All-Time Finest vs Current Finest

wolfbear

This is a minor point,
but someone brought it up in another thread and I agree.

On the main page for each set, the All-Time Finest sets are listed first,
then the Current Finest sets are listed. This ranking seems out of order to me.

While the All-Time Finest sets, which may no longer exist, can be of minor curiosity,
the more interesting sets are the Current Finest sets because they are still intact.

They deserve, and should be given, the top billing.

carew4me

Wolf,
I say set up the ATF list as a link at the top...but nothing else.

I think ATF is flawed. Maybe the one and only top of the heap atf finest set ever to be assembled but beyond that????

doncherry

wolfbear

Agree with you 100%

Golfcollector

Amen

Axtell

I guess I am in the minority...I think the all-time finest should be given top billing.

If you are assembling a set, and wanting the all-time best, shouldn't that give you the motivation to work that much harder for it?

shouldabeena10

I think I'd be in the minority on this one too.

I've always liked "looking up" at the all time finest sets. They represent the ultimate challenge for set builders and the pinnicle of achievment. It's also nice to know that even if you sell or retire one of your great sets that it might have a shot at immortality at the top of the set registry.

Mike

koby

I agree.

Disassembled sets are not as important as current sets that are still in existence.

wolfbear

For the minority dissenters :

Say somebody puts together a top 5 All-Time Finest set and puts it on the registry.
Then the owner decides to sell the set by consigning it to an auction house,
who then put the cards into the registry under their auction house name and sell the set.

The new owner then puts the set onto the registry, and all of sudden,
we have 3 of the top 5 All-Time Finest sets that are just the same dam cards. Total BS !

I want to compete against actual viable sets, not pretend ones.
Put the All-Time Finest sets somewhere on the page, but NOT above the living, breathing sets.
Well, maybe everyone's sets don't live and breathe, but mine do ...

Axtell

<< <i>

Say somebody puts together a top 5 All-Time Finest set and puts it on the registry.
The new owner then puts the set onto the registry, and all of sudden,
we have 3 of the top 5 All-Time Finest sets that are just the same dam cards. >>



And that happens when?

How often is an all-time top five finest set sold, let alone sold as a complete beast? For me, I love seeing how good Chris Renaud's 1971 set was. That was an amazing accomplishment, seeing the ridiculous task involved in getting these beasts not only 100% complete, but at over 8.5. I am under no delusions I'll ever have a top 5 ATF 1971 set...but my goal of hitting the top 20 is something within reach with a lot of dedication.

It's like taking the records of a baseball player off the books when he retires...with no sense of history, how can we appreciate the present?

I'd vote a resounding NO to changing the existing format away from having the all time finest on top of the current finest.

I'm not sure I understand the desire to have the all-time greatest sets taken away from the top of the page...other than for those under it to feel better about their sets. /shrug

wolfbear

How would you like to open your sports page EVERY morning
and have the headline read "Babe Ruth hits 60th Homerun !",
and then have to look around to see what happened last night ?

How about if Sports Center opened EACH broadcast with
"DiMaggio extends hitting streak to 56 !, we'll get to what occured recently later on." ?

This has nothing to do with ignoring past accomplishments, or with throwing away history,
it's only about putting them in their rightful place : subordinate to what's happening now ...

shouldabeena10

Wolf,

Yes, I'd have to agree that your scenario of the same set being registered over and over again in the top 5 ATF spots would change my mind somewhat if that started happening. Is it starting to happen yet? I don't think I've seen one.

Maybe CU could come up with a good rule of thumb to stop that from happening? Like maybe if the same set is registered twice (by different names / owners) it could still only hold 1 spot on the ATF list? Just combine the names of the different owners.

Here's an example of how a #1 All-Time Finest Set could look with two different owners:

Couldabeena's 1976 Crane Disc's / Wolfbear's Dream Finally Realized



Mike

koby

Sense of history? We all have to stop this hero worship.

Sportscard collecting is a hobby where we admire the accomplishments of athletes. When we take it a step further worship the wealthy collectors as if they were great athletes, then we have taken this hobby a step further than I want to go. When we equate building a 1971 set to setting a record in Major League Baseball, then something is wrong.

