Adding cards you don't own???

downgoesfrazier

It appears a 1978 Topps collector is adding cards to his set trying to win the registry award WHILE THE CARDS ARE STILL ON EBAY?!?!?!
Check out Guy's set and check your eBay listings...hmmmm...pretty brutal. I think I'll make a run at Marshall's 50's sets while I'm at it...I'm sure I can dig up some old Superior & Mastro catalogs...perhaps a Goodwin or two and BAM! Start punching in the numbers...egads!


dgf

AlanAllen

It was only a matter of time. He'll probably use the lame excuse "I just wanted to see what it would do to my set rating." I'm surprised it doesn't happen more often to be honest.

Joe

qualitycards

Imagine the potential for problems w/ GAI who will use PSA, SGC & their own cards for the registry. And I doubt they will be privy to PSA & SGC's data base. So it will be more of an honor thing.

downgoesfrazier

Yeah, you guys are right. I'm just surprised and a little disappointed in Guy. Perhaps he was just checking to see if he could catch Frank by whacking the BIN's...although you CAN do that without entering cards and validating, I believe.

dgf

SOM

Poor Guy. He pleaded with me (set #3) last night, to sell him the reg's off of my cards that he wanted. Trouble is, Frank is bound and determined to kick his ass anyway. What a job of sandbagging!

Nick

mikeschmidt

DGF:

At some point - a lot of everything comes down to honesty and trust. Clearly - anyone with any sort of motivated intention who has followed the hobby for the last few years can likely put together a virtual "set" comprising of nothing other than various serial numbers that have made their way to auction house. There are a few vintage sets that are underrepresented on the Registry (e.g. major players have not registered) - and such an exercise would not be tremendously difficult.

FB

And what idiot waits till the weekend of the registry awards to to start their full-court press???? Any normal, honorable sandbagger would have been working on this for monthe already!

Cubfan

Just curious. How do you know what cards he is entering in his set?
There is no way he is entering scans too is there?

Or are they 1 of 1's or cards so limited that you know where they all are?

I was wondering when something like this would pop up.

jrdolan

I don't have any problem with registering cards as soon as you buy them. They belong to you, even if they are not in your greedy little hands yet. If it turns out to be a scam or some other problem, you can delete them from your set.

But registering cards you find on eBay but haven't won .... that is pretty pathetic. Where will it end? "Oh look at the great cards in Memory Lane's catalog! I think I'll register them and have a kickass rating for a few days!"

downgoesfrazier

Cubfan,
You are correct. Guys who watch their sets closely know where the stuff is. However, when a 1/1 is on eBay and it's also in a desperate registrant's set, it doesn't take an astute collector to notice...just a guy surfing the 70's on eBay.


dgf

downgoesfrazier

Schmitty,
I officially nominate you as the "Tim McCarver" of the CU boards.

dgf

WinPitcher

i have now heard it all, what can possibly be next?

theplasticman

hah! thats not even worth the time or hassle.

sjeanblanc

DGF,

Is it possible that the card on eBay is not a 1 of 1, but is a 1 of 2 and the PSA Pop report hasn't been updated yet?

I've had problems with 4_Sharp making claims like that, in the past. The funny thing there was he auctioned and sold, on back to back to back weeks three of the same 1 of 1 card, an 1983 OPC Nolan Ryan PSA 10.

Just a thought,

Scott J.

1420sports

I was once addicted to the idea of "The Registry", but realized that it was not for me. I am still active on sets and I do update them as I add to or change my collection, but the idea of competing for a piece of paper just does not appeal to me anymore. Don't get me wrong, the main reason I stopped being competitive on the Rose Master set was due to finances but all in all it just got old.

doncherry

sjeanblanc

DGF was bang on he added cards that are definately 1/1 PSA 10's including Jenkins etc that 4 Corners has listed. After reading the post this morning and checking his set it was at 9.16 GPA it is now at 9.11 GPA and the 10's are removed. If you check out some of the cards that say updated PSA 9 they will match with PSA 10's currently on ebay

sjeanblanc

Wow,

If that was the case, thats just wrong. Once you win the card and pay for it, put it in your set, but otherwise its not very sporting.

Scott J.

downgoesfrazier

BUSTED by the "card-cops" once again. Another great card-caper foiled by the CU board.


I can almost hear Guy Barenna now, ..."and I would have gotten away with it to if it weren't for Frazier and that group of meddling kids...


dgf

joker73

<< <i>Perhaps he was just checking to see if he could catch Frank by whacking the BIN's...although you CAN do that without entering cards and validating, I believe. >>



I play around with my set spreadsheets all the time for exactly this reason ... there's no reason to ever mess around with the actual Registry until new cards are in your hands.

ranger63

I don't have any problem with registering cards as soon as you buy them. They belong to you, even if they are not in your greedy little hands yet. If it turns out to be a scam or some other problem, you can delete them from your set.

that is the first thing i do when i win a card.

SOM

Sure...those suspect cards are removed from Guy's roster this morning. Because the deadline was last night at 7:00 p.m. to finalize your Registry set for the 2004 awards!

What a travesty...

Cubfan

Did the suspect cards put him at #1? If not, then he had nothing to gain and only the respect of his fellow 78'ers to lose.

And dgf was correct, if you want to see how cards might affect your overall rating, you can now enter the cards in your set on PSA and it will update the scores and weights for you with all the detailed numbers there (I like this new feature).

Then you DONT hit validate, but insert the old numbers back into the set. The set does not have to be updated for you to see the "what-ifs".

SOM

You are correct, Keith.

Guy's shenanigans were as unnecessary and as poorly executed...and resulting in the same personal embarrrassment...as the Watergate break in!

