<< <i>Shouldn't the registry members have a say in this? >>
I refrained from commenting on this when I saw the post that Howard put up in regards to recalculating the weights of each card that comprise the Clemente Master set, as it really doesnt affect me, considering I am not building this set, but I have to admit that your comment is what went through my head when I read Howard's post. With all due respect to you Howard, you have been nothing but nice to me on these boards, but why are you the sole individual helping PSA out? I would at the very least have the owner of the #1 set, along with Scott Mt. Joy assist with this tasks, just to remove any doubt that might go along with this process. The Clemente Master like the Clemente Basic is a very competitive set, and I would think that having the collective group, or at least a representative group to speak for those members building this set, would have been the better way to handle this weight recalculations.
<< <i>Shouldn't the registry members have a say in this? >>
I refrained from commenting on this when I saw the post that Howard put up in regards to recalculating the weights of each card that comprise the Clemente Master set, as it really doesnt affect me, considering I am not building this set, but I have to admit that your comment is what went through my head when I read Howard's post. With all due respect to you Howard, you have been nothing but nice to me on these boards, but why are you the sole individual helping PSA out? I would at the very least have the owner of the #1 set, along with Scott Mt. Joy assist with this tasks, just to remove any doubt that might go along with this process. The Clemente Master like the Clemente Basic is a very competitive set, and I would think that having the collective group, or at least a representative group to speak for those members building this set, would have been the better way to handle this weight recalculations. >>
Hi Matt,
If you check much earlier in this thread you will see that not only did I attempt to include those you mention, I developed a draft of proposed weights for the entire master set and sent it to the top 10 set holders requesting input and hoping to come to a relative consensus to submit as a unified group to PSA. I received some "thank you's" and "I'll get to it soon" comments, but ultimately received no feedback or input from anyone. That said the weights that have existed for the master set were disturbing to me before I ever got started in the running. I have collected, traded and sold Clemente material for well over 20 years. I am in process of putting together a checklist (viewable in a web browser) with images and difficulty ratings of Clemente memorabilia made before 1973 - currently there are about 500 items in it. Many of the weights in the master set are just off (Some of the Clemente venezuelans (not leader cards or team cards) would be to me an obvious one). Period. So with no input from anyone, I chose not to sit by and do nothing. That said, the process of trying to provide input for PSA to change their weights is by no means easy or a given - they don't just say oh, Howard said so, so let's change it. Essentially I provided input on 3 items - 1) Milk duds - they had the single at a 6 weight and the box at a 2 weight - it was a joke - the cut single by their standard would sell for more than a box (both being a psa 8) - just silly. 2) Bazooka's - in many cases they had the single and the panel at the same weight (I believe in one case they left it) - is it not pretty common knowledge that a panel sells for significantly more than a single? That said they put the weights of the boxes in most cases the same as the panels - another joke, but they will not change it unless I can show them "market prices" for the boxes supporting that they are that much more valuable. 3) Plak checklist - I just pointed them to the auction where the checklist in a PSA 7 sold for 22k - I also disclosed that it was purchsed by my partner and resides in our Clemente set - a little self serving - absolutely, but there was an under bidder right behind my partner. I pointed them to the auction link - they decided the weight. I am ready and willing to have a dialogue with any Clemente master set builders who would be interested in discussing weights and trying to address it further with PSA. I don't make the rules here, I play by them. While I absolutely am competitive and want to be a part of the top set, I can also be objective in having a discussion about the weights of any of the cards involved. Consider this both a response and invitation.
<< <i>If you check much earlier in this thread you will see that not only did I attempt to include those you mention, I developed a draft of proposed weights for the entire master set and sent it to the top 10 set holders requesting input and hoping to come to a relative consensus to submit as a unified group to PSA. >>
Howard, Clearly I did not see where you mentioned you tried to involve the top 10 set holders. Not much to say if you tried to involve those set owners and got no response. I apologize.
Thanks matt. My primary objective is to have an accurate and fair playing field. My second objective is to rise to the top on that field. Please check out the very first post of this thread. Be well. Happy collecting. I look forward to more spirited dialogue opinions and the sharing of Clemente memorabilia information. Be well.
<< <i>developed a draft of proposed weights for the entire master set and sent it to the top 10 set holders requesting input and hoping to come to a relative consensus to submit as a unified group to PSA >>
I started this set in May and my goal is to be in the TOP 10 by next May or sooner.
"EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE ON THE WALL" - JACKIE MOON
<< <i>This was one of my first submissions. Man was I excited >>
Congrats! I had the chance to buy that card (PSA 8) from a fellow board member that pulled a dead centered one from a pack rip. I wish I would have picked it up when given the opportunity, as he has since sold it. Love that card.
All new additional Clemente cards added on to the the master set should remain optional until at least a couple of Clemente collectors register that card..we don't need a master set full of the only one graded Clemente card known to exist as requirements. and a posted picture/scan should be an additional requirement before any new card can be listed for the cards required/optional for the Clemente master set.
I'm all for new overlooked additions to the required master set,(72 daily juice..) however it seems quite a few newly labeled minor Clemente variants to previous listed cards are being added and I believe only one of them should be required to fill that spot in the set,(a bazooka panel or box should be fine for the slot in the set, but not a requirement for both since that Clemente card is already well represented in the set. ) since so many of the earlier graded cards do not notate these newer variants and it seems way too late to me to try and retro fit all these previous graded Clementes now..and that doesn't even take in account the many PSA flips of Roberto that don't match the card inside.
Once we can figure out the number of Clemente cards required for the master set, we can begin to work on establishing the correct weighted values assigned to each required Clemente master set card.
Just a few random thoughts to consider, and try to bring a little more common sense to make collecting our Clemente master sets more fun : )
<< <i>All new additional Clemente cards added on to the the master set should remain optional until at least a couple of Clemente collectors register that card..we don't need a master set full of the only one graded Clemente card known to exist as requirements. and a posted picture/scan should be an additional requirement before any new card can be listed for the cards required/optional for the Clemente master set.
I'm all for new overlooked additions to the required master set,(72 daily juice..) however it seems quite a few newly labeled minor Clemente variants to previous listed cards are being added and I believe only one of them should be required to fill that spot in the set,(a bazooka panel or box should be fine for the slot in the set, but not a requirement for both since that Clemente card is already well represented in the set. ) since so many of the earlier graded cards do not notate these newer variants and it seems way too late to me to try and retro fit all these previous graded Clementes now..and that doesn't even take in account the many PSA flips of Roberto that don't match the card inside.
Once we can figure out the number of Clemente cards required for the master set, we can begin to work on establishing the correct weighted values assigned to each required Clemente master set card.
Just a few random thoughts to consider, and try to bring a little more common sense to make collecting our Clemente master sets more fun : ) >>
With all due respect, all of the PSA sets are considered works in progress and the Clemente set had a few "single graded" copies prior to the latest editions. Please be specific with regard to what you are calling "minor variants". As deserving as Topps 1958 yellow letter and white letter are as having seperate lines so too imho are the Dexter variations, Nabisco team flakes variations, Salada coin variations, etc. Regarding the Bazooka's I found it a bit self serving (of PSA) to include both the single and panel as seperate line items - my original suggestion was a single line item for Bazooka filled by a single, a panel or a box - with the weights appropriately reflecting the higher value of the panel over the single and box over the panel. That said, if Bazooka's deserve seperate lines for a single and panel, then certainly it deserves a seperate line for the as issued most difficult original box. I am sure some of these additions are challenging for those who have been working on master sets for a while, but these are all legitimately issued cards and although rare, I can assure you exist in more than a single copy and deserve inclusion. Anybody else?
<< <i>developed a draft of proposed weights for the entire master set and sent it to the top 10 set holders requesting input and hoping to come to a relative consensus to submit as a unified group to PSA >>
I started this set in May and my goal is to be in the TOP 10 by next May or sooner. >>
Bobby,
At the rate you are going, you will certainly be there sooner - then it gets tough ;-)
I just listed some items on ebay: see them Here.. I will take down and sell privately to board members any item with a buy it now. Check back once a week as I will be listing more items in weeks to come. If you prefer I do not post here when I list items let me know and this will be the last one. Be well.
Regarding the additional Clemente minor variants, i'm talking about ones that psa has been grading for years with no notation or idea as to which one it is., and that a varient card that had not been listed in the master set ... I feel it's way to late to now start adding and more importantly requiring these mostly unlisted/unknown variants on Roberto to the master set, since so many of these "newly listed" varients have been graded long ago before PSA knew about them and labeled them as such..., How can we expect to go back and retro fit all of these PSA Clementes graded from years ago.. so keeping them optional for the set and allowing any version to fill the current slot is the best option i can see in the future... or at least until a few Clemente collectors start to recognize a new optional variant by adding it to their set as well, at that time maybe it could then be upgraded to a required card...keeping the spirit of a work in progress..
