Home PSA Set Registry Forum

Clemente Master set rankings are RIDICULOUS!

To whom it may concern,

I see that the Topps test disc was included in the Clemente master set as an "optional" item which doesn't count toward completion!!?? I think it is RIDICULOUS to exclude such a rare prize from the set. While it is true that there will be very few who will ever own one - is that a reason for exclusion? Why not exclude PSA 10 Mantle Rookies from registry sets? Is it because PSA has chosen to only grade them authentic - with no explanation! They should still be included. Certainly more a Clemente collectible than all the stupid Pirate team cards!!
While I'm on it, - WHO determines the numeric weights "based on the value of the card in NM condition?" - While my list is too exhaustive to begin to complete here (These are all regarding the Clemente set) - I will mention a few of the glaring ones - 1) 1967 punch out stadium background a 9 (2 graded) and plain background an 8 (1 graded) - They should AT LEAST be the same ranking, if not the other way around as the plain background is much harder. 2) 1970 Transogram and 1971 Milk Duds both 7's while 57 Kahns, 59 Kahns, 1960 Bazooka Panel, 1962 Venezuelan are all lower the list goes on and on regarding cards that are more valuable and desirable in NM condition than the Transogram or the milk duds yet with lower numeric values ! 3) 1962 Venezuelan a 5, 1966 Venezuelan a 5, 1967 Venezuelan a 3, 1968 Venezuelan a 3! - First of all According to the PSA pop reporton Topps Venezuelans - 1962 (5 graded 7's - none higher - That's out of all cards submitted!), 1966 (107 graded 7's with 10 higher), 1967 (14 graded 7's with 2 higher), 1968 (17 graded 7's with 2 higher) - Now back to Clemente - As far as Value and difficulty - the 1962 and 1967 Clemente's are the most expensive and not coincidentally the most difficult - followed by the 1968 and The "easiest" if you can use that word with Venezuelan's the 1966. Imho the 66 should remain at a 5 ranking with the 1962 and 1967 moved to a 7 and the 1968 moved to a 6. As stated there are MANY more inconsistencies within the ranking - If anyone at PSA cares for the sake of accuracy please contact me and I will spend the time to go through it with a fine tooth comb to help fix it. Unfortunately, I expect no one but a few diehard collectors will care, some of whom probably don't even bother with the registry set!
I'm curious to hear from others - please weigh in.
A QUESTION FOR OTHER PLAYER MASTER SET HOLDERS - Are there these glaring inconsistencies in your sets too? Please list the player you collect and yes or no?

Joe if you are out there - I've been buying, selling, trading and collecting Clemente cards and memorabilia for 20+ years - I need to hear from you.

-Howard Chasser
image

Comments

  • PSASAPPSASAP Posts: 2,284 ✭✭✭
    Wow, talk about being so mad you can't see straight. This guy was so steamed he couldn't spell his last name!
  • mikeschmidtmikeschmidt Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭
    Howard:

    Sometimes it is more effective to propose a recommendation for the way things should be, socialize it with other Clemente collectors, and then approach Joe Orlando and the Set Registry team with your consensus recommendations.

    Marc
    I am actively buying MIKE SCHMIDT gem mint baseball cards. Also looking for any 19th century cabinets of Philadephia Nationals. Please PM with additional details.
  • YES! Really steamed. Thanks for the correction on my name - got a great laugh out of it and fixed it. Also thanks for the suggestion on speaking to others on the set registry.

    -Howard
    image
  • markj111markj111 Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭
    The assigned weights in many sets have some ridiculous results. Pick any year with a Mantle-he gets about 1/10 the weight he deserves. In 1959 Del Rice has a weight of 1.5, and an average selling price in PSA 8 of about $800. Many cards of equal weight can be had for $30. I collect cards because I enjoy it, and am fortunate enough to be able to buy cards from time to time. I do not worry about where I rank on PSA's out of whack registry. I list the cards there only because it helps me keep up with my inventory,
  • firedawg45firedawg45 Posts: 1,251 ✭✭✭
    i have to agree also on the rose set..weights are all over the place and not on rarest cards to collect
    # 2 Pete Rose Master Set , also
    collecting 1977 topps baseball in psa 9 and psa 10
  • yawie99yawie99 Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭
    I just want to thank you for spelling ridiculous correctly. Rediculous is even more upsetting than the vagaries of the Registry.
    imageimageimageimageimageimage
  • bishopbishop Posts: 2,917 ✭✭✭
    I am not a registry person. Which test disc(s) did they make optional ? Both the 67 and 68 ? The 67 is really tough. The 68 is really, really ( ridiculous) tough)
    Topps Baseball-1948, 1951 to 2017
    Bowman Baseball -1948-1955
    Fleer Baseball-1923, 1959-2007

    Al
  • Hi Howard,

    The Mickey Mantle Master Registry Set's numeric weights were adjusted a couple of days ago, but like with the Clementes, it is very confusing as to how the weights were decided.

    Also too many to list, but the Venezuelans are a great example, especially when compared to a regular issue Topps team card.

    The 1956 Yellow Basepath PM15 Pin (pop 18) has the same weight as a 1963 Topps #200 (pop 2656).

    I admit that I don't know exactly how the system works, but I do know that the 1956 YB PM15 Pin should be higher than the 1963 Topps, regardless of the grade.

    On a positive note, the overall weights for the MM Master Set have been improved immensely over the past year.

    PoppaJ

    p.s. To answer Bishops' question about the "test discs" .... I believe ALL "test discs" will be optional and will not be calculated in the grade or the percent completion of a set.

  • If I understand correctly, they made BOTH years optional!
    image
Sign In or Register to comment.