J.R. DOLAN
speeder
Posts: 819 ✭
congrats,
nice grab on that 74 deckle edge psa-10 (johnny bench), i`m glad to see that card in the bench registry (where it belongs)
well, thats 2 out of the 3 psa-10`s in the bench registry, the other is in the 74 deckle edge registry .
that may just give you that "we try harder" spot ( #2 ) in the bench master set !!
see ya, john
your friend, lee
nice grab on that 74 deckle edge psa-10 (johnny bench), i`m glad to see that card in the bench registry (where it belongs)
well, thats 2 out of the 3 psa-10`s in the bench registry, the other is in the 74 deckle edge registry .
that may just give you that "we try harder" spot ( #2 ) in the bench master set !!
see ya, john
your friend, lee
0
Comments
Good luck on your sets. I don't think either of us have much of a chance to catch Lee for this year's Bench Master Set, but 100 points from the Deckle Bench sure will help.
Hope everything is okay.
Be good!
My Auctions
As you guys know, that PSA 10 Deckle was on eBay before at $1350 without a bid. Before that it was on NAXCOM at $1650. I almost didn't bid this time, thinking it would come back up in a few weeks at $1000. Then I thought, when that happens I might be fighting with others and it will end up selling for more than $1200. So I took the plunge. I couldn't really afford to, but hell, I'm getting tired of Lee having the only one in the Bench registry. Since he only paid $40 plus grading for his, he can still feel pretty damn good!
Now I have a raw Deckle Bench to sell. I will get it graded soon and see what it gets. It's hard for me to tell with these wavy borders. Anyway, Lee still has nothing to worry about in the top spot. Not when his additions to the registry are weighted 9 and 10, and other things almost as scarce only get 1 or 2. Like the Milk Duds hand-cut that someone just added, with a population of 1. How do they decide this stuff?
Do you guys know the seller of this Deckle, smvrckg? I haven't paid yet. Something's holding me back, I don't know what. I guess I could pay with credit card through PayPal and be protected that way. He has a clean history and buys and sells a lot of cards. Just wondering what he's doing with a PSA 10 Deckle Edge that's not registered. Being paranoid, prolly.
find out where this dealer is from, maybe you could take a day and drive over to get it. use a third party ?
now john, if i may, the rarity of a 1970 candy lid, a 68 kahns, 68 topps venezuelan, 75 test disc, brings the high dollars.
a milk dud box can be found on ebay about every other month, and brings about $40 - $50 bucks. trust me there will be a whole more
examples of the handcut items, psa just started grading them.
i do have issues with some grade weights in the bench registry, we`ve discussed that in the past.
btw, got my grade back on the 68 kahns ,,,,,, it was a psa-5. only the 5th johnny bench to be graded by psa, and my psa-5 is the lowest
graded so far. who cares ,,, just glad to have that one out of the way !!
got my 75 msa test disc back also,,,,,, that one is for another thread though.
your friend, lee
RobE - I've been around, just not as active as I have been in the past. I've picked up the vast majority of the more expensive cards I needed for my 3 main sets, so my buying has been smaller stuff lately. Also, I just got done buying a big screen TV and upgrading all my steroe equipment, so money has been tight.
well heck, lets here what your thinking !!
i think we all have some questions about whats going on, ( weight wise )
or is this a private matter between just you two ?
your friend, lee
Here are the list of cards I asked Joe about the weights:
1969 Milton Bradley +
1969 Topps Stamps +
1970 Topps All-Star +
1970 Topps Candy Lids -
1971 Dell Stamps +
1971 Keds -
1971 Milk Duds +
1972 Pro Star Promotions -
1973 Topps Comics -
1974 Topps Deckle Edge -
1975 SSPC Puzzle Backs +
1977 Venezuelan League Stickers -
The + or - next to a card signifies my suggested alteration to the current weight. What I'm looking for is more of a balance in the registry, where price and rarity are more level.
For example, the current weighting for the 1970 Topps Candy Lid is a 10, the same as a '71 Topps Greatest Moments or a 1968 Kahn's, and more than a rookie card. Granted this item is difficult to find, but to place more emphasis on a candy lid than a rookie card is just going too far. As I said, I'm looking for a balance, and in looking at some of the other player sets, the cards I have listed above didn't seem like they were in balance with the rest of the set.
Just my 2 cents!
Does anyone have a spare low grade rookie that they'll let go of at a reasonable price?
Thanks,
Michael
Subjectively, it will be hard to find total agreement in weighting for a player set. Objective criteria (SMR or catalog price) is a safer way to go.
IMHO
Bob
P.S. Michael---do you need a graded one, or would raw do?
bobsbbcards SGC Registry Sets
Either/or, I'm not particular. I'm just cheap (or semi-broke).
Michael
I agree with you that there isn't an easy way to fairly weight a set. SMR would be a great way to go, but alot of these oddball issues don't make it into an SMR, thus the subjectivity begins.
Scott
I glanced around at the weightings for various other player sets. Most others totally discount the more difficult issues ('70 Candy Lids for Reggie Jackson and Hank Aaron are both 2...or twice as tough as an Isaly's disc). '70 OPC Aaron is a 1? Try finding that card in high grade!
The '64 Topps Stand-Up for Yaz is a 10 (I would have given it a 6), '69 4-in-1 Yaz is a 2 (I would have given it a 6 too). The '60 Yaz rookie is a 10, but compared to many of the Yaz cards in the registry, it's a common.