Many of the variant ones you mentioned..salada.180 or 200 back, nabisco wide or narrow border etc.. haven't even been listed yet..(does PSA even consider labeling any of these variants when grading now without a request from the submitter..? ).and I feel we really do not need any more extra duplication at this point (PSA ran into some of this last year with all the new panels/boxes/uncut sheets and proofs..cut in so many different ways....that were being added/required to many master registries, thank goodness they stopped that nonsense..)..besides how long can i expect to wait til PSA gets a graded holder for my 1967 Topps Roberto Clemente punchouts in original panels of 3 and does anyone really want them added as a requirement when i do ... optional sure, but required..nah...since the single punchouts are already required...maybe i could separate mine, NOT! or just keep waiting : )
I feel strongly that all new Additions to the master Clemente registry should remain Optional (and not counted in the scoring..) until being recognized and added by a few(3 or more) Clemente collectors to their own master set registries, and maybe some back tracking may be in order..( how did that 68 bazooka 2 panel sneak in again??..) to reel in some of the duplication and the now required that should be optional 1 of 1's.. A picture of the new "Optional" additions would be a great help..as which post gazette paper card (paper?) got added..the 72 stats or as newly listed the 1973 in memory one, without a photo it's anyones guess, since i don't know if psa or if many clemente collectors even know at least 2 years exist..A perfect example as why every newly added Clemente "card" should always start out as optional..and then earn it's way onto the required list ..
hopefully a few of my fellow Clemente collectors can understand and get behind the idea of starting all the new Clemente master set additions as optional and then earning their way to becoming required..other ideas or imput on collecting Clemente is always welcomed..
p.s. my personal thoughts regarding the complete Clemente bazooka boxes just added ..i still feel they need to earn the required status..by being collected/graded by more than 1 person and since the 1960,62,67,68 and 71 boxes are still missing from the current master set list (i don't think psa has a holder for most yet..and the 1960 Clemente box remains a hidden mystery ) and whether Optional (as they should be..) or required the master Clemente set will still remain incomplete on the bazooka box front for quite awhile .. and how about those poor souls who may have destroyed a perfect bazooka box to get a pristine panel for the registry.. but maybe i can help your newly listed bazooka Clemente boxes along the way to gaining the required status i feel they should have to earn by getting mine PSA graded and registered..at what level submission did you use and how long did it take?? please lmk... but i still don't wish to cut up my 1971 numbered bazooka sheet to get a nice Clemente numbered panel for the registry..so i can't help that tough issue earn it's stripes : )
guys I need some help identifying this. Looks like a 1957 or 58 team issue photo pack . Does psa grade this ?
Collecting Clemente master (#6) and basic PSA registry sets, Hank Aaron master and basic sets, Mantle oddball issues, 1970's mega decade HOFs, 1967 Topps pin ups, and high grade Topps Clemente and Aaron. Numerous transactions with over 100 board members.
A lot of talk on this thread about the bazooka boxes...no one has answered my question I posted a couple days ago...how did Howard's Clemente box get "complete box" when it is missing part of the flap? What is the deal??...is a part of a box missing considered a complete box in PSA eye? If so where do they draw the line? To me Complete means the whole thing. Love to here what you hard core collectors think. Scott
<< <i>I feel strongly that all new Additions to the master Clemente registry should remain Optional (and not counted in the scoring..) until being recognized and added by a few(3 or more) Clemente collectors to their own master set registries, and maybe some back tracking may be in order..( how did that 68 bazooka 2 panel sneak in again??..) to reel in some of the duplication and the now required that should be optional 1 of 1's.. >>
I totally agree with you on your thoughts. Well said.
"EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE ON THE WALL" - JACKIE MOON
Completed my Clemente Basic Set this AM. This is the last card that I needed. Hopefully its as nice in hand as it looks in the scan, as I paid a premium, and really hoping that it will get .5 upgrade.
<< <i>A lot of talk on this thread about the bazooka boxes...no one has answered my question I posted a couple days ago...how did Howard's Clemente box get "complete box" when it is missing part of the flap? What is the deal??...is a part of a box missing considered a complete box in PSA eye? If so where do they draw the line? To me Complete means the whole thing. Love to here what you hard core collectors think. Scott >>
Hi Scott haven't requested PSA's criteria on these - Simple logic would say it is a heck of a lot closer to a box than a panel. That said, the box is in spectacular condition outside of the part of the missing flap which PSA penalized significantly for on the grade. My guess is it otherwise would have been an 8. Just some thoughts - like I said not sure of PSA's position on this. Be well.
