Anyone want to help me re-weigh the 1983 Fleer baseball set?

NickM

I looked at the Set Composition today.

Gwynn is 10
Boggs is 9
Sandberg and Ryan are 8
Rose and Ripken is 6
EVERYONE ELSE is 1

Obviously, the weights for Schmidt, Brett, Henderson, Reggie, etc. should not be 1 unless nothing is weighted.

I'm in on this set (3 cards so far - Winfield, Henderson, and Brett), and would like to know if anyone else wants to work with me to submit a better weighing to BJ.

Nick

pandrews

How are "weights" given out? I know nothing about the registry.. I have one Player Set that i've been working on for about 2 months.. I just add the cards when I get them and watch my % complete go up.. I know I have a GPA and a "Rating" but I dont know how they're figured..

NickM

Weights are decided by PSA staff, in consultation with members. They are supposed to reflect a card's relative importance and value to the set.

The total possible points for a set equals the sum of the weight of each card times 10. As you add cards to your set, your total points equals the sum of the grade of each card you have, multiplied by its weight. Your total points divided by the total possible points equals your set rating.

Nick

GoSoxBoSox

Nick,

I would think this set shouldn't be weighted. No offense to any collectors of the set. I have it myself. It's just that all of these cards can be bought in PSA 8 or better for under $20.

PSA hasn't even put weights on the 1951 Parkhurst hockey set. But that's another subject entirely.

mikeschmidt

PSA will take the advice/suggestions of members, if they are willing to put the legwork forward. I've done so in the past for a few of the player sets, most notably Schmidt (which should be re-weighted sometimes with all of the additions). But I've made suggestions for change on the 1955 Bowman set, too. If you put a spreadsheet together, and spend the time to weight things - PSA will generally have it quickly reviewed by staff and/or Joe, and it usually will fly.

They tend to like to follow the SMR

And the point on 1983 Fleer is probably worthwhile. For better or worse - most star cards from the set don't even sell that well in PSA 9. With most modern sets - the "value" of a card is sometimes less than or so insignificantly different than the cost of grading - that the weighting issue becomes kind of moot. If you can pick up a PSA 9 common for $2 and a PSA 9 Schmidt for $4, should the Schmdit have a higher weighting, given that $4 doesn't given you your grading fee back? Shrug.

MS

BobGreasey

It's about 4 pounds. You're welcome.

ctsoxfan

I agree that the weighting is probably just fine, considering the market for the cards. Other than the Boggs and Gwynn RC's, there is little market interest and value in the set. I personally own a few of the key cards, and have purchased PSA 10's of several of the star cards for as little as $20.