The '69 Topps rookie for Reggie is a 10 (way overweighted) and the '69 Topps Super rookie for Reggie is a 7.5 (a little underweighted).
1970s MSA discs tend to have weightings of 1 regardless of the difficulty of the issue. Isaly's, Crane, Buckman, Pepsi, and others truly deserve 1s, but Saga, Red Barn, Wendy's should be about 4 or 5.
Again, without quoting prices, all of this is just opinion.
SCD Catalog prices might be a good alternative (Beckett annual pricing is ridiculous).
Bob
bobsbbcards SGC Registry Sets
Just to speak for the Reggie set (since I'm the only person that really has any interest in it) I think that some of these sets are simply put together and then they wait for the collectors to adjust them. You are right about the things that you pointed out. The 1970 Reggie disc is a joke as a 2, the rookie is very easy and to rate it a 10 makes little sense to me. I personally feel that all these sets automatically make the rookie a 10, I don't agree with that at all because, as a player collector, I can get a rookie any time I want one, but find a Red Barn disc, nicely centered OPC's or even a 71 Greatest Moments.
I think that the best way to go about it is to have the people with registered sets get together with the spread sheet and see what they can come up with together.
By the way, anyone got a Reggie 74 Deckle edge, 70 candy lid or Wendy's disc?
Abe
I'll join the Reggie set collecting group if you need company.
I have the Deckle and Candy Lid, but I don't have the Wendy's disc. In fact, I don't have any Wendy's discs.
Bob
P.S. Hopefully you got my warning about MLHOOKUP before doing any business with him.
bobsbbcards SGC Registry Sets
I also meant to say great pickup on the '74 Deckle Bench PSA 10! I didn't mean to hijack your namesake thread. Johnny Bench rocks!
Bob
bobsbbcards SGC Registry Sets
i can see right now, alot of this (weighting) is going to come down to personal perspective.
well, here are some of mine. we have to find some balance between rarity and personal cost.
johnnys rookie card #247 is important, but theres no rarity and and a psa-8 can be had for around $150 - $200 so personal cost is say
medium. (0 rarity + medium cost = ??) if we then look at his other two 68 rookie year items, the 68 kahns and the 68 venezuelan #247
card. the rarity is a 10 on both, and the personal cost is close to $400 ( 10 rarity + high cost = ??)
i would tell joe, if johnnys topps rookie card #247 is a grade weight 9,,,,, johnnys topps venezuela card #247 is a grade weight of 15 !!!
and the 68 kahns card has to be close to that also.
grade populations;
1) 68-topps venezuela ( 3 total ) 2-psa-4`s // 1 psa-5
2) 68-kahns wieners ( 5 total ) 1-psa-5 // 2-psa-6 // 1-psa-7 // 1-psa-8
3) 68 topps ( close to 2000 have been graded )
i think the only reason johnnys topps rookie card has a weight of 9 IS because of its importance.
but by the same token, there have only been 2 keds cards graded. does that mean they are rare and of high personal cost and thus should be graded a 9 or 10 ,,,,, OF COURSE NOT !! these cards are neither rare or expensive. they are just new to psa grading world.
we, as experienced johnny bench collectors truly know which bench items are ( RARE AND EXPENSIVE ) that meet both requirements.
1) 68 - kahns wieners
2) 68 - topps venezuela #247
3) 70- topps candy lid
4) 71- topps greatest moments
5) 73- topps candy lid ????
6) 73- topps comics
7) 73- topps pin-up
8) 74- topps deckle edge
9) 75- msa test disc
10) 77- venezuelan league sticker
11) ?????? did i miss any ?????
there has to be a registry reward for finding (good luck) and then shelling out big bucks to obtain that rare item !!!
each one of the above list ( with the possible exception of the 73 candy lid) is very hard to find and will cost you big bucks.
each one of these deserves a high grade weight. IMO
your friend, lee
I happen to agree with your point of view on this. Now, I'm speaking as a player collector in general, not a Bench collector. I think maybe this is a part of the basic and master set distinctions. The basic set, of course the rookie should be the highest weight, but maybe we need to look at the master set differently.
Because I'm on a budget, the way I buy is according to rarity. If I find something, say the Reggie 74 Deckle Edge I'm dying for I am going to pass on a PSA 8 rookie, PSA 9 70's issues, etc so that I can buy the Deckle and get the others at a later time becasue I know I can. My personal opinion is that the weighting should be similar. Cost has to come into it, but I think that rarity should be the number 1 consideration.
Hope the Bench collectors don't mind me throwing in my 2 cents.
Abe
As you probably already can guess, I agree with your synopsis.
Abe's distinction between the weighting for a basic set and master set is also very perceptive. The basic set is easy to weight based on SMR since the only way a card can make it on the basic set is for it to be fairly "common." The master set, by its very nature, is the place to emphasize the rare and oddball cards that take a collection to a "higher" level.
The other "higher" level that a player set builder could aspire to is to collect the highest possible grades for the basic cards. I wouldn't begin to presume that Marshall Fogel's collection isn't full of important cards in extremely nice condition, but the cards he concentrates on in the 50s and 60s are not "rare". They are only rare in the conditions he collects them in. His registry sets that are "master sets" are buoyed up by the PSA 9s and PSA 10s he has acquired that also sit in his basic sets.