<< <i>Completed my Clemente Basic Set this AM. This is the last card that I needed. Hopefully its as nice in hand as it looks in the scan, as I paid a premium, and really hoping that it will get .5 upgrade.
>>
Congratulations Matt! It's a sweet looking card. Already in a post .5 holder, so don't know about the chances, but beatiful nontheless.
(1) How to grade the same Clemente team issued card, 3 different ways! Really? as i can see no real difference/variation in any of them..can you?? Please LMK, as i think it's just the same basic Clemente card issued over a span of years 66-70 by the Pirates... (see scans) so at least 3 times in his master set...and then 3 or more submissons for the same card, Really?
(2) onto the 1971 team issue Clemente (head shot )..it's been a labeled a team issue and also now is labeled a autograph style issue and it fits in the 1971 action photo slot in a master set..(and i think has been mislabeled as that action photo as well, the real action photo is shown in the B+W scan i think..) (1970 color team issue is arms folded looking right?)
this is the Roberto Clemente card that does it all and more : )
i hopefulley added a few random scans of some of these cards..from many sources...but i'm still confused please help me if you can... Thanks : )
I do have a question for Howard or one of the Scott's (Mt Joy) (Greb) How can you tell the year on the Pirate issue cards from (1966-1969) because they all look identical
BTW here's my latest pick up. (Thanks again to Oaksey)
"EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE ON THE WALL" - JACKIE MOON
Regarding team issues - I agree they need some cleaning up. I have done A LOT of research on the team issue B& W 5x7's from 1955-1968 and feel pretty confident about being able to identify most. I have not taken a serious look at the color issues from 1966-1972 - I have many of them including a bunch in their as issued sealed state - a number came with dated checklists as seen in Jeff's scans - I hope to delve further into them to discern which is whcih - after I do so, I will post my findings in hopes of getting a consensus to present to PSA to facilitate change. - please send me or post scans of the front and back if you have any that are still sealed with the dated header cards.
-Howard
Ps. The last B&W scan that Jeff posted is what PSA is recognizing as the "1971 Action photos"
Bobby -- great work on your progress with the set. I admire that you have the patience to wait for the right card at the right price. When I started my Clemente registry I subbed every low and mid-grade issue that I had -- and I'm still upgrading several years later.
Regarding the 1966 through 1969 team issues -- I think we can say with some confidence that the '67, '68 & '69 issues are the same. I learned that the '67 and '68 were the same (thx to Scott Mt. Joy) a while back -- and I recently spoke with an ebay seller that has the same issue along with the team checklist that bears the year (1969). I'm not sure if the sets contain the same cards but it appears that the designs are identical. Maybe PSA should start listing this card as a 1967-69 issue but I think that's a lot to ask.
recent pick ups and self subs - for the master set 1967 pin ups - this is the highest graded pop 1 recent sub
Collecting Clemente master (#6) and basic PSA registry sets, Hank Aaron master and basic sets, Mantle oddball issues, 1970's mega decade HOFs, 1967 Topps pin ups, and high grade Topps Clemente and Aaron. Numerous transactions with over 100 board members.
Wow, great cards, cpettimd. Question, though. How can an item ever get an 8 if it has a fold in it. I know pin-ups were packaged with a fold, but I've seen other cases where PSA doesn't care how the item was packaged, and will only award a 5 for the item. I am in no way knocking that Clemente, as it is amazing.
I just received this in the mail today. I wanted to personally say thank you to Scott (Scotgreb) for his warm generosity. As I opened my package to see my newly purchased 68 Dexter press from Scott, there was another card with it which was a 1968 Clemente KDKA card with a post it on the slab that read "Merry Christmas" All I can say is WOW!!
Once again Thank You Scott!!!
"EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE ON THE WALL" - JACKIE MOON
I've decided to sell the majority of my master set. I am keeping all the basic cards and half a dozen other Clemente's like I like. If you're interested in any of my cards please check out the BUY/SELL/TRADE boards.
Thanks again Bobby
"EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE ON THE WALL" - JACKIE MOON
<< <i>That was "quick"! Sorry to see you go Bobby. The master set is much more like a marathon than a sprint. Best wishes and a Happy Healthy new year!
<< <i>
I just don't have the disposable income to continue to buy high dollar Clemente's. I want quality instead of quantity. I'll continue to buy Clemente's just the ones I want and not worry about the registry
<< <i>Good luck Bobby....what are you going to focus on now? >>
Paul, I'm not sure yet. I really would like to own a Hank Aaron rookie. I might to take my Clemente money and invest into an Aaron.
I wish all you guys a Happy New Year!!!
"EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE ON THE WALL" - JACKIE MOON
Here is my latest Clemente I submitted. I was disappointed in the grade. Thought is should have been a 6. I guess maybe the corners were a littel softer than I thought.
"A full mind is an empty bat." Ty Cobb
Currently collecting 1934 Butterfinger, 1969 Nabisco, 1991 Topps Desert Shield (in PSA 9 or 10), and 1990 Donruss Learning Series (in PSA 10).
I know someone asked about it a while ago as I have been looking for one too but I just saw a 71-72 Team issue Clemente in the latest Goodwin Auction. Now I know what to look for. Nice card-
Any action on the Clemente front boys? Any girl Clemente fans out there? Still NO responses to my suggested changes - although a lot has changed since I sent it.
Collecting Clemente master (#6) and basic PSA registry sets, Hank Aaron master and basic sets, Mantle oddball issues, 1970's mega decade HOFs, 1967 Topps pin ups, and high grade Topps Clemente and Aaron. Numerous transactions with over 100 board members.
recently received this 64 baz stamp panel- pop 2 highest graded so far- raw sub
Collecting Clemente master (#6) and basic PSA registry sets, Hank Aaron master and basic sets, Mantle oddball issues, 1970's mega decade HOFs, 1967 Topps pin ups, and high grade Topps Clemente and Aaron. Numerous transactions with over 100 board members.
A couple of more - with some toughies I was fortunate to pick up an Aaron and Clemente rub off in PSA 8 in a trade from another collector The pin and the Fleer were raw subs
Collecting Clemente master (#6) and basic PSA registry sets, Hank Aaron master and basic sets, Mantle oddball issues, 1970's mega decade HOFs, 1967 Topps pin ups, and high grade Topps Clemente and Aaron. Numerous transactions with over 100 board members.
Comments
<< <i>Shouldn't the registry members have a say in this? >>
I refrained from commenting on this when I saw the post that Howard put up in regards to recalculating the weights of each card that comprise the Clemente Master set, as it really doesnt affect me, considering I am not building this set, but I have to admit that your comment is what went through my head when I read Howard's post. With all due respect to you Howard, you have been nothing but nice to me on these boards, but why are you the sole individual helping PSA out? I would at the very least have the owner of the #1 set, along with Scott Mt. Joy assist with this tasks, just to remove any doubt that might go along with this process. The Clemente Master like the Clemente Basic is a very competitive set, and I would think that having the collective group, or at least a representative group to speak for those members building this set, would have been the better way to handle this weight recalculations.
<< <i>
<< <i>Shouldn't the registry members have a say in this? >>
I refrained from commenting on this when I saw the post that Howard put up in regards to recalculating the weights of each card that comprise the Clemente Master set, as it really doesnt affect me, considering I am not building this set, but I have to admit that your comment is what went through my head when I read Howard's post. With all due respect to you Howard, you have been nothing but nice to me on these boards, but why are you the sole individual helping PSA out? I would at the very least have the owner of the #1 set, along with Scott Mt. Joy assist with this tasks, just to remove any doubt that might go along with this process. The Clemente Master like the Clemente Basic is a very competitive set, and I would think that having the collective group, or at least a representative group to speak for those members building this set, would have been the better way to handle this weight recalculations. >>
Hi Matt,
If you check much earlier in this thread you will see that not only did I attempt to include those you mention, I developed a draft of proposed weights for the entire master set and sent it to the top 10 set holders requesting input and hoping to come to a relative consensus to submit as a unified group to PSA. I received some "thank you's" and "I'll get to it soon" comments, but ultimately received no feedback or input from anyone. That said the weights that have existed for the master set were disturbing to me before I ever got started in the running. I have collected, traded and sold Clemente material for well over 20 years. I am in process of putting together a checklist (viewable in a web browser) with images and difficulty ratings of Clemente memorabilia made before 1973 - currently there are about 500 items in it. Many of the weights in the master set are just off (Some of the Clemente venezuelans (not leader cards or team cards) would be to me an obvious one). Period. So with no input from anyone, I chose not to sit by and do nothing. That said, the process of trying to provide input for PSA to change their weights is by no means easy or a given - they don't just say oh, Howard said so, so let's change it. Essentially I provided input on 3 items - 1) Milk duds - they had the single at a 6 weight and the box at a 2 weight - it was a joke - the cut single by their standard would sell for more than a box (both being a psa 8) - just silly. 2) Bazooka's - in many cases they had the single and the panel at the same weight (I believe in one case they left it) - is it not pretty common knowledge that a panel sells for significantly more than a single? That said they put the weights of the boxes in most cases the same as the panels - another joke, but they will not change it unless I can show them "market prices" for the boxes supporting that they are that much more valuable. 3) Plak checklist - I just pointed them to the auction where the checklist in a PSA 7 sold for 22k - I also disclosed that it was purchsed by my partner and resides in our Clemente set - a little self serving - absolutely, but there was an under bidder right behind my partner. I pointed them to the auction link - they decided the weight. I am ready and willing to have a dialogue with any Clemente master set builders who would be interested in discussing weights and trying to address it further with PSA. I don't make the rules here, I play by them. While I absolutely am competitive and want to be a part of the top set, I can also be objective in having a discussion about the weights of any of the cards involved. Consider this both a response and invitation.
