Congrats to HalleyGator!! 100% on his HOF set!!

BigKidAtHeart

I just noticed when I was looking mine up.

Way to go! That is quite a feat!

I do wish you would post some scans - especially of the older cards!

~jeff

pinhigh

HalleyGator - I would also like to congratulate you. I think that your HOF set is an unbelievable task to undertake. I also appreciate the fact that you were interested in collecting the HOF set as a set itself, rather than simply registering your cards from other sets. Way to go - it is something to be proud of!

HalleyGator

Thanks Guys!!

I wish being 100% meant that I could rest my weary bones ... but I still have to keep upgrading!!

BUT ... Here is my dilemma: If I continue my search for "rookie cards", then my set grade will fall because many of the very old rookie cards simply can NOT be found in high grades.

For instance, I have found two 1921 American Caramel cards of Joe Sewell and Goose Goslin (their rookie cards). They will probably only grade out as PSA 3 ... but they will still be MUCH RARER than PSA 8 1933 Goudey cards of these same players.

This is why weighting is needed ... because right now I have no choice but to just keep the 1933 cards on the registry or else my grade will fall.

OH, The horror!!!

pinhigh

HalleyGator - I know that this has been something that you have been constructing long before the set registry and for that reason, I would say stick with your initial plan of owning each HOF's rookie or earliest card. My opinion is to disregard the set rating, especially with a collection such as this, because collecting for the rating is a losing endeavor. Also, I'm sure other collectors will recognize that the '21 Caramel cards are rarer and more difficult to obtain than the '33 Goudey cards. I do agree that the HOF set needs to be weighted, if to at least place more weight on the rookie cards or the earliest cards. Good luck with the upgrading.

HalleyGator

I think you are right and I think I will indeed stick with my lifelong plan of getting the oldest cards possible.

But, I may ALSO keep the higher graded cards registered and NOT sell them until the sets are weighted properly. This should solve my problem, but it will cramp my spending ability!

waitilltheytrytosell

Just list another set. One with anything, and then one concentrating on the oldest cards or rookies.

Vargha

Congrats -- that is a phenomenal achievement! Collect what you want and disregard the Registry ratings.

thegemmintman

HalleyGator - I just looked over your set again. Truly outstanding! Keep'em coming!

HalleyGator

I just have a problem replacing a $1,800 PSA 8 1933 card with a $200 PSA 3 1922 card ...

It just naturally feels like a "downgrade" when you replace a card with one that costs less, but I need to do it if I am going to stick to my plan.

carkim

I think this is spectacular

Welcome to the 100% club.

Carlos

sixdart

HalleyGator -

Have you contacted PSA regarding the potential weighting options?

There is much room for discussion in those weights. For example, a 1975 Robin Yount PSA 9 vs a 1989 Robin Yount PSA 9. They both count, however, the 1989 is currently has an equal value.

Maybe the can or should weight the rookies much higher than the non-rookie year cards. This makes for a more complex set composition - this may even cause the need for different programing - but it is more fair.

It would be nice if PSA could also associate the low population cards with a higher value/multiplier as well. They have the databases to access all the information. So far, I think that the registry set has exceeded PSA's expectations and will continue to evolve with efforts such as yourself.

Great job on the set!

HalleyGator

Sixdart:

Yes, I have designed at least SIX effective weighting systems ... but PSA keeps putting me off.

Oh well.

Mitochondria

Congratulations Halleygator! Your set is truly amazing. Well done.

Ron

LuxuryWines

WOW!!! What an Amazing Set !!!! Great Job.... Congratulations Jeff

HalleyGator

Thanks, Jeff. I love wine!

Seriously, let me know if you sell the good stuff...

BigKidAtHeart

<< <i>let me know if you sell the good stuff... >>

like what, Boone's Farm or Thunderbird!

HalleyGator

Franzia ... in the cardboard box.

pinhigh

HalleyGator - What is involved in your six weighting systems? Just wondering how you went about weighting them and what the weights came to be in your system. Thanks.

HalleyGator

One had just the players weighted from 1 - 10, regardless of what year the card was.

One was the same way but from 1 - 25.

One had the players weighted 1 - 10 (based on their stardom) AND had the cards weighted by age (1 - 10).

One was the same way but 1 - 25 on both.

One had the players weighted 1 - 10 AND the cards weighted 1 - 10 by age AND had the card weighted by SMR price (1 - 10).

One had the same way but 1 - 25.

Oh well....

LuxuryWines

Sorry ,

I am not the Pro grading of the Wine Business .. You will have to go for you cheap swill elsewhere... Brands I sell are mostly esoteric $15-20 bottles with some going as high as $200. Think of my portfolio as a solid PSA 8.

HalleyGator

Harlan Estates?

Bryant Family?

Screaming Eagle?

NickM

Luxury - would that be a vintage PSA 8?

Nick

pinhigh

HalleyGator - I would be very interested in seeing your weighting system that you describe as:

"One had the players weighted 1 - 10 AND the cards weighted 1 - 10 by age AND had the card weighted by SMR price (1 - 10)."

Also, did you ever receive a response from them concerning your weighting systems? If so, what were the reasons they denied them?

LuxuryWines

My Brands Are
Sonoma Cutrer
Mariah Zinfandel
Bonterra
Jekel
Owens Estates
Tahbilk
Geoff Merrill Reserves

Nick of course they are vintage PSA 8

HalleyGator

Pinhigh: They were in the process of implementing my weighting system, but then everyone screamed when they came out with the system that rated some cards WAY higher than others (which is exactly what my system was designed to do) and they decided to stick with a simple 1 - 10 scale.