Since master set collectors are drawn more to the rarity of the "non basic" issues, then they should be rewarded for obtaining the most rare cards (in any condition). I think Lee's "Top Ten", if the '73 Candy Lid dropped a couple places and some OPC issues were inserted, is about right.
Bob (IMHO)
bobsbbcards SGC Registry Sets
the ten cards that were listed, were simply listed by years, 68 on up.....
i`m curious bob, what other bench cards would you consider for high grade weight. working off the (rare AND high cost plan)
for those of you unaware, bob`s collection of the rare and high cost cards is, shall we say, outstanding !! many others on this forum
can testify this to be true. thus, i respect his opinion.
now that i`ve pumped you up ,,,,,,, GO
your friend, lee
OK, you got my interest piqued. I've included stuff that PSA can never grade, and my grading system doesn't really correspond to PSAs, but it doesn't matter because it's fun. The regular issue Topps cards, along with Donruss, Fleer, etc. have been omitted (as have a couple of the later OPC issues and stickers). Now, let the debate begin:
10
1968 Venezuelan Topps
1968 Kahn's
1972 Topps Candy Lid
1977 Venezuelan Sticker
9
1973 Topps Comics
1968 Uniroyal Reds
1977 MSA Cup Lids
8
1970 Topps Candy Lid
1971 Topps Greatest Moments
1973 Topps Pinups
1974 Topps Puzzle
1975 MSA Test Disc
7
1969 Topps Team Poster Cincinnati Reds
1971 Bazooka Numbered
1974 Topps Deckle Edge
1982 Topps "Blackless"
6
1968 Partridge
1970 OPC All-Star #464
1973 Topps Candy Lid
1973 Dimanche/Derniere Heure NL
1974 OPC (either)
1976 Icee Drinks Reds
5
1969 Tasco All-Star Collection Caricatures
1972 Milton Bradley
1974 Linnett Portrait
1977 Saga Disc
1977 Wendy's Disc
1977 Red Barn Disc
1976 Hostess Twinkie
1977 Hostess Twinkie
1980 Cincinnati Enquirer Reds
4
1969 Milton Bradley
1969 OPC
1971 Milk Duds
1971 OPC (any)
1975 SSPC Superstars
1984 Nestles
3
1971 Bazooka Unnumbered
1971 Topps Coin
1971 Topps Tattoos
1972 OPC (either)
1975 Carousel Disc
1975 SSPC Puzzlebacks
1976 MSA Blank Backed Disc
1978 SSPC All-Star Gallery
1982 Cincinnati Reds Yearbook Card
1982 Perma Graphics Super Star Credit Card (gold)
1983 Cincinnati Reds Yearbook Card
2
1969 MLB Player's Association Pins
1969 MLB Photostamps
1973 OPC (any)
1974 Kelloggs
1975 Hostess
1976 Hostess
1976 Kelloggs
1976 Kroger
1976 OPC
1977 OPC
1976 Safelon Disc
1977 Hostess
1978 Hostess
1978 OPC
1980 Kelloggs
1981 OPC
1982 Perma Graphics Super Star Credit Card
1
1969 Topps Stamps
1970 Kelloggs
1970 Topps Posters
1970 Topps Super
1971 Topps Super
1974 Topps Stamps
1975 SSPC
1976 Buckman Disc
1976 Crane Disc
1976 Dairy Isle Disc
1976 Isaly's Disc
1976 Linnett Superstars
1976 Towne Club Disc
1977 Pepsi Cola Disc
1977 Topps Cloth Sticker
1979 Topps Comic
1981 Fleer Star Sticker
1981 Perma Graphics
1981 Squirt
1981 Topps Home Team 5x7 Photo
1981 Topps National 5x7 Photo
1981 Topps Scratchoff
1981 Topps Sticker
1982 Coca Cola Reds
1982 Drakes
1982 Fleer Stamps
1983 Topps Sticker
1983 Donruss Action All Star
1983 Fleer Star Stamp
1983 Fleer Stickers
1983 Fleer Foldouts
1983 Topps Stickers (any)
1984 Donruss Champions
1984 Fleer Stickers
1984 Topps All-Star Glossy
bobsbbcards SGC Registry Sets
first off, did you use any paticular criteria to come up with these results ??
secondly, do we know for sure there is a 72 candy lid of bench, i mean for sure ??
on the 77 msa lid, i really don`t have a handle on the pricing, i have not seen any !! rule of thumb for me is, if i have not ever seen one,
cha ching $$$$
i would move the 75 msa test disc up.
i have the 82 blackless, but i`ve been told psa will just grade it and label it as a standard 82. its a tuffy though.
i know the 69 milton bradley is very tough above psa-7, i`d move it up a couple.
well, i`d better stop now. very interesting bob.
thanks, your friend, lee
No criteria except experience. I can't totally guarantee there is a 72 Bench Candy Lid. My opinion is there most likely is. On the '77 MSA Lid, the last one I've seen is the Stargell and the price was $100. Bench would start at $200 probably, but until we see one, who knows?
I agree on moving the '69 Milton Bradley up a couple. I added it to my list early, and didn't review it enough before posting. I'll bump it up to 4 and move the '72 Milton Bradley up to 5.
I can't make myself move the '75 MSA Test Disc up one because I would gladly trade mine in a heart beat for the same condition card of any of the three I have listed at "9". That's probably the best description of the ranking. If you wouldn't trade a card heads up for another card, then it should have a higher rank.
Bob
bobsbbcards SGC Registry Sets
Lee, more people might weigh in (ha ha) if you change the name of the thread.