Sense of history? Everyone should just focus on their own collections rather than admiring the wealthier collectors. When the wealthier collector breaks his set up, don't pretend that it still exists. Just let it go.

wolfbear

shouldabeena10 - how can you expect anyone to take you seriously
when you have such a ridiculously silly icon above your user name ?

And speaking of top billings,
here's a BETTER example of how a # 1 All-Time Finest Set could look with two different owners:

Wolfbear's how did I end up with all of these round things ? / Couldabeena's 1976 Crane Disc's

Axtell

You honestly look at your set registry every day?

Damn...

If you do, no wonder this topic has you so heated.

I doubt you do, and I have to wonder if it's not more about what you want: you want to see your set higher on the page than it currently is.

What's so terribly bad about having the all time leaders there for you to look up to? Why does it bother you so? So many things to get upset with in this world and this is your champion cause?

ctsoxfan

<< <i>Sense of history? We all have to stop this hero worship.

Sportscard collecting is a hobby where we admire the accomplishments of athletes. When we take it a step further worship the wealthy collectors as if they were great athletes, then we have taken this hobby a step further than I want to go. When we equate building a 1971 set to setting a record in Major League Baseball, then something is wrong.

Sense of history? Everyone should just focus on their own collections rather than admiring the wealthier collectors. When the wealthier collector breaks his set up, don't pretend that it still exists. Just let it go. >>



Amen! Very well said Koby - and for the record, I agree with Wolfbear...put the ATF somewhere on the page if you must, but current sets deserve top billing.

Axtell

<< <i>
Sense of history? Everyone should just focus on their own collections >>



If that's the case, why have a public display of the set registry at all then?

So we aren't to admire the work that the highest of the high end sets have been able to achieve?

You say we shouldn't focus on the wealthiest sets...I bet there are many with sets under yours who feel the same exact way about your set...but I bet you think you have put in a ton of work on them, right?

And there is a huge jump to take my statement 'appreciating the past sets of the set registry' to 'hero worship'.

I just can't believe there is this much envy against the ATF sets.

wolfbear

Didn't mean for this to turn into a flame war.
Just thought the topic was worthy of discussion.
Also, it seems like it would be something very easy for PSA to fix.

By the way, this really has nothing to with my sets personally.
Listing the All-Time Finest above the Current Finest has just never seemed logical to me.

Griffins

I"m with Wolfbear. The current finest should be at the top- if you want to remain there don't sell your set. Otherwise the set is just a footnote, and should be at the bottom of the page.

Yzerman19C

Wolfbear

I agree with you as well

Teemu

Wolfie,

Gotta agree with you also. The all-time is nice to look at, but the current one is the only one that really matters.

Vintagegolfcollector

Great thread and one that deserves some attention. Here are my thoughts. I'm absolutely against auction houses leaving "their" sets on the ATF once the sets are sold. There is no reason to have the same set listed two or even three times, especially when the collection wasn't even really owned by a "collector" and only passing from one person to another through the seller. This really needs to be addressed by PSA for the good of the hobby.

My thoughts on the next issue differs from some collectors. I don't have a problem with a no longer existing set staying on the ATF if the set was broken up and now resides in a number of other sets. I just sold the # 2 all-time 1976 Topps Basketball Set to another collector and plan on removing it from the ATF list once the new owner receives it. (It's truly a great set and I hated to let it go but I've decided to move my collecting primarily to vintage golf and needed to let something go in order do such.) The new owner plans adding to the set but I believe it's not fair to the collectors on my heals to have to compete with my old set and the new one. On the other had, if I had broken up the set and sold the individual cards to several collectors, I would have left my set on the ATF list.

I do like the idea of having the top 5, or maybe even expanding it to a top 10, All-Time Finest listed at the top of the page. I enjoy viewing from time to time what others have been able to achieve, even if their sets no longer exist, just as long as it isn't listed more than once under different owners. There are plenty of sets I will never be able to afford a top 10, that's fine by me, I collect what I enjoy and can afford. It's nothing like worshipping a set or collector, just admiring what someone else has been able to achieved. My outlook on life is a steward not an owner of things.

The Registry has been around long enough now that new issues will begin popping up that require addressing and PSA will need to give some thought to what is best for the Registry and the collectors. They have invented a great vehicle to promote the hobby and like anything it will need adjusting and added to in order to continue running well.