-Howard
<< <i>If you check much earlier in this thread you will see that not only did I attempt to include those you mention, I developed a draft of proposed weights for the entire master set and sent it to the top 10 set holders requesting input and hoping to come to a relative consensus to submit as a unified group to PSA. >>
Howard, Clearly I did not see where you mentioned you tried to involve the top 10 set holders. Not much to say if you tried to involve those set owners and got no response. I apologize.
-Howard
I appreciate his efforts and admire his passion as a Clemente collector.
Scott
Always plenty of PSA-graded cards in my ebay store -- https://ebay.com/str/thelumbercompanysportscards
<< <i>developed a draft of proposed weights for the entire master set and sent it to the top 10 set holders requesting input and hoping to come to a relative consensus to submit as a unified group to PSA >>
I started this set in May and my goal is to be in the TOP 10 by next May or sooner.
1 1 17944108 NEAR MINT 7 1967 DEXTER PRESS PREMIUMS ROBERTO CLEMENTE ALL-STAR SET (LONG BIO)
Currently collecting 1934 Butterfinger, 1969 Nabisco, 1991 Topps Desert Shield (in PSA 9 or 10), and 1990 Donruss Learning Series (in PSA 10).
<< <i>I just received poppage from PSA. I bought this at the National and it was a SGC 84, I cracked it out and received this. Overall pretty happy >>
Congrats Bobby, You did well, based on what you paid for that SGC 84.
<< <i>Not a card but very happy with this pickup, a nice clemente photo from the Sporting News Collection- >>
Great Looking photo Scott. Now will you have that slabbed as well?
<< <i>This was one of my first submissions. Man was I excited >>
Congrats! I had the chance to buy that card (PSA 8) from a fellow board member that pulled a dead centered one from a pack rip. I wish I would have picked it up when given the opportunity, as he has since sold it. Love that card.
I'm all for new overlooked additions to the required master set,(72 daily juice..) however it seems quite a few newly labeled minor Clemente variants to previous listed cards are being added and I believe only one of them should be required to fill that spot in the set,(a bazooka panel or box should be fine for the slot in the set, but not a requirement for both since that Clemente card is already well represented in the set. ) since so many of the earlier graded cards do not notate these newer variants and it seems way too late to me to try and retro fit all these previous graded Clementes now..and that doesn't even take in account the many PSA flips of Roberto that don't match the card inside.
Once we can figure out the number of Clemente cards required for the master set, we can begin to work on establishing the correct weighted values assigned to each required Clemente master set card.
Just a few random thoughts to consider, and try to bring a little more common sense to make collecting our Clemente master sets more fun : )
<< <i>All new additional Clemente cards added on to the the master set should remain optional until at least a couple of Clemente collectors register that card..we don't need a master set full of the only one graded Clemente card known to exist as requirements. and a posted picture/scan should be an additional requirement before any new card can be listed for the cards required/optional for the Clemente master set.
I'm all for new overlooked additions to the required master set,(72 daily juice..) however it seems quite a few newly labeled minor Clemente variants to previous listed cards are being added and I believe only one of them should be required to fill that spot in the set,(a bazooka panel or box should be fine for the slot in the set, but not a requirement for both since that Clemente card is already well represented in the set. ) since so many of the earlier graded cards do not notate these newer variants and it seems way too late to me to try and retro fit all these previous graded Clementes now..and that doesn't even take in account the many PSA flips of Roberto that don't match the card inside.
Once we can figure out the number of Clemente cards required for the master set, we can begin to work on establishing the correct weighted values assigned to each required Clemente master set card.