I'm sure we all feel our oddball Bench items that we've seen rarely offered for sale should be weighted more than 1. Especially if we had to pay big bucks to acquire them.
For example, the '71 Milk Duds hand-cut. Lee says one surfaces every two months. That sounds about right, so my point is that is should NOT have the same weight as some mass-produced 1980s Bench PSA 9 that 4_sharp_corners can't sell until they drop the price to $5 or less. There are other Bench items that you rarely see for sale, and bidding is fierce when they do come up, yet their weight is also 1.
And yet other items, admittedly rare as well, enter the registry with a weight of 7, 8, 9, even 10. How did PSA determine that? Because none other were graded before? No, because other first-graded things get a weight of 1 or 2. Did PSA simply take the submitter's word for it that it should have a hefty weight, or did they do some deep research? I doubt they have that kind of time or staff to spare, so I wonder how they come up with weights for new items.
With mainstream cards it's easy. With scarce oddball items that have only a couple or even zero previous graded examples ... how on earth do they assign 9 or 10 to one and 1 or 2 to another? Is it just a matter of making a suggestion when you submit for addition to the registry?
I'm picking a fight with no one, least of all my fellow Benchers. Just want to know how it works. I have maybe 6-8 Bench items that are not in the registry yet. If I have to do something special to get more than a weight of 1 for those that deserve it, I'd like to know what.
Lee- I'd be curious to see how much you paid for these raw oddball cards, but I'll understand if you choose to keep that information private. I just find it hard to believe that the price paid for a raw 1970 Candy Lid which graded out at a 4 would cost the same as a PSA 8 '71 Topps Bench, but maybe I'm wrong. Just by looking at the pop reports for the '70 Candy Lids, it does appear that they can be had in pretty high grades (6 9's and 1 8 out of 9 total cards graded).
i too, have mentioned a paticular weight when i submitted a card that had yet to be graded. with no definable results.
one paticular card ( 1972 pro star promotions ) only one had been graded, a willie stargell, it had a grade weight of 8.
i simply asked that the bench be given at least the same weight. reasonable request i thought. it came back with a grade weight of 3
when i asked why, psa said they thought that was a reasonable grade and that the willie stargell card had been brought down to a 3 as well. ask virtualizard, it was in his stargell master set.
scott, i bought that 70 lid at the national show in cleveland. i paid almost $400 for that lid, in that condition. did i pay to much ? how would
any of us know, i`ve never, ever seen a one for sale anywhere, anytime !!! have you ever seen one for sale, how much were they asking for it ?? and that was the 1st and only johnny bench 70 candy lid psa has graded to date, regardless of what grade.
and to compare grade for grade, how much would the seller have been asking if he had a 70 bench candy lid in a psa-8 slab !!!
compare that price, to the 71 topps bench psa-8. trust me, there will be a noticable difference.
let me kindly tell you this, the market for johnny bench test + rare issue cards is a whole different market than his standard issue stuff.
and johnny was in some of the toughest mid-70`s test issues there were.
i also noticed that in your list of 11 cards, the 5 cards that you would be in favor of dropping their weights, 3 are very, very hard to obtain
the other 2 are just tough to find.
this is the master set, not the extended basic set. and it is going to be graded differently than the basic set, where the premier card
is the rookie card. how many collectors do you think would trade a 1968 psa-8 topps #247 card for johnnys 1968 psa-8 kahns wieners
or 68 psa-8 venezuelan rookie card ??? i would think 100% of them would make that trade in a second !! that being the case,
johnnys topps rookie card just does not carry the same weight,,,,, in the master set.
and their are other similar case`s throughout the master set.
hope that helps alittle, your friend, lee
Let me play devil's advocate for a minute....please note that I'm not actually making this point, just merely making a comparison. I have the 1975 SSPC Puzzle Backs Johnny Bench (PSA 8). It's the only one PSA has graded to date. In total, there have been 17 graded copies in the entire set, with a breakdown as follows:
10's 1
9Q 1
9 3
8 9
7 2
6 1
Compare that to the '70 Candy Lids (remember I'm not really trying to equate these 2 cards), with 9 graded copies in the set with 6 9's. Granted the Puzzle Backs have nearly twice the # of cards submitted, but the difference isn't that much when you're talking about so few cards. Before I bought mine off eBay, I had no clue these even existed, nor had I ever seen any at any show, online dealer, etc.
What does this prove? Absolutely nothing. Just something to think about as we discuss this weighty (pun intended) issue. There is no definitive way to weight these cards, unless Joe decides to include every issue in the SMR, which is very unlikely. Even then I'm sure there will still be debate.