I hope other collectors will share their thoughts to these issues and let's hope PSA will address them.

Peter

Buckwheat

Just have your set as both the ATF and Current finest, and it doesn't matter.

Axtell

<< <i>Just have your set as both the ATF and Current finest, and it doesn't matter. >>



I couldn't agree more. If you don't want other sets 'above' yours in the ATF listing, sac up and throw down the coin. Otherwise, you shouldn't be complaining.

Vintagegolfcollector

I believe there are several points to the thread. One is having something in place where the same cards to an individual set are not listed under multiple owners, past and present. There are a number of registries where the # 1 and # 2 sets on the ATF are identical due to the set simply changing hands. If the set was consigned to one of the auction houses, you could also have a situation where three of the top five places are in fact taken up by the same set, the original owner, the auction house, and the second owner. It might not affect too many collectors right now but I think just because it doesn't affect you doesn't mean it isn't an issue. I don't believe an auction house should be allowed to leave a set on the registry after it is sold.

Separate issue. I'm also of the opinion that if a complete set is sold as a whole to an individual, that the old set should also be removed, but if the set is broken up and sold to several collectors that the old set should be allowed to stay on the ATF. I simple do not believe that the same set should be listed more than once just because it has been owned by more than one person.

For those who believe one should retain a set to keep it on the ATF, then why bother with the all time finest and just have a current finest list??? I don't have a problem with the ATF being at the top of the page or even on a separate page needing to be access from the current finest page. I think both options have their merits.

Peter

magellan

Peter , very well thought out and presented. Some of the knee jerk reactions to Wolfie's original post sound as if they have some ax to grind here. Wolfie was simply stating his preferences and his opinion. Everyone has that right.

Vintagegolfcollector

Thanks for your support Magellan. I was wondering if I had missed something or just dealing with people who buck at any attempt to make changes. Wolfie brought up some good points that will effect more and more collectors as time goes by. I probably see it more than most collectors due to collecting small runs and mostly non-baseball sets. Some of these sets are so obsure or lack enough quality cards that collectors become discouraged and just give up on them.

I admire those of you who collect those massive baseball sets. I actully began with the 1974 Topps baseball set, which was the first set I bought from packs as a kid. Those cards actually survive to this day, not that mom didn't attempt to rid me of them several times. Some day I will get around to submitting several hundred PSA 3, 4, 5, and 6s. I would love to see the looks of the graders at PSA when they get the submission too. Maybe they will give me a price break on such a lot?

There's no doubt I will disagree with some but that doesn't mean they don't have the right to express their opinions. Hopefully, I will try to see things from their point of view and give constructive feedback.

Have a great weekend,
Peter

wolfbear

The beginning of my original post was : "This is a minor point"

And so it is. Nevertheless, I appreciate everyone's thoughtful responses,
and solid arguments from both sides ... even from those of you who are wrong ...

phreakydancin

How about one list with Current sets highlighted in bold?

Sideplate

I have a solution!

On large sets such as the 1974 Topps set, just open the link that says "view all current finest list". Then bookmark the page as your set. Each time you come back to the page you will not see the ATF at the top, only the current finest. I don't know if this will work for smaller registry sets, but it does work for the ones with a large front page. If we are keeping score I agree with Wolf. Current should be on top!

Ken

Axtell

I have the best solution.

If you don't like seeing your sets under the all-time sets, MAKE YOUR SET AN ALL-TIME FINEST SET.

Problem solved!

JonB

lol

koby

I have a solution....why don't people who build great sets keep the sets? Pony up the money to remain number one. If children's education, layoffs, hospital bills force you to sell, too bad....you are no longer the big dog.

In all seriousness, Attell, I understand your point of view, but we really do not need other people to set goals for ourselves. On top of each registry page, there is the "Finest Possible Set Rating" for each set. If building the finest sets is your goal, then you can look at that. No need to look at what others have done.

I don't mind keeping some kind of record, but the current participants should definitely have top billing.

jrdolan

I don't mind shifting my eye downward a smidgen to see the Current Finest sets. But putting the current, active sets on top seems logical. Maybe PSA should differentiate between ATF active sets and the ATF retired (broken up) sets.