Just a few random thoughts to consider, and try to bring a little more common sense to make collecting our Clemente master sets more fun : ) >>
With all due respect, all of the PSA sets are considered works in progress and the Clemente set had a few "single graded" copies prior to the latest editions. Please be specific with regard to what you are calling "minor variants". As deserving as Topps 1958 yellow letter and white letter are as having seperate lines so too imho are the Dexter variations, Nabisco team flakes variations, Salada coin variations, etc. Regarding the Bazooka's I found it a bit self serving (of PSA) to include both the single and panel as seperate line items - my original suggestion was a single line item for Bazooka filled by a single, a panel or a box - with the weights appropriately reflecting the higher value of the panel over the single and box over the panel. That said, if Bazooka's deserve seperate lines for a single and panel, then certainly it deserves a seperate line for the as issued most difficult original box. I am sure some of these additions are challenging for those who have been working on master sets for a while, but these are all legitimately issued cards and although rare, I can assure you exist in more than a single copy and deserve inclusion. Anybody else?
<< <i>
<< <i>developed a draft of proposed weights for the entire master set and sent it to the top 10 set holders requesting input and hoping to come to a relative consensus to submit as a unified group to PSA >>
I started this set in May and my goal is to be in the TOP 10 by next May or sooner. >>
Bobby,
At the rate you are going, you will certainly be there sooner - then it gets tough ;-)
I just listed some items on ebay: see them Here.. I will take down and sell privately to board members any item with a buy it now. Check back once a week as I will be listing more items in weeks to come. If you prefer I do not post here when I list items let me know and this will be the last one. Be well.
-Howard
or at least until a few Clemente collectors start to recognize a new optional variant by adding it to their set as well, at that time maybe it could then be upgraded to a required card...keeping the spirit of a work in progress..
Many of the variant ones you mentioned..salada.180 or 200 back, nabisco wide or narrow border etc.. haven't even been listed yet..(does PSA even consider labeling any of these variants when grading now without a request from the submitter..? ).and I feel we really do not need any more extra duplication at this point (PSA ran into some of this last year with all the new panels/boxes/uncut sheets and proofs..cut in so many different ways....that were being added/required to many master registries, thank goodness they stopped that nonsense..)..besides how long can i expect to wait til PSA gets a graded holder for my 1967 Topps Roberto Clemente punchouts in original panels of 3 and does anyone really want them added as a requirement when i do ... optional sure, but required..nah...since the single punchouts are already required...maybe i could separate mine, NOT! or just keep waiting : )
I feel strongly that all new Additions to the master Clemente registry should remain Optional (and not counted in the scoring..) until being recognized and added by a few(3 or more) Clemente collectors to their own master set registries, and maybe some back tracking may be in order..( how did that 68 bazooka 2 panel sneak in again??..) to reel in some of the duplication and the now required that should be optional 1 of 1's..
A picture of the new "Optional" additions would be a great help..as which post gazette paper card (paper?) got added..the 72 stats or as newly listed the 1973 in memory one, without a photo it's anyones guess, since i don't know if psa or if many clemente collectors even know at least 2 years exist..A perfect example as why every newly added Clemente "card" should always start out as optional..and then earn it's way onto the required list ..
hopefully a few of my fellow Clemente collectors can understand and get behind the idea of starting all the new Clemente master set additions as optional and then earning their way to becoming required..other ideas or imput on collecting Clemente is always welcomed..
p.s. my personal thoughts regarding the complete Clemente bazooka boxes just added ..i still feel they need to earn the required status..by being collected/graded by more than 1 person and since the 1960,62,67,68 and 71 boxes are still missing from the current master set list (i don't think psa has a holder for most yet..and the 1960 Clemente box remains a hidden mystery ) and whether Optional (as they should be..) or required the master Clemente set will still remain incomplete on the bazooka box front for quite awhile .. and how about those poor souls who may have destroyed a perfect bazooka box to get a pristine panel for the registry..
but maybe i can help your newly listed bazooka Clemente boxes along the way to gaining the required status i feel they should have to earn by getting mine PSA graded and registered..at what level submission did you use and how long did it take?? please lmk... but i still don't wish to cut up my 1971 numbered bazooka sheet to get a nice Clemente numbered panel for the registry..so i can't help that tough issue earn it's stripes : )
What is the deal??...is a part of a box missing considered a complete box in PSA eye?
If so where do they draw the line?
To me Complete means the whole thing.
Love to here what you hard core collectors think.
Scott
I wish I could give you my thoughts on those bazooka boxes, but I do not have enough information on those boxes to pass a long.
My buddy Matt used his new scanner on some of my Clemente cards and I wanted to share.