<< <i>...Let me play devil's advocate for a minute....please note that I'm not actually making this point, just merely making a comparison. I have the 1975 SSPC Puzzle Backs Johnny Bench (PSA 8). It's the only one PSA has graded to date. In total, there have been 17 graded copies in the entire set, with a breakdown as follows:
10's 1
9Q 1
9 3
8 9
7 2
6 1
Compare that to the '70 Candy Lids (remember I'm not really trying to equate these 2 cards), with 9 graded copies in the set with 6 9's. Granted the Puzzle Backs have nearly twice the # of cards submitted, but the difference isn't that much when you're talking about so few cards. Before I bought mine off eBay, I had no clue these even existed, nor had I ever seen any at any show, online dealer, etc... >>
Scott,
I know you say you're not trying to equate the '70 Candy Lid with the '75 SSPC Puzzle Backs. What was the purpose of the comparison then? Here are the reasons why I have a problem with this comparison:
1. The '70 Candy Lids were a test issue, not distributed widely.
2. The '75 SSPC Puzzle Backs were widely issued as a complete set for $2 in 1975.
3. The '70 Candy Lids can be submitted under a regular bulk submission for $6 per card for grading.
4. The '75 SSPC Puzzle Backs need to be submitted under the Tall Boy service for $8 per card for grading.
About a year or so ago, I was watching a PSA 8 Rod Carew SSPC Puzzle Back on ebay. I put a decent snipe on it. The damn thing sold for around $80 or so! I thought that was ridiculous, so that night and over the next few weeks, I searched ebay for raw SSPC Puzzle Backs. Within a month, I had 4 complete sets of them, and spent a TOTAL of about $80 for all 4 COMPLETE sets!.
Fast forward to last month. The 1 PSA 10 and 1 of the 3 PSA 9s currently graded came back to me from PSA:
Here' my submission, if you're interested.
These cards are super easy to find. If you're basing your proposed weights off of the availability of PSA graded oddballs on ebay, then you're making a big mistake.
Those are my thoughts. Hope it helped.
JEB.
Scott, not to knock your set, but I just looked at it and saw that you only have Topps, Kelloggs, a handful of OPCs, SSPC, a bunch of the easy MSA discs, and a couple of Topps oddballs ('77 Cloth Sticker, '70 and '71 Topps Super). I won't even get into the '80s stuff. It appears that you are much better suited to the basic set, maybe an "extended basic set" if such a thing existed (like the Topps Nolan Ryan Player set). But what gets me is that you don't have one of the tough to find cards that make up the master set - no Kahns, no Venezuelans, no Milton Bradleys, and none of the tougher to find Discs of the '70s.
Lee has made an extraordinary effort, not to mention the money spent, to acquire some very hard to find cards. For you to email Joe O suggesting a change in any of the weightings in the set, let alone issues that you have never even seen and have no idea of the scarcity, really gets me. If somebody with a similar Willie Stargell master set (only the Topps, Kelloggs, etc.) did this to me, I'd be extremely upset.
You really should have emailed Lee and John first. Together you guys could have corrected some minor problems with the weighting, but to indiscriminately suggest changes without any backup to support them is really upsetting. If PSA changes the weights to accomodate your request, I will be very upset. To know that anyone can randomly send an email such as this, and have changes made without contacting other members of the registry first, would really put a black mark on PSA and the whole Set Registry idea, at least in my opinion.
JEB.
***Edited for 2 words that were out of order***
scott trust me, i did not want to spend that kind of money on that lid. but there i am, i`ve never seen one for sale before and when might
i see another one ??
it`s not like i could say, WHAT i saw one last week and that guy was only asking $200 !!!
its true what you say, some dealers will take advantage of a situation like that, it`s called the law of supply and demand.
maybe thats what seperates the big boys from the small boys, there willingness to spend big bucks to own something no one else has.
you see it all the time in some of the older sets, the deep pocket boys run #1, #2, #3, and everyone else fights for the leftovers to round out the top ten.
make no mistake, i`m no deep pockets. but the bench registry is the only one i really spend money on.
i`m more than willing to move one way or the other on 95% of the cards in the bench registry.
but that 5% of expensive and rare items, i feel very strongly that there has to be a so called "registry reward" with a high grade weight !
if you did`nt, why would anyone bother to spend the big money, so you would never have the rare oddball items on anyones registry.
geez, i can get a 1973 psa-8 bench for $30.00 with a grade weight of 2.50, why would i spend $400 to get a 73 topps comic with the same grade weight of 2.50 ??
i think we`re better off discussing why opc cards are`nt graded higher, things of that nature.
i think all registrants should understand, if you do not wish to spend the big bucks and take the time and effort to find the rare and test issue items ,,,,, you may only progress so far in your given registry.
its not right to tell those that do, that theres a weight cap on those type items.
i`ll leave you with this, a 1975 sspc johnny bench puzzleback in psa submission holder
thanks, scott
always your friend, lee
Scott, like Lee I have a '75 Bench Puzzleback being graded at PSA, so you won't be the only one much longer. I hope it'll grade 8 or more, but as they say in baseball ... ya never know. Isn't it weird how the uneven framing of the photo makes the card appear miscut at first glance? I also have a '69 Milton Bradley in that submission. I'm hoping for 7 at least, but it's hard to tell because those were detached at the corners.
I admire Lee for the very scarce Bench items he has acquired. That's why he's so far out front. So? I still love Johnny Bench (in a platonic way), whether I'm #2, #3, or #20 ... which I was once. Let's not forget the pleasure of collecting because we got lost in the math.
No, '71 Milk Duds or '71 Dell Stamps shouldn't be weighted the same as '68 Kahns or '68 Venezeualen or '70 Candy Lids. But nor should they be weighted the same as some mainstream Bench card that you buy in PSA 9 for a few bucks any day of the week. And why is the hand-cut KedKard with a population of TWO (I have the PSA 3 and Lee has the PSA 4) weighted only 3? It would appear to be much scarcer, at least in graded form, than some of those high-weight items.
I don't want to get into a d*ck-swinging contest about who has the better cards. I just feel the weighting is not very consistent, and there are some bizarre inequities just in the Bench Master Set. However, if it's not fixed, I'm still going to enjoy tracking down all the Bench oddballs.