What I did was break the 200 players down into groups of 20 each --- some like Ruth and Mays and Aaron were in the top 20 and were worth 10 points, while others like Dave Bancroft and Travis Jackson and Al Lopez were in the bottom 20 and were worth 1 point. Guys like Joe Morgan and Lou Brock were in the middle of the pack and were worth 5 points.

Then, I basically said something like: Cards made before 1900 are worth 10, cards from 1901-1909 are worth 9, etc.... all the way up to cards made after 1980 being worth 1 point.

The final weighting factor (other than the actual PSA grade of the card, of course) was that if a card had a PSA 8 value of: $10,000+ = 10 points, $7,500 - $9,999 = 9 points, etc. .... all the way down to a card whose PSA 8 value was less than $50 = 1 point.

HalleyGator

My system is indeed complicated, but it would only be needed in sets where there are cards from different eras (1870 - 2002 in the HOF set) and different players, etc.

In other words, a PSA 9 Old Judge 1887 King Kelly card (worth $50,000 and rare as a three-headed snake) would be weighted MUCH, MUCH higher than a 1992 Topps Kirby Puckett card.

The difference between those cards is more like 1,000 to 1 ........ not the 10 to 1 that PSA is using .... but who am I to judge???

waitilltheytrytosell

It's going to be very hard to add weighting for value when you have no idea what somebody is going to register. Weighting for a 1933 Goudey set is easy. It's all listed in the SMR and you can only register 1933 Goudey cards for the set. For a Fine Pen set that isn't listed in the SMR, it can still be weighted very easily because you will only be able to register Fine Pens. But, for your HOF set, people can register any obscure card they can find. It could be a card listed in the SMR, a new collector's issue, obscure regionals, team composites, everything and anything goes. It would be very difficult to determine values for things popping up which aren't in the guides. If you register a Rodeo Boudreau, what's it worth, and how will your rating number be adjusted. Will a flag go up to a PSA guy that Halleygator just registered a Rodeo Boudreau and somebody has to find out what it's worth, and enter the info in the system so the rating is adjusted. Every card somebody registers would need a value put to it. This complicates matters a great deal. It complicates it to the point where it's impossible. The simpler you make it, the more likely PSA will come up with weighting.

I like the first two factors of your weighting idea - weighting by player significance, and then rating by decade. Just add these two numbers up, factor in condition, and it's very easy for PSA to implement, and there is zero need for constant attention with having to value stuff. Flaws in the system? Absolutely, but there is no possible way that they can come up with a method that everybody is going to agree on. It needs to be just as easy for PSA as it does for us. You ask for easy, they will do it. You want the impossible, they will drag their feet. And who could blame them. They are going to get complaints regardless of what they come up with.

I think your time/decade weighting should be 1 to 20 like your players.

pinhigh

Thanks for the response HalleyGator and thanks for your post waitill. I think the biggest difficulty with the way that the HOF set is set up at the moment, is that I could purchase a complete, modern Upper Deck HOF set, have it graded and likely receive mint cards back. I could then register the complete set under the HOF set registry and it would appear that this set would be better than that of HalleyGator. That is ridiculous to me. I feel that some type of weighting system must be implemented for the HOF set simply because you can register cards from any decade, as waitill describes. Either that, or only allow certain cards of players be registered, such as only cards of individuals during their playing days. I believe the implementation of a weighting system for the HOF set is just as important, possibly more important than that of a set that includes cards of the same type and same year.

I also agree that the best way to do this is to factor in the player's status along with the decade which the card was distributed.

HalleyGator

If nothing else ... maybe they will implement an "Age Rating" system only.

After all, everyone in the Hall of Fame is already deemed to be a "10" when you consider that only the top 1% of all players ever make it into the HOF.

I will see what PSA says...

Because if nothing else, an age-weighted factor would keep someone's 2002 reprint cards from being worth anywhere near as much as the REAL 1887 card of that player.

waitilltheytrytosell

Here is an example of how things would balance out. Say for instance you have 1956 Mickey Mantle, and a N172 Hugh Duffy. Because of Mantle's popularity and card values in general, you might put him in the 15 to 20 range on your player weighting, and Duffy's will go in the 1 to 5 range. The 50's decade rating might rank say 5, and the 1880's might be 20. So the overall rating will be 20 to 25 for Mantle, and 20 to 25 for Duffy. Now with this, there is a flaw in that a 1952 Topps Mantle is worth the same as a 1958 Mantle AS, but who cares. To try to make exceptions for freakishly high cards makes the whole system very difficult. If you were to register a HOF Metal Duffy and Mantle, the weights would be 15 to 20 plus a 1 or 2 decade for Mantle, and 1 to 5 plus a 1 or 2 decade on the Duffy. Mantle would sell for more than Duffy. Seems to work.

Davemri

i would also like to congratulate you hal. Please note that i mention your name on my website as the greatest psa set of all time. (however, not sure if the link still works). Just curious if you are working on, or planning to do this in any other sport, or perhaps adding managers or umpires to you baseball set.
Your set is what actually inspired me to create the set i am working on. thanks.

Dave

Davemri@yahoo.com

Mitochondria

Halleygator,

Are you by any chance a Florida Gator fan?

Ron

HalleyGator

Huge Florida Gator fan and alumnus ... hence the nickname!!

Mitochondria

Just moved to Gainesville recently. I am quite impressed with the real alligators at Paynes Prairie Preserve. Go Gators!

Ron

pinhigh

Ahhh, not the Gators. I'm a Dawg. My grandfather has a sticker on one of his cars that you might enjoy. It prominently shows the greatest mascot in college sports (UGA) and says, "Gator In Trunk." And I was really starting to like you Halley