<< <i>I feel strongly that all new Additions to the master Clemente registry should remain Optional (and not counted in the scoring..) until being recognized and added by a few(3 or more) Clemente collectors to their own master set registries, and maybe some back tracking may be in order..( how did that 68 bazooka 2 panel sneak in again??..) to reel in some of the duplication and the now required that should be optional 1 of 1's.. >>
I totally agree with you on your thoughts. Well said.
Mike
------
stupid print dots
<< <i>guys I need some help identifying this. Looks like a 1957 or 58 team issue photo pack . Does psa grade this ?
1958. I don't believe PSA has graded one yet nor do I know that THEY (PSA) knows or would grade it as a '58 - VERY tough team issue.
-Howard
<< <i>A lot of talk on this thread about the bazooka boxes...no one has answered my question I posted a couple days ago...how did Howard's Clemente box get "complete box" when it is missing part of the flap?
What is the deal??...is a part of a box missing considered a complete box in PSA eye?
If so where do they draw the line?
To me Complete means the whole thing.
Love to here what you hard core collectors think.
Scott >>
Hi Scott haven't requested PSA's criteria on these - Simple logic would say it is a heck of a lot closer to a box than a panel. That said, the box is in spectacular condition outside of the part of the missing flap which PSA penalized significantly for on the grade. My guess is it otherwise would have been an 8. Just some thoughts - like I said not sure of PSA's position on this. Be well.
-Howard
<< <i>Completed my Clemente Basic Set this AM. This is the last card that I needed. Hopefully its as nice in hand as it looks in the scan, as I paid a premium, and really hoping that it will get .5 upgrade.
Congratulations Matt! It's a sweet looking card. Already in a post .5 holder, so don't know about the chances, but beatiful nontheless.
-Howard
(1) How to grade the same Clemente team issued card, 3 different ways! Really?
as i can see no real difference/variation in any of them..can you?? Please LMK, as i think it's just the same basic Clemente card issued over a span of years 66-70 by the Pirates... (see scans) so at least 3 times in his master set...and then 3 or more submissons for the same card, Really?
(2) onto the 1971 team issue Clemente (head shot )..it's been a labeled a team issue and also now is labeled a autograph style issue and it fits in the 1971 action photo slot in a master set..(and i think has been mislabeled as that action photo as well, the real action photo is shown in the B+W scan i think..) (1970 color team issue is arms folded looking right?)
this is the Roberto Clemente card that does it all and more : )
i hopefulley added a few random scans of some of these cards..from many sources...but i'm still confused please help me if you can... Thanks : )
BTW here's my latest pick up. (Thanks again to Oaksey)
-Howard
Ps. The last B&W scan that Jeff posted is what PSA is recognizing as the "1971 Action photos"
Regarding the 1966 through 1969 team issues -- I think we can say with some confidence that the '67, '68 & '69 issues are the same. I learned that the '67 and '68 were the same (thx to Scott Mt. Joy) a while back -- and I recently spoke with an ebay seller that has the same issue along with the team checklist that bears the year (1969). I'm not sure if the sets contain the same cards but it appears that the designs are identical. Maybe PSA should start listing this card as a 1967-69 issue but I think that's a lot to ask.
Scott
Always plenty of PSA-graded cards in my ebay store -- https://ebay.com/str/thelumbercompanysportscards
1967 pin ups - this is the highest graded pop 1 recent sub
-FC
Once again Thank You Scott!!!
Thanks again
Bobby
-Howard
https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/pdub1819/othersets/6204
<< <i>That was "quick"! Sorry to see you go Bobby. The master set is much more like a marathon than a sprint. Best wishes and a Happy Healthy new year!
<< <i>
I just don't have the disposable income to continue to buy high dollar Clemente's. I want quality instead of quantity. I'll continue to buy Clemente's just the ones I want and not worry about the registry
<< <i>Good luck Bobby....what are you going to focus on now? >>
Paul, I'm not sure yet. I really would like to own a Hank Aaron rookie. I might to take my Clemente money and invest into an Aaron.
I wish all you guys a Happy New Year!!!
Currently collecting 1934 Butterfinger, 1969 Nabisco, 1991 Topps Desert Shield (in PSA 9 or 10), and 1990 Donruss Learning Series (in PSA 10).
Currently collecting 1934 Butterfinger, 1969 Nabisco, 1991 Topps Desert Shield (in PSA 9 or 10), and 1990 Donruss Learning Series (in PSA 10).
WTB: PSA 1 - PSA 3 Centered, High Eye Appeal 1950's Mantle
I was fortunate to pick up an Aaron and Clemente rub off in PSA 8 in a trade from another collector
The pin and the Fleer were raw subs