The ones that Lee hasn't scarfed up already, that is.
Lee & John,
I admire your restraint in this thread. I don't know that I could be as polite if this had happened to me.
Thanks for the input so far. I look forward to more good discussions on this issue in the future.
Best of luck with your sets.
JEB.
If they do grade and slab them ... how?? They're inserts folded up to 1/12th of their full size. Out of the pack, they're anonymous packets of folded paper. Even if you carefully refold it inside-out, you'd see only a small portion of Johnny or some lettering in the holder.
I have some of these 1970 Topps poster inserts, including Bench, so I am very interested in this.
virtuallizard -- I agree with you that some rookie cards should not have high weights. Johnny Bench, for example, has 108 examples graded PSA 9 and SEVEN graded PSA 10. You don't even want to know how many hundreds of PSA 8's there are. Even in the Basic Set, 1971 and even 1981 are harder to find in mint condition. In the Master Set, many items are much more difficult to acquire in any grade than the '68 rookie in the "usual" grade of PSA 8. This is one of the bizarre inequities I was referring to.
<< <i>...virtuallizard -- I agree with you that some rookie cards should not have high weights. Johnny Bench, for example, has 108 examples graded PSA 9 and SEVEN graded PSA 10. You don't even want to know how many hundreds of PSA 8's there are... >>
I rest my case!
JEB.
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
<< <i>Virt - what you are saying makes more sense for '70s players than '50s players, many of whom appeared in few regional issues.
Nick >>
Nick, I'm not sure that I follow you. If you are collecting a master set of a player from the '50s, wouldn't those oddball cards be even more scarce? I would tend to believe that the difference in weighting of these cards should be even more exagerrated. Granted, the POPs on the regular Topps/Bowman/Fleer issues will be lower, but they will remain the easiest cards to find for any given player.
No matter the Player, no matter the era, the oddballs are generally much harder to find, and should be represented accordingly in the Set Registry. As of today, they are not. From where I sit, that is a major problem and it needs to be fixed, but not by someone with no knowledge of the intricacies of the set. It needs to be discussed openly among all participants, especially those who really know what it takes to find some of these cards.
JEB.
<< <i>You mentioned the '69 and '70 posters in your weight ranking. Does PSA grade these? There are none in the Pop. Report. >>
John,
No, I just included them in the rankings to give some collectors a sense of where they fit in the rarity pecking order. There are quite a few issues mentioned above that PSA can't (or won't) grade. Also, to clarify once more--the numbering system used above is not meant to match PSA's 1-10 grade weighting. I would have jammed some things closer together (8.5, 2.5, etc.) and moved some issues down to 0.5.
I agree with JEB that almost all player cards that appear in the basic sets (regular issue Topps, Fleer, Donruss, etc.) should be weighted 1 or 2. Bench Rookie might be 4 (at most) just because of its significance. If a card for a player is a conditional rarity, it should get a higher weighting, or if it is in a difficult series ('67 Brooks Robinson for instance), it should get a weighting boost. Weights should (in master sets) be closely tied to how difficult it is to acquire the card. If you can buy it on eBay any day of the week, it should be weighted quite low. If you can't buy it with a bucket of cash after years of looking...well, you get the idea.
Bob
bobsbbcards SGC Registry Sets
Jeb- You are correct, my Johnny Bench set doesn't have many of the "tough" issues to obtain, mainly because I refuse to pay ridiculous prices for low-quality, albeit rare cards. I do have a few of the "rarer" 70's discs at PSA now, but Lee does go out and find these tough issues to find. I am aware of the scarcity of these cards, and my motivation in e-mailing Joe was to get input from Joe as to why the weights were given the weights they were. I have received a response from him, and he has suggested I contact BJ and discuss this with her (which I will). Obviously I'm not the only one who has questions about the weights, since John has mentioned in a few of his posts some issues he sees some inconsistencies. Consistency is all I'm asking for, not just within the Bench Master Set, but also between other player sets. Maybe we should look at removing all the "basic" cards from the Master Set, and that way all the oddballs cards can be weighted against each other. As far as me contacting Lee and John first before talking to anyone at PSA regarding my concerns, that's certainly your opinion to think that. Not everything needs to "go through committee" before being brought to PSA's attention for clarification. I know changes have been suggested/made to weights and inclusions without my approval before.
As I've said MANY times already, all I'm looking for is consistency. It's becoming apparent that we're all going to agree to disagree. I'm not trying to pick a fight, merely trying to gain some clarification and insight into PSA's thought process for weighting cards.
Sorry for stirring the pot!
<< <i>It needs to be discussed openly among all participants, especially those who really know what it takes to find some of these cards. >>
It takes time, money, rooting around at shows (as Lee knows), and networking with other collectors. Some items in my Bench Master Set came from other collectors who knew I would be interested in paying to grade their item, when they themselves would not bother. A few have even been donated as an act of friendship. That's what our hobby is all about.
Some things come on eBay rarely or not at all because they are just plain scarce. Others are readily available but don't come on eBay often simply because nobody cares other than us hardcore Bench collectors. It's a shame that some in the first category are weighted 1 just because nobody requested otherwise, and that some in the latter category are weighted higher just because somebody did.
But what should PSA do about that? There are so many sets, it would be a monumental job to keep on top of all the weighting intracacies of each one.
So I dunno. This is probably why BJ asks us for a consensus when somebody asks for a change.
