? about weight assignments.

MCMLVTopps

Anyone know how PSA assigns weights to cards within Registry sets?

I would think the more rare the card, the higher the point value. I have a particular player set that contains some one of ones, as in the only one graded by PSA, not just within the grade. However, these cards have a 1-point value. I am more curious than overly concerned about my Registry standing. Other cards within this set are not so tough to come by, but garner a higher point weight than one.

I'm not sure I see the logic to weight assignments.

Thanks,
Al

WinPitcher

Star power has higher weights.

Low pop common 8's do not get higher weights.

tonygug

I think the pop report of a card isnt as important as the actual value of the card when it comes to assigning a weight value for it for a set. I have a ton of 1 of 1 psa 10's in a master set and 90% of them have only a 1.0 value. Some of them I think should have a higher weighted value but what do I know?
You can always email PSA and request them to review a particular weighted value.

augustaman

It's a combination of the two........

Take the 1971 baseball set as an example:
1. #100 Pete Rose (high value superstar) - weight is 8.00
2. #536 Claude Raymond (low pop common) - weight is 8.00

jradke4

weights are based on the value in psa8. there is a table that you can get from the registry people. the bottom line is that value determines the weight not the rarity of the card. for example thats why a rookie card is usually rated higher in a master set than a 1/500 printers proof.

mikeschmidt

Al:

Furthermore, if a set has not been weighted, all cards have a default weight of 1.

If you provided us with the name of the actual set, and a link to the weighting for that set, that would be helpful.

Cosetta, BJ and crew have historically been SUPER helpful in adjusting weights when it is based upon principled rationale consistent with PSA's Weighting logic.

jradke4

that is true they will review any questions. though you might have to be prepared to demonstrate the price realized for certain cards, more so for those that arent priced by beckett due to rarity (ie those that around 1 of 25 cards).

MCMLVTopps

The set in question is the Luis Tiant Master Set, which is mine under the handle El Tiante. I just now opened the set for public view.

A review will show the set has some one of ones, as in none higher, but, there are a few "only one ever graded" by PSA. I understand the star concept and the value placed on PSA 8s, however, I also believe if ANY set has cards as stated above, their inherent value to that particular set should indeed be much higher than one point. There are Venezuelan cards in the compositon, that, if you're lucky, you might get in a PSA 2, as they are rarer than rare...thus should, IMO, hold a higher point value.

Oddly, the Red Barn disc has a value of 2 points, while all others have a one point value...it is of course a one of one also. The 1977 Saga Disc (POP 2 in a 10), has a value of 3.

Something isn't quite right.

Thanks for all responses, I'm sure my set isn't the only one that has this "situation".

Al

bking

<< <i>The set in question is the Luis Tiant Master Set, which is mine under the handle El Tiante. I just now opened the set for public view.

A review will show the set has some one of ones, as in none higher, but, there are a few "only one ever graded" by PSA. I understand the star concept and the value placed on PSA 8s, however, I also believe if ANY set has cards as stated above, their inherent value to that particular set should indeed be much higher than one point. There are Venezuelan cards in the compositon, that, if you're lucky, you might get in a PSA 2, as they are rarer than rare...thus should, IMO, hold a higher point value.

Oddly, the Red Barn disc has a value of 2 points, while all others have a one point value...it is of course a one of one also. The 1977 Saga Disc (POP 2 in a 10), has a value of 3.

Something isn't quite right.

Thanks for all responses, I'm sure my set isn't the only one that has this "situation".

Al >>



That one little detail helps a lot, thanks. If it's a player set, then I think rarity and value are the prime drivers of the point scale. But, someone has to be responsible for making the case to PSA that a certain card has a certain value ranking. I bet that is an easy conversation to have with them.

jradke4

<< <i>

<< <i>The set in question is the Luis Tiant Master Set, which is mine under the handle El Tiante. I just now opened the set for public view.

A review will show the set has some one of ones, as in none higher, but, there are a few "only one ever graded" by PSA. I understand the star concept and the value placed on PSA 8s, however, I also believe if ANY set has cards as stated above, their inherent value to that particular set should indeed be much higher than one point. There are Venezuelan cards in the compositon, that, if you're lucky, you might get in a PSA 2, as they are rarer than rare...thus should, IMO, hold a higher point value.

Oddly, the Red Barn disc has a value of 2 points, while all others have a one point value...it is of course a one of one also. The 1977 Saga Disc (POP 2 in a 10), has a value of 3.

Something isn't quite right.

Thanks for all responses, I'm sure my set isn't the only one that has this "situation".

Al >>



That one little detail helps a lot, thanks. If it's a player set, then I think rarity and value are the prime drivers of the point scale. But, someone has to be responsible for making the case to PSA that a certain card has a certain value ranking. I bet that is an easy conversation to have with them. >>



trust me on this you will have to show raw value to get the weights changed at a minimum...its even better if you can show a psa graded sale price. i had to do this with some cards for my favre set. i had a base card with a higher weight than a 1/25 patch card...why because they could find the price of the base card but not the price of the patch card. i had to show them the ebay price i paid for the patch, which was more then the book price for the base. they then adjusted the weight according to the table for the favre master set. they dont weight the cards based on psa pop reports...why? those will keep changing which will mean they will have to start decreasing weights as more cards are graded.

the over all values of the cards may go up and down but they are all more likely to track the same for all the players cards, ie you wont the major changes you will have with pop reports.

theczar

Al,
Thanks to Cosetta and Joe and help from people like you the 1966 recently got updated. Based on PSA 8 prices a reasonable weight was assigned based on those prices. My set actually went down in rating but I think it is much closer to market so that is what I really wanted.

FM