SOM

(Apologies for my feeble attempt at election day eve topicality...)

downgoesfrazier

Feeble, perhaps, but the spirit is what counts


dgf

WinPitcher

did they put him at #1?

AlanAllen

No, he was still #2.

Joe

BugOnTheRug

<< <i>if you want to see how cards might affect your overall rating, you can now enter the cards in your set on PSA and it will update the scores and weights for you with all the detailed numbers there (I like this new feature). >>


You can also download Virtualizard 's excel spreadsheet for '78 and do the calculations that way. Before the new psa format, he made one for me for the 84D set. I then used this to chart and figure what 8's and 10's would do to the set. Nice worthwhile tool by the boards always-helpful-JEB.

BOTR

fsjeter

BOTR,

I created an excel sheet for my '67 set and have used the same setup for all my sets since then. It's much easier inputting a grade than inserting cert. #'s that don't belong to you. Especially since that little feature hasn't been around that long. Where can you download Steve's? I'd be interested in seeing any differences in the spreadsheets.

Thanks,
Scott

gfb

Hi everyone, just wanted to clear up the confusion and set things straight

plain and simple,
this was an experiment to see if it would be possible to reclaim the top spot with what was available on ebay in the limited time frame and make offers to those sellers. seeing it wouldn't be close, 9.16 to 9.24 , clicked the wrong button (you can see at the bottom what your rating will be, so there was no need to validate to see), (if you will notice, i didn't update any of the team sets from 78, this was just to see what would happen with the main one), realized what i did, pulled all the ones in question and reentered the original certs and re-validated correctly this time.
I've spent too much time putting together this set in addition to scanning all the cards in it and uploading them (over dial up no less), and trying to put some descriptions on them to do something stupid (which with 1 errant click did happen).
thanks,
guy

pc

according to the rules (i'm just relaying them) even if we have paid for an item we are prohibited from entering it into a set until we have physical possesion.i completely disagree as i feel one real world benefit of the registry is having a certification number at my fingertips if a card is missing or doesn't arrive from a seller.i might be mistaken but if i enter a card,ticket or whathaveyou into my set and the item is stolen or missing then no one else can enter it into his or her set without my notification.this would greatly increase the chances of my recuperating money spent or the return of the item to me.anyone differ?

downgoesfrazier

PC,
I sure don't differ. That makes perfect sense to me.

dgf

Virtualizard

If anyone wants to see what the effect of adding cards to their set will do for their % completion, GPA, and Set Rating, you are welcome to use my Set Registry Spreadsheets. It's much easier and safer than editing your set and mistakenly hitting the "validate" button.

If there is a set that I don't have listed, or if you find that one needs to be updated to accomodate recent changes, please email me. I'll be happy to add or update any sets.

Best of luck to all in whatever you collect!

JEB.

sjeanblanc

PC,

I sure don't differ, I had a $160 Ryan PSA 10, vanish like a fart in the wind while in transit from a seller. I didn't take a refund because I wanted the card and it is registered in my set. If anyone tries to register it, I have the eBay auction, Paypal payment, and email from seller, to prove that its mine. The Set Registry can act like a hobby sentinel in this capacity.

Scott J.

WinPitcher

so, had your gpa been 9.25 your mistake would have cost someone his/her rightly spot a top the list?

i ask cuz i do not fully understand how this all works.

fsjeter

pc, DGF, and sjeanblanc,

Not to play devil's advocate but I don't see PSA wanting to get in the middle of something like that. A while back, PSA sent out survey's about the problem of registering cert #'s that were already in somebody else's set. One of the suggestions was to remove the previous listing if the new owner submitted a scan. I have yet to register a card that is still in someone else's set so I don't know how PSA goes about contacting the two registrants. Does PSA contact the previous owner after the new owner requests it or after they TRY to register a card regardless if there is a request or not?

Scott

downgoesfrazier

Jester,
Based on PSA's customer service track record, I'd be inclined to agree that they would not get involved. WIWAG came and went and involved them directly and they didn't get too involved. In this regard, you're probably right.

Anyway, BJ or Cosetta generally will email and ask that you delete the card, etc. They are very professional and kind. I have to say that the registry operations seem real solid to me. If only the grading were as consistent as those folks...oh well.

dgf

BugOnTheRug

fs_ and JEB,

My bad............wrong author of the spreadsheets in my previous post

Thank YOU jeb for making these spreadsheets for everyone's use. I've used the 84D spread since you first made it and it's a wonderful tool - use it all the time just to tinker with what is possible.

Take care, Bill

fsjeter

JEB,

Nice work. I looked at your '67 sheet. Where did you get the divisor for the set rating (cell AF617)? I use the total grade weight for the set (925.5), am I using the wrong number? It seems to divide out right.

Scott

Virtualizard

Scott,

It appears that you are correct. 925.5 is the correct divisor according to the set registry. Obviously, the weighting was changed since I created the spreadsheet. As I stated in my previous post, I count on the users of my spreadsheets to let me know when something changes. I don't collect the '67 set, so I was unaware of the change until now. I will fix it shortly. Thanks for the update.

See how easy that was?

JEB.

Virtualizard

Scott,

I updated the set on my website. In case you're interested, the changes that were made are as follows:

#265 Lou Burdette - weight changed from 2 to 1
#266 Pitt Power - weight changed from 1 to 2
#417 Bob Bruce - weight changed from 4 to 1

I checked (as I always do) and the 925.5 divisor shown on the Registry is correct. I have found a wrong divisor listed on many sets, and notified PSA as I created the spreadsheets. They have always corrected it promptly.

The spreadsheet should work fine now!

JEB.