Warren Spahn Master Set
Number of Cards: 56
Card No. Item Name Grade
Weight
1947 EXHIBITS WARREN SPAHN B ON CAP 1
1947 EXHIBITS WARREN SPAHN M ON CAP 1
18 1948 BOWMAN WARREN SPAHN 6
32 1948 LEAF WARREN SPAHN 10
33 1949 BOWMAN WARREN SPAHN 3
25 1949 EUREKA SPORTSTAMP WARREN SPAHN 1
19 1950 BOWMAN WARREN SPAHN 7
14 1950 DRAKE WARREN SPAHN 4
1951 BERK ROSS WARREN SPAHN 3
134 1951 BOWMAN WARREN SPAHN 3.50
30 1951 TOPPS RED BACKS WARREN SPAHN 1.50
156 1952 BOWMAN WARREN SPAHN 4
22 1952 RED MAN TOBACCO WARREN SPAHN 4
33 1952 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 8.50
33 1952 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN BLACK BACK 8.50
99 1953 BOWMAN COLOR WARREN SPAHN 6.50
10 1953 JOHNSTON COOKIES BRAVES WARREN SPAHN 2.50
19 1953 RED MAN TOBACCO WARREN SPAHN 3
147 1953 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 4.50
21 1954 JOHNSTON COOKIES BRAVES WARREN SPAHN 2.50
1954 RED HEART DOG FOOD WARREN SPAHN 2.50
11 1954 RED MAN TOBACCO WARREN SPAHN 3
20 1954 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 3
10 1955 RED MAN TOBACCO WARREN SPAHN 3
31 1955 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 2.50
1955 TOPPS DOUBLEHEADERS SPAHN/BREWER 4
10 1956 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 2.50
90 1957 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 2
270 1958 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 2.50
494 1958 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN ALL-STAR 1.50
40 1959 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN BORN IN 1921 1.50
40 1959 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN BORN IN 1931 1.50
40 1959 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN BORN IN 1931 3 OBSCURED 1.50
571 1959 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN ALL-STAR 1.50
63 1960 NU-CARD BASEBALL HI-LITES WARREN SPAHN 1
445 1960 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 1.50
1961 CHEMSTRAND IRON-ON PATCHES WARREN SPAHN 1
402 1961 NU-CARD BASEBALL SCOOPS WARREN SPAHN HURLS NO-HITTER WHIFFS 15 1
463 1961 NU-CARD BASEBALL SCOOPS WARREN SPAHN BEATS YANKEES IN WORLD SERIES 1
200 1961 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 1.50
589 1961 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN ALL-STAR 2
1961 TOPPS STAMPS WARREN SPAHN 1
100 1962 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 2
312 1962 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN SHOWS NO-HIT FORM 1
399 1962 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN ALL-STAR 1.50
1962 TOPPS STAMP PANELS SPAHN/FORD 1
45 1963 FLEER WARREN SPAHN 2
320 1963 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 2
1963 TOPPS PEEL-OFFS WARREN SPAHN 1
1964 BAZOOKA STAMPS WARREN SPAHN 1
400 1964 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 1.50
88 1964 TOPPS COINS WARREN SPAHN 1
31 1964 TOPPS GIANTS WARREN SPAHN 1
1964 TOPPS STAND-UPS WARREN SPAHN 2.50
205 1965 O-PEE-CHEE WARREN SPAHN 1
205 1965 TOPPS WARREN SPAHN 1.50
Of the 56 cards, 17 are regional or oddball issues, 7 more are Topps oddball issues [Red Backs is counted as a base issue], and 1 more is an OPC issue. All the rest are major manufacturer basic issues.
Any Topps Spahn card from the '50s is quite expensive in high grade, even though available frequently. Due to collector demand, you would likely pay more on eBay for a PSA 8 caliber raw or graded '54 or '55 Topps Spahn than you would for some much rarer ones, such as Johnston Cookies. Effectively, the exceptions created for such a player's cards on weighting would swallow the rule you would like to see on card weights.
The Spahn registry is far from perfect ('65 OPC is way underweighted, the '59 variations should be at different weights, and Stand-Ups and Double Headers should be weighted higher, just to name obvious examples), but I believe it far better approximates a proper weight than your proposed rule would give it.
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
I have not read this thread thoroughly yet, but maybe I can share my experience with weighting the Nolan Ryan sets over the years. Lots of opinions and influences can go into any sets weights, but when it comes to player sets, things can quickly get out of whack due to combinations of scarcity, value, desirablility, and demand among the myriad types of cards that make up a player set.
First, the basis for the weighting is every card's value in PSA 8 NM-MT condition within the set. The most valuable in the set would have a weight of 10. The least valuable could have a weight of 1 or even .5 if you use half weights (a necessity in the Ryan sets). This weight is only relative to the weights in the set, not all baseball cards. So, a Ted Williams rookie and a Nolan Ryan rookie could conceivably both be weighted 10 within their respective sets.
The weights cascade down from the value of the "10" card(s) in increments determined by the values of the highest and lowest cards in the set. So, if a 10 weight is worth $1000 in PSA 8 and the 1 weight is worth $2 in PSA 8, this is where the range of other weights can be derived. This is why it's easy to weight Topps cards. The values in PSA 8 are well known and stable. For Johnny Bench, his rookie in PSA 8 is $250, so there's the 10, his 1983 Topps in PSA 8 is $2, so there's the 1. The 9 weight would likely be a card of about $200, $150 for a 7, $100 for a 6, $50 for a 5, $25 for a 4, $12 for a 3, $6 for a 2 and $2 for a 1. If card values in Bench's set conform to this scale, the weights should be easy. If there are several other "tiers" of value, you may need to add half-point weights.
