidding
dgf
Mike
dgf
dale - I had thought about that too... But, I'm not sure if we wouldn't simply have a popularity contest if the registry members did it. Maybe if we could submit votes for each category and the PSA panel would consider the top 10 vote getters in each group - I dunno...
downgoes - I have no problem with ANYONE expressing a well thought out dissenting opinion in a rational and without personal attacks. This is what makes America great! Now Wayne and I just have to step up to the plate for 2004 and improve our sets mightily and see if we can work out an evil plan to get Funky Frank and Scott Wetzel to part up their 75 and 73 sets respectively!
mike - granted pop reports don't tell the whole story of any given set - they can also factor in popularity, distance between the top set and the next ones down and even the degree of low pops included in the set. But the folks at PSA don't have a lot more to go on unless they're stopping by peoples homes and looking through contending sets. I doubt that there is a way (or that PSA would ever want a way) of identifying stellar 8's versus slacker 9's. So, statistics and general "feel" is probably all they can work with.
machodoc - Oct 31st was chosen because its BJ's birthday!
edited because I can't spell before morning coffee...
Sets - 1970, 1971 and 1972
Always looking for 1972 O-PEE-CHEE Baseball in PSA 9 or 10!
lynnfrank@earthlink.net
outerbankyank on eBay!
Mike - I thought about your arguement prior to posting but I don't necessarily agree. There are 166 psa 10's from the 74 set available and 164 psa 10's from the 1975 set available. Which year are psa 10's more readily available? They are definitely harder to get by having them graded from the 75 set but the availability is exactly the same.
I guess I didn't think about the popularity of the set as a factor in deciding which set won. That would definitely knock out the 73's and the 74's. If that's the case then why didn't FB win again. He increased his GPA .10 this past year while I believe Frank Smith increased his GPA by about .04.
Once again, Frank's set is awesome and the fact that he put it together mostly out of raw cards is amazing.
Wayne
1973T -
Total Graded = 25,082
Total # of 9s and 10s = 5,557
9s and 10s make up 22.16% of the total number graded
10s make up 0.522% of the total
1974T -
Total Graded = 29,285
Total # of 9s and 10s = 7,401
9s and 10s make up 25.27% of the total number graded
10s make up 0.567% of the total
1975T -
Total Graded = 47,833
Total # of 9s and 10s = 6,815
9s and 10s make up 14.23% of the total number graded
10s make up 0.343% of the total
There are about 600 fewer PSA9s from 1975 and more competition for them. Not to mention that 75T 9s are about twice as tough as a percentage of the whole. I would argue that 75s are quite a bit less available.
Mike
James
1974 Topps
<< <i>9s and 10s make up 25.27% of the total number graded >>
1975 Topps-
<< <i>9s and 10s make up 14.23% of the total number graded >>
I think that is the reason right there.
In fact...Wayne...you may have built your 1974 set "too fast"....how long did it take you to build it...a year? That may have played a part in the decision process.
John
I understand. Your questions are valid. My response was to merely point out that while you raise some good arguments, Frank's 75's are deserving. It's funny, each year I have to cut a kid who's been a Jr. High All-Star player, who's dad is on the rec-league board of directors, etc. I hear things like "My kid can do this and that..." yadda...yadda...yadda. I always respond like this "Who should I have cut? Who's undeserving? Do you understand the criteria for making this team?
The cuts are never easy but have to be made. There will always be quality left on the pile. Heck if I finish my '77s this year, I feel I'm a legitimate candidate for 2004.
FB,
Not sure where you were going with your post. Good luck in 2004.
dgf
I've seen so many posts lately where people can't express an opinion without making it a personal attack. I thought that Wayne's post was reasonable without getting personal. We should all be able to express our opinions whether popular or unpopular. If anyone else (who was not a contender) for the Best Modern Baseball Set had posted what he posted - no one would thought anything of it. Thats all I was pointing out.
On another note.... how many of youy guys believe like I do that my 72 set should be moved to the Best Vintage Set category for next year. Make the category 1960 to 1972?
I don't relish competing against Chris Renaud's 70 or 71 when he completes them but I think that the 72 set probably has more in common with the 70 and 71 than it does with the 73, 74, 75.
Thoughts?
Sets - 1970, 1971 and 1972
Always looking for 1972 O-PEE-CHEE Baseball in PSA 9 or 10!
lynnfrank@earthlink.net
outerbankyank on eBay!
1320 total cards: 245 PSA 8's, 14 PSA 9's and zero 10's.
Compare this to any other set from the 60's or 70's especially '64 Giants (no offense Gemmintman, but you can buy those Giants by the thousands in bricks) or '69 supers (again no offense Bob).
