Home› PSA Set Registry Forum
Options

Weighting a New Set for the Registry

cofccougarcofccougar Posts: 7
in PSA Set Registry Forum
Perhaps some have experience providing "weighting" for new PSA Registry Sets. I noticed that the submission form for new sets mentions that if you provide weighting it will be processed with priority.

Can anyone provide weighting?

Are there guidelines?

What factors in?


I am kind of picking up where I left off in the hobby say 1994. Having fun putting together a 1994 Finest Refractor Set, which sadly has no cards that are weighted (does this mean it is in the same category as 1991 Fleer? or that no one has provided weighting?) It would be nice if the set had weighting since it will run at $2250 or so to have all the raw cards graded.

Also putting together a '93 set of refractors, which clearly has a well-thought out weight system.

I would like to submit 94 Sportflics A/P for the Registry but would probably only be interested if there was some way to give some of the cards some importance via weighting.

Thanks for any input

Dave

Comments

  • Options
    mikeschmidtmikeschmidt Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭
    Dave:

    At the end of the day, this hobby should be fun. If you're not having fun with the hobby, you might want to pursue something else...

    Weighting helps only in sets in that it gives stars greater weight than commons (or, in player set registries, more expensive cards greater weight than less expensive ones). As a default, all cards are given a weight of 1. The "right" way to do it might be to give key rookies and stars higher weights of, say, 5-10, and keep most commons at 1, with minor stars in the 2-3 category.

    But this only really matters in the competitive aspect of the Registry -- i.e., in the judging of "My Set is Better than Your Set", and when it comes down to it, if that is what is driving your collecting, perhaps it is more about the competition than about the true thrill of putting the set together in the first place.

    A final question: does the set(s) you are collecting in graded form have other people putting the set together in graded form? If not, it's sort of a moot point if you're the only one collecting it graded anyway.
    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.
  • Options
    cofccougarcofccougar Posts: 7
    I guess my thought here, maybe someone else is more likely to join me in the pursuit of these sets if they are weighted and that in turn makes it more fun. With the '94 Finest Refractor Set for example it would be nice to say that the Cal Ripken was more importnat than Cal Eldred. Obviously those distinctions have some importance when ranking sets on the Registry- if those distinctions aren't drawn then it makes it less likely that folks would be inclined to bother putting together a graded set.

    So anyone can submit an initial weight for cards then? And then with popular sets these are haggled about and adjusted later if need be?
  • Options
    mikeschmidtmikeschmidt Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭
    I've never met any specific collectors whose decisions on collecting a set graded where in any way dependant on the card weighting of cards in the set....

    And, yes, anyone can submit an initial read on the grades. I think someone at PSA looks at them, and unless they think you are on crack when you made your first pass, they largely get accepted.

    On more popular sets, it obviously makes sense to get a few Set Registrants involved and come up with a concensus....
    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.
  • Options
    MeteoriteGuyMeteoriteGuy Posts: 7,140 ✭✭
    More modern sets appear to be not to be weighted to me.....or at least the ones I collect do not seem to be. I don't see it as a big deal. I do think it strange that some of the 80's sets, which are weighed, have HOF'ers at 1. HOF'ers should always at least be 2.

    Mark
    Collecting PSA graded Steve Young, Marcus Allen, Bret Saberhagen and 1980s Topps Cards.
    Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
  • Options
    PubliusPublius Posts: 1,305
    Aren't you the guy who leaves neg feedback for people who dont leave you feedback within a few weeks?
    My Steve Largent Master Set
  • Options
    MeteoriteGuyMeteoriteGuy Posts: 7,140 ✭✭
    Me? I have never done that. I sell 10 times what I buy on ebay, that would make no sense to me. Meaning that sounds like a way to collect negs.

    Mark
    Collecting PSA graded Steve Young, Marcus Allen, Bret Saberhagen and 1980s Topps Cards.
    Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
  • Options
    PubliusPublius Posts: 1,305


    << <i>Me? I have never done that. I sell 10 times what I buy on ebay, that would make no sense to me. Meaning that sounds like a way to collect negs.

    Mark >>



    Mark,
    sorry, Obviously not you, I ddint mean that.

    this cougar guy responded to a thread awhile ago, sorry I dont know how to insert links. Basically it was about feedback and cougar said he leaves NF for someone if they dont leave him feedback in a transaction. Anyone remember that thread, anyone have the link, it was a week ago or so.

    Sorry for the confusion Mark, Ive heard nothing but good things about you, except that one thing I heard.....image

    joe
    My Steve Largent Master Set
  • Options
    cofccougarcofccougar Posts: 7
    1. Thanks for the clarification on whether or not anyone can provide weighting. As trivial as that may seem I feel like it is important.

    2. I leave negative feedback for lousy sellers, including those who stick you with exorbitant fees. As I have a 100% positive feedback @ 335 feedback, apparently I'm am not out of my mind. I have never mentioned leaving negative feedback for those who don't leave me feedback.
Sign In or Register to comment.