Now, for oddballs that cannot be priced so easily, the measuring "tool" should be scarcity in relation to demand. This "ratio" helps establish an idea of value. For example, PSA has only graded 1 PSA 8 1971 Dell Stamp Nolan Ryan (I don't know Bench enough to quote his oddballs). If you have looked for these, you know they are really hard to find centered and cleanly perfed. Yet, overall it's pretty easy to find one of these, so the raw value is low despite the low population in high grade. The only PSA 8 sold for $75. So, on the weight scale, the Dell is about a 2.5 I think (about the same as a '76 Topps).
OPCs are always tough to gauge because they are so damn hard to find (the old ones) in PSA 8, yet often sell for less than their Topps counterparts in PSA 8 because the market for OPC set builders and collectors is pretty thin. Since the demand is not there, it is not realistic to weight them much heavier (if any) over the Topps cards. But, they should be weighed heavier because of the scarcity factor (and desirability to player collectors), but since the demand is not as steep, you can't weigh them off the charts.
A lot of nuance goes into weighting. It really helps to have the list in front of you and do it visually -- adding here, subtracting there -- until the balance seems about right. Three of the Ryan guys have been working on weighting the revised Nolan Ryan Master Set for months and it really takes a while to get it right.
I hope my opinion is somewhat helpful.
<< <i>I hope my opinion is somewhat helpful. >>
Extremely helpful, thanks Con. But I'm curious about some things.
How do you know what a 1983 Bench PSA 8 is worth? SMR stops listing Johnny's cards individually after about 1981.
Your explanation seems to indicate that weights for established mainstream cards are linked to how much the card generally costs to acquire. That can shift with the market, but I assume the weights do not go up and down depending on realized sales. Am I reading the explanation wrong?
On the '71 Dell Stamp, I am surprised to hear that Ryan's is weighted 2.5. Bench's is weighted 1 with only four or five graded examples (I own the highest graded, PSA 9). Not sure which is appropriate, but my basic question is:
When PSA adds an oddball item to a Master Set, do they automatically assign a weight of 1 unless the submitter requests otherwise? When the submitter does ask that his ultra-scarce Johnny Bench mini-Frisbee be slabbed and given a weight of 9, what does PSA do to research the issue?
By the way, Johnny Bench has a line of men's clothing. I wonder if PSA would slab, say, a sock or handkerchief.
Good questions.
First, the value of a 1983 Bench in PSA 8 would be about equivalent to its raw NM-MT value if it's not listed.
As far as the stability of value, anything can fluctuate up or down (particularly low-pop stuff like the '81 Topps Bench in PSA 9). So from time to time weight adjustments may be required to keep the set accurate to the market. PSA will not do this "maintenance". It's up to the set members to request the changes. If BJ and Joe deem them appropriate, they'll make them.
PSA will automatically assign a weight of 1 to any set additions unless you suggest a weight when the card addition is requested.
The '81 Bench is a good example of understanding the nuances of weighting. PSA suggests using PSA 8 values as a determinant of weight. The '81 Bench would then be weighted a 1 most likely. But we all know that card is a bastárd in PSA 9. Knowing that, the weight should reflect that difficulty because most Bench collectors would presumably want that card in PSA 9 or better. I wouldn't recommend a weight of 7 or something like that (recent sales could support it though). But a weight of 3 may be a fair assessment. It should have more weight value placed on it than other 1s like the '82 or '83. This is why you really have to understand the cards, demands, difficulties, and market for player sets. It is really tough to do these weights accurately.
As far as clothing goes, I think you may have to submit to GAI for pack slabbing! They'll pretty much put anything in a slab.
Good point about PSA not doing "maintenance" on weight values. So in the case of Bench, it's up to us to draft a list of the worst problems with the weight values (like '81 Topps), point to the pops and actual sale prices, and ask BJ to make changes.
That sounds reasonable. The only thing is, getting members of a registry to agree on weights is kinda like trying to get cats to walk in a parade. Just look at this thread. I imagine someone is not going to want to see his prize '72 Bench beer coaster reduced from 7 to 2, nor will he want to see his rival's '74 Bench poker chip raised from 1 to 4.
If it sounds like I'm laughing at myself (and us) ... I sorta am.
Good luck... but in my experiences asking them to suggest weights, I have been very disappointed... Joe (the ultimate weighter) seems to undervalue anything that is not listed in SMR... for example, in the first Nolan Ryan Master Set, he weighted the '74 Deckle a 2 I think (the set was not yet listed in SMR). I emailed him to explain the set was difficult and the Ryan should be weighted at least an 8. He said the set was not that scarce and the card not that valuable, so I told him I had the only PSA 9 Ryan (at the time) and had been offered $2500 by a national dealer. He was stunned and agreed to weight the card an 8 or maybe even a 9. Funny thing is, a couple months later, the '74 Deckle set turned up in SMR with the PSA 9 Ryan valued at $2500... wonder how they figured that price?
Instances like this have shaken my faith in Joe's knowledge of some scarce, obscure issues. I recommend you do the legwork and weighting yourself and then present the evidence to Joe. You will be more satisfied.