should true 1/1 be included in set registries?

fandango

should cards that are true 1 of 1, be included in player registries?

this pertains to modern cards of course since this serial numbering practice is only 10 years old....

any opinions?

jradke4

i dont think so. as only one person can have that card they shouldnt be included. i think they need to make a strict limit. maybe something like only cards numbered out of 10 or 25 and greater should be in the registry. I have a few low numbered favres that i would love to have in but i dont think that is fair to other in the registry, which is now growing quite high. maybe there should be a mega player set that would include all possible cards, but i think that these things get reduntant. if i have the #1 master set, i would mostly like have the #1 basic set. i think the showcase's are the best place for the ultra low numbered cards.

TheMcgwireMuseum

I think it would be cool if the set registry allowed them until somebody needed it to complete 100%, and then it would be removed from the player set. That would be a great general rule for allowing low serial #'d cards in player sets. For example: once 6 people needed a certain sequentially #'d to 5 card to reach 100%, that card would be removed, etc. That would allow people to still finish a set, and would also allow the people with the real low #'d cards showcase them and also get their set more accurately weighted against others, at least until people started reaching 99%+

fandango

<< <i>I think it would be cool if the set registry allowed them until somebody needed it to complete 100%, and then it would be removed from the player set. That would be a great general rule for allowing low serial #'d cards in player sets. For example: once 6 people needed a certain sequentially #'d to 5 card to reach 100%, that card would be removed, etc. That would allow people to still finish a set, and would also allow the people with the real low #'d cards showcase them and also get their set more accurately weighted against others, at least until people started reaching 99%+ >>




very good idea!

RedRomad275

It's probably unrealistic but it could be included in a set but have no weight on the set. Or possibly used in some kind of Collectors Showcase set.

Red

TheMcgwireMuseum

Well I'd love to see them at a weight of 10 if they could be added. Another cool idea for player sets would be to have a 'bonus' section listed at the end of the player sets. Like a collectors showcase but it didnt have to be its own set lost in the jungle of all the Showcases, it could be a section at the bottom of your Master set. A bonus section could be set up like the Collector's Showcase with the cards having no weights and not being factored into the master set. That way cards could be listed and shown if they arent included in the master set because they are past the year where a player played (like a post-master set), and it would be a great place to 'park' cards while waiting for the eligible ones to be added to the master set while they get caught up on addition requests.

fandango

<< <i>It's probably unrealistic but it could be included in a set but have no weight on the set. Or possibly used in some kind of Collectors Showcase set.

Red >>




im not to crazy about the collectors showcase, it does not feel the same as a true registry....you cant move items once entered, there are no population reports shown , no "higher graded" column, and just more of an unorganized feel......

it would be nice to incorporate the 1/1, or the 1of 5, on the true registry with flexibility once all existing cards (out of 5) are registered

TheMcgwireMuseum

Yeah I agree on the unorganized feel of the showcase. Thats the main reason I'd like to have it at the bottom of my Master set. of course I'd still like to see the pop numbers listed with them as well.

jradke4

the thing that i dont like about the showcase sets is who looks at them. someone needs to know what they are looking for to find the set.

Alfiewt

I don't think 1/1s should be included in the registries. Its kind of absurd to have cards included that only a single person can own. I recently did a count of the Griffey cards issued in 2006, and out of 417 cards, 117 cards were 1/1s. It would be insane to have a set for which 1/4 of the cards only one copy exists. I don't think anyone could realistically hope fo own all the 1/1 cards of any modern player.

PSA can list the cards in the registry but not have them count toward the set rating or competion percentage. The do this for the game card in the 1970 Milton Bradley set.

I think any card with a print run of less than a set number (25?) should be included in the player sets like this. It wouldn't be required, but any who has any of those cards could still show them off.

fandango

<< <i>I don't think 1/1s should be included in the registries. Its kind of absurd to have cards included that only a single person can own. I recently did a count of the Griffey cards issued in 2006, and out of 417 cards, 117 cards were 1/1s. It would be insane to have a set for which 1/4 of the cards only one copy exists. I don't think anyone could realistically hope fo own all the 1/1 cards of any modern player.

PSA can list the cards in the registry but not have them count toward the set rating or competion percentage. The do this for the game card in the 1970 Milton Bradley set.