Perhaps there are two schools of thought that graded card collectors come from. One being to pursue sets that can be done in pristine condition (1969 Supers, 1970 Kelloggs, 1964 Giants etc..), The other being the pusuit of difficult (based on appeal in most cases) sets and working towards making the set as nice as can be found.
That said, building the GM's in high grade is one of the toughest and most rewarding set efforts I have ever made. Fortunately, these cards usually are quite appealing in PSA 7 holders and a number of collectors seem to have begun the set at that level(happy hunting to all)
My Goal this year is to at least upgrade one card, although it would be nice to pass Shane on the way up this mountain as I have grown weary of the silly set rating that shows my set .03 points behind...........but I guess it's OK 'cause Shane knows my cards are nicer than his and we all know that on top of that mountain lives the annonymous "Monster" set.
Davalillo,......how's the weather back down there at base camp?
box on the submission form were you get maybe an extra .25 percentage weight for your own submission. lf i was to submit a 72 schaal in action and get a 9 on it i should get an extra .25 weight (if i check the box that says it's going into my set) once i decide to sell it and delete it from my set that extra .25 goes away. this isn't a slam on anyone. i am guilty of spending too much on ebay too
but i think the collectors that submit their own finds should be rewarded.
m2c
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
I know what you're sayin...
But, I don't know that there is any practical way to do it. My 72 is 53% from my own submissions, but those submissions have gone through bulk submitters so that I could get a break on price. So, even PSA's database wouldn't recognize cert's as my own on cards that I scoured Ft, Washington and the National for.
I think that those of us who submit most of our own will reap the rewards when we finally go to sell and find that we're not $50K in the hole like other collectors might be.
Sets - 1970, 1971 and 1972
Always looking for 1972 O-PEE-CHEE Baseball in PSA 9 or 10!
lynnfrank@earthlink.net
outerbankyank on eBay!
I don't agree for a number of reasons.
oops...the real world is calling, I'll yield the floor.
My post was not a personal attack. When I attack, it's really obvious. Sorry it was taken that way...I shoot real straight and sometimes folks reading a post may not grasp the tone.
dgf
I know you didn't attack. Just your point about "you shouldn't have posted on this". Its his neck if he's willing to stick it out - that's all I meant.
Sets - 1970, 1971 and 1972
Always looking for 1972 O-PEE-CHEE Baseball in PSA 9 or 10!
lynnfrank@earthlink.net
outerbankyank on eBay!
dgf
<< <i>There are about 600 fewer PSA9s from 1975 and more competition for them. Not to mention that 75T 9s are about twice as tough as a percentage of the whole. I would argue that 75s are quite a bit less available >>
Mike,
Sorry it's late replying but it was one long day. I agree somewhat and if someone was only building a set by submitting their own cards then there is no question that the 75 set would be much tougher to build. But the availability of 9's on ebay is pretty much similiar for both sets. Plus the cost to acquire the 9's is pretty similiar for both sets. The 75's are much more attractive and I'm probably crazy to have started a 74 set but it was the set that got me started on card collecting.
Most of the collectors building the 75 set are doing so in mostly psa 8 with some 9's. There are about 26,000 cards graded psa 8 from the 75 set with about 14,000 cards graded psa 8 from the 74 set. I think you would agree that it is much easier to put together a 1975 set in psa 8 just because of the current availability. Obviously there are a lot of raw 74's out there and if they become more popular those numbers could change quickly. I think the competition for the psa 9's of the 74 set is very tough right now and it's very competitive. Many of the 9's are selling at huge premiums to smr - in fact they are probably way overvalued right now. I'm sure that will change back the other way if I ever decide to sell.
Btw, are you going to the Chicago show this weekend? I'll be there Friday and Saturday morning. Does anyone know what time the show opens on Friday??? I have about 1000 nm/mt to mint condition 1974 commons that I want to sell at the show. Any ideas on who would want them. I only submitted the cards I needed for my set and received about half 9's and several 10's. I don't really want to submit the rest and sell them. They are all centered very well and most have very sharp corners but the main problem is print defects on the cards. Those fisheyes are real problems on the 74's.
I appreciate and respect your opinions - hope to see you at the show.
Wayne
Jackstraw - I really disagree with that thought. I can't even begin to think about how that could be monitored.
John - I built the 74 set from scratch to 9.0 in 54 weeks. I submitted about 20-25% of the set myself. I bought about 10-15% or so of Carlos's old 74 set. I also bought a large batch of cards from Brian (dgofwinter). Other than that it was pretty much ebay. The first 50% of the set I had well under 65% of smr into the cards and the 20% or so I submitted myself worked out extremely well. The rest I got stupid with.
Wayne
The Chicago show opens at 4:30 for VIP's, I will be walking in at 5:00 with the rest of the commoners
Keith
Mike