SGC Set Registry II

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