I think any card with a print run of less than a set number (25?) should be included in the player sets like this. It wouldn't be required, but any who has any of those cards could still show them off. >>




so 1/1 cards should not be included in set registries....

what SHOULD the minimum amount of cards issued be....I suggest 15 cards issued be the cutoff.....Ultimate collection has some great cards numbered to 15, 20, and 24...it would be a shame to exclude these types of cards because of an arbitrary number (25)......

also, 15 cards in existence gives the top 15 most serious collectors a chance to each own a copy of a rare card.....most registries today do not go 15 deep with close to 100%....even if 15 solid collections were competing in a specific registry (Griffey), its unlikely all them would be at the stage of acquiring on of the sets rarest and most difficult issues..........so 15 seems like a safe cutoff to include cards in a registry....

TheMcgwireMuseum

Well I already have a 1/10 listed in the McGwire Master

MeteoriteGuy

I think they should be included as they are cards. I do not think coins, pins and the like should be included....they are not cards.

Mark

fandango

<< <i>Well I already have a 1/10 listed in the McGwire Master >>




well 10 is just as good as 15 i guess.....

i think anything under 10 is pushing it....

and this would eliminate "printing plates" from any registry.....a good thing seeing the proliferation in 1 of 1 printing Plates (card company gimmick) the last few years...

helionaut

Yes, they should be included. I'm a fairly hardcore player collector and some of my favorite cards are 1/1s. Just because no one else can have them doesn't mean they should be excluded. Very, very few people can have a Wagner or 52T Mantle or fill in some other heinously rare and expensive card, but that doesn't mean they should be dropped from those sets. I can see the points people make, though. Maybe count 1/1s, 1/5s, etc., as bonus cards with special weighting and have missing them not count against completion percentage or something. But exclude them? Nah.

RedRomad275

<< <i>im not to crazy about the collectors showcase, it does not feel the same as a true registry....you cant move items once entered, there are no population reports shown , no "higher graded" column, and just more of an unorganized feel...... >>



Maybe I'm missing something but if it's a 1/1 there are none higher and it's pop is 1.

Red

fandango

<< <i>

<< <i>im not to crazy about the collectors showcase, it does not feel the same as a true registry....you cant move items once entered, there are no population reports shown , no "higher graded" column, and just more of an unorganized feel...... >>



Maybe I'm missing something but if it's a 1/1 there are none higher and it's pop is 1.

Red >>



that is about the collector showcase in general, not specifically related to 1 of 1's....

RedRomad275

My bad...

Red

TheVon

I only have a few modern player sets registered so far and I'm not very serious about any of them . . . but if I were serious, I think I'd hate the idea adding a 1 of 1 card or even a 1/10, 1/15 etc. I guess the image that comes to my mind is some snot-nosed kid holding that serial numbered card in his grubby little hands while I'm stuck at 99.77% on the registry because I can't find anyone that has that card for sale. I already lose sleep over those cards that have none grade higher in other people's sets!

speeder

PSA is quite flexible with issues such as these.

If collectors of a certain player or set decide (after a poll) that they wish to include (or not to include) it will be done. But only to that player or that set.

All it takes is for one set registry member to ask for a poll (among those registry affected members) and only those folks will decide Yes or No and proper set weight.

LEE

sixdart

What is the current rule on adding serial #'d cards? 5, 10 or higher?

TheMcgwireMuseum

I dont think theres a defined rule yet, besides no 1/1's. the lowest Ive seen is a 1/10 included

theplasticman

<< <i>I dont think theres a defined rule yet, besides no 1/1's. the lowest Ive seen is a 1/10 included >>



There is a 1/1 in one of the sets Im working on (I forget) Will Clark or Eddie Murray. Pinnacle Certified Mirror Black. I dont own it and havent seen it.

fandango

<< <i>

<< <i>I dont think theres a defined rule yet, besides no 1/1's. the lowest Ive seen is a 1/10 included >>



There is a 1/1 in one of the sets Im working on (I forget) Will Clark or Eddie Murray. Pinnacle Certified Mirror Black. I dont own it and havent seen it. >>



are you positive about this? can you double check to make sure?

AlanAllen

There is a "1997 PINNACLE CERTIFIED MIRROR BLACK EDDIE MURRAY" in the Murray master set. The Marcus Allen master set has a serial numbered to 5 card that I requested, and was added (1997 PLAYOFF ZONE GOLD MARCUS ALLEN). They twice denied my request to add a 1/1.

fandango

<< <i>There is a "1997 PINNACLE CERTIFIED MIRROR BLACK EDDIE MURRAY" in the Murray master set. The Marcus Allen master set has a serial numbered to 5 card that I requested, and was added (1997 PLAYOFF ZONE GOLD MARCUS ALLEN). They twice denied my request to add a 1/1. >>



is the mirror black EDDIE MURRAY 1/1 pr 1/5?

jgarci11

I, of course, think that 1 of 1's should be included in the master sets! In fact for the Mcgwire registry set, PSA already graded a 1998 Pinnacle press plate. They have since stopped doing this because "It hurts the Plastic holders."

I have 1 of 1's just waiting for the day when they can be seen on my registry set. If you want to do a poll, Jay in regard to this on the Mcgwire Registry set, then count me in!

By the way, anyone know anything about the 1996 Select Certified Interleague Preview SAMPLE card?? IS it the first REAL 1 of 1?

and don't think I forgot about you, Repugnantass, I'll be knutting on u later!

TheMcgwireMuseum

<< <i>I have 1 of 1's just waiting for the day when they can be seen on my registry set. If you want to do a poll, Jay in regard to this on the Mcgwire Registry set, then count me in! >>



Theres no way the others would go for it. You and I are the only ones with real 1/1's, I believe the others only have a couple, and they turned out to be aftermarket.

Alfiewt

There is a 1/1 in one of the sets Im working on (I forget) Will Clark or Eddie Murray. Pinnacle Certified Mirror Black. I dont own it and havent seen it. >>



I think if you were to contact BJ and let her know that this is a 1/1, it will be removed from the set. The rule for the master sets clearly state the 1/1s are not allowed. Maybe you can suggest to her to leave as an optional card that doesn't count toward the completion % or GPA?

theplasticman

<< <i>There is a 1/1 in one of the sets Im working on (I forget) Will Clark or Eddie Murray. Pinnacle Certified Mirror Black. I dont own it and havent seen it. >>



I think if you were to contact BJ and let her know that this is a 1/1, it will be removed from the set. The rule for the master sets clearly state the 1/1s are not allowed. Maybe you can suggest to her to leave as an optional card that doesn't count toward the completion % or GPA? >>



Yeah, 1/1s probably shouldnt be in. If you're the top guy, then I can see why some would want 1/1s in... I like a level and competitive playing field. Im going to make sure it gets removed.

jgarci11

The USA Grading Company seemed to have no problem with grading this SUUUPER Rare Press Plate. I know Why would ANYBODY send their Mcgwire Press Plate to USA in the first PLace. Trust me, PSa WON't ReHolder It!

AWESOME "Card" AND SCAN. I'll put up my others if you guys would like to see them. Just give me credit on the scans and ownership!

jgarci11

Oh and here is an example of how PSA Graded The president of Pinnacle Cards' Signature.

I am still amazed that they would rather grade Jerry Meyers auto ratehr than just Holder my 1 of 1. Take a look below

jgarci11

Lastly, here is the back oft the "Graded Auto" Press Plate

TheMcgwireMuseum

I think you should sell those to me

jgarci11

Here is a scan of the 1996 Select Certified Interleague Preview card AND the 1996 Select Certified Interleague Preview SAMPLE card.

I think the Sample Version is a 1 of 1.

If this is the case than PSa has indeed graded a 1 of 1 for the Mcgwire set. Also, Since this card is from 1996 it can be construed as the FIRST 1 of 1.

Does anyone know anything about the Interleague Preview Sample Card??

jgarci11

here is a scan of the backside of both cards!

Clearly distinct is the bigi black lettering across the back of the Sample card which say "SAMPLE."

MeteoriteGuy

Plasticman noted, " I like a level and competitive playing field."


That seems to be the majority opinion on those that think they should not be included. However, since when has collecting cards, especially PSA graded cards, ever been a level playing field?

Mark

jgarci11

Here are two of the Same Press Plate BAcks from the 1997 New Pinnacle.

PSA Graded Jerry meyers auto on these, too! Great!!

jgarci11

Lastly Here is How PSA Player HAted on Me BIIIIG TIME By not even giving my 1997 Pinnacle Press Plate Preview 1 of 1 A chance to be Graded or Holdered!

Jerry meyer Didn't sign the Press Plate Previews and there is no indication of what color the Press Plate represents!

These Press Plate Previews are impossible to get!!!

What A shame!!!

So tell me Jay what's the Price tag on the 1 of 1's I've put up?

RipublicaninMass

<< <i>

and don't think I forgot about you, Repugnantass, I'll be knutting on u later! >>



Dont be mad at me for outing you and your severe anime habit.


So tell me Jay what's the Price tag on the 1 of 1's I've put up?

I'll tell ya...Jay I don't mean to steal your thunder


0.00$ unless it is the right collector. USA grading services?? C'mon Is that your own grading service? Did you know that this AMAZING thing called the PSA registry is what drives the values of MANY "low pop" cards. But, there has to be someone COMPETING. Do you set snipes to beat your own bids to gie you some sense of power? If PSA won't grade your card, it will NEVER garner the high prices of other set registry cards, that's a fact. Will the grade your game used needle? Better sell ALL your Mcgwire's afer he get's in the hall. There won't be another upswing. Unfortunately, EVERYONE already knows that. Lemme know if you want to upgrade your PSa 9 85 Topps for my PSA 10. And no, I dont want to listen to your radio show.

TheMcgwireMuseum

Well, I'm pretty sure your pulling my leg, as I don't see you ever selling them. But maybe Im wrong. To borrow a line from Indiana Jones, 'It belongs in a museum!" And I know juuuuust the one

TheMcgwireMuseum

I hope that wasn't directed toward me. I didnt sell in 1998, I wont ever sell. I'm always a buyer, so any 'upswing' in his prices ultimately hurts me. The only thing that an upswing is good for is bringing rare and oddball stuff into the market from people trying to cash in. I do however agree 100% on your statement about low pops and the 1/1's. I just bought a 1992 Fleer PSA 10 pop 1, paid $92. Bought one of my 1/1's for just over double that, $200. As you well know, without the set registry, these 2 cards are no where close to each other as far as selling price.

edited for spelling

RipublicaninMass

<< <i>Well, I'm pretty sure your pulling my leg, as I don't see you ever selling them. But maybe Im wrong. To borrow a line from Indiana Jones, 'It belongs in a museum!" And I know juuust the one >>



Jgarci belongs in an Asylum, and I know just the one

jgarci11

Great to hear you write, Jay! Which 1 of 1 did you buy for $200? It's about 3 hours until that "Max" Card ends on ebay.

I wonder what it goes off at!

Wonder who the winner will be!

Hey Jay what is your take on the 1996 Select certified Interleague Preview SAMPLE card?

Is this card a 1 of 1? THEE first 1 of 1 because it was issued in 1996?? Is it similar to the 1997 Pinnacle Certified Mirror Blacks?

As for RepublicanAss, He is bringing nothing to this post, so I would suggest that we not bother with his pointlessness.

fandango

ahh, when did this become the Mark McGwire show and sell thread?

you know Mcgwire will never get into the hall, because then they would have to vote Baroid Bondz in.....

i think the only 2 Mark McGwire collectors in the world, are right here in this thread!

jgarci11

This post is about 1 of 1's, which I have posted pictures for. If Mcgwire is on the 1 of 1's than that's just the way it is.

The topic is about 1 of 1's not weather he'll get into the hall of fame.

If YOU have nothing to contribute OR SHOW about the topic of 1 of 1's than you probably shouldn't write anything here.

I mean, why the heck did you write in this post anyway, when I am sure you can contribute better inside another post elsewhere.

So what do you, Fandango, know about 1 of 1's and weather they are registry worthy? Let us know your opinion on this post's topic.

and concerning the steroid stuff, Albert Pujols and his Kansas city trainer are held in suspicion, too, for using REAL Steroids, too. The steroid scandal touches nearly every player and will taint them when they go into the Hall, but a compromise and resolution will eventually be achieved I believe.

Lastly that brings me to the stupid sports writers. I mean these guys shouldn't be responsible for electing Hall members anymore.

There needs to be a new system.

These guys are not only composed of, demographically, a group that DOES NOT represent the racial make up of baseball anymore, but 99% of them hail from cities far distant from a future hall of famers home team.

I mean these boneheads actually are going out of their way to do such stupid things as deny Ripken or Gwynn a high enough acceptance percentage just because of their own whims and "morality" issues.

The only reason Tom Seaver received such a high entry percentage, in my opinion, was because his election went under the radar, and didn't attract the media attention which would have caused particular sports writers to play contrarian and player hate on a baseball player in order to, pitifully, get people to notice them.

When sportswriters start to make the news, instead of report it, they immediately become propaganda. Not voting for ANY player and leaving the ballet blank is just a way to show the world that you just wasted your fortunate opportunity like a dumbazzz. and if I were Major League baseball I would seek to get that fortunate opportunity removed before the next vote occurs.

fandango

Well to me it seems obvious that 1 of 1's should not be listed on player or team registries , but can be entered on the collectors Showcase in order to validate its existence....The Registries have competition as their basis, and people cant compete to get something at the highest grade if there is only One in existence, therefore 1 of 1's do not fit the criteria for being included on a Comeptitive registry....they are perfect for the Non-competitive portion of the Registry, the Collectors Showcase....

Now, the only real question i believe is What should be the cutoff for inclusion in Set, player registries 5,10,15,20 or 25.......

this is what the thread is about, not about how many McGwire 1 of 1's you have......

jgarci11

sorry if you thought I was showing off, but the only 1 of 1's I have are of Mcgwire. In a post talking about 1 of 1's I thought it would be nice to show what they look like for those interested.

The fact is, people like you have to come to some viable resolution regarding players that use performance enhancing drugs and 1 of 1's. I mean, it is hard for fans to reject their favorite players.

Please understand this. Likewise, it is hard to own 1 of 1's and not feel like some prestige should be accorded to your player collection. Look, go out and buy a 1 of 1. Hold it, stare at it, show the 'hood.

I mean, isn't there some 2005 topps pristine press plate of Pujols you could get? When you own a 1 of 1, you feel special. Real player collectors would sell anything to get them, so why would they not want them included in the player registry set? Especially if you are battling for the top spot against people who think that they can muster themselves into first place by buying common graded stuff off of ebay. I mean not even PSA 9 stuff. The 1 of 1's would really show those people a thing or two.

What Jay and I are doing is setting out to create the best known player card collection around.

Oddballs and all. Cards PSA grades and alot they won't grade because of their own issues.

When all is said and done you will understand dedication. Whether it is to a false idol or not, the fact is that we set out to create something many men never even dream of trying.

And because of our experience we can help alot of other Baseball Card collectors to do the same thing with their favorite player.

fandango

very inspiring jdarci11...............................

ps..i only collect 2001 Pujols cards, no 2002 or later, and definately not 2006 and those rediculous 1 0f 1 press plates.............

jgarci11

...maybe you should collect them now...because it's only get harder to find the cards later on. Trust me, you will start creeping up into the 2002's soon enough.

For example, the 2001 Mcgwire & pujols Ultra Card (out of /2000) IS It a Pujols rookie or is it really a 2002??

You should just set out RIGHT NOW to collect every Pujols card!! Every 200? Leaf Mirror emerald, black or whatever else they issued.

Every Pujols you can find, because VERY SOON, the competition to complete a pujols Registry set is going to get fierce.

In fact tons of the collectors will be clamoring PSA to grade and include the most rarest Pujols cards in the Master registry eventually.

PSA Will give in eventually.. it's just a matter of time.. I just think they will find a reason to charge an exorbitant "authenticity fee" for grading a 1 of 1!

Your reluctance to acquire the rare cards you currently chastise, will result in your collection becoming run of the mill in the future. Do you want that?? or is that all you can afford? It's cool if it's financial, it's understandable, but if it's by choice..yikes.

I guess if you do then, to quote RepublicanAss's hero, "Stay the Course."

RipublicaninMass

Since when is a "press plate" a card? No press plates are not cards. I think CARDS issued wth a 1/1 stamp, not some random memorabilia should be added, but no weight given. If we start saying a "press plate" is a one of one, then PSA should start grading game chewed gum, jok straps, and any other odd ball item so some "dillusional" person can CLAIM they have a one of one.

Jgarci11 you sure are a one of one, you are orginal and nobody is like you. But ask yourself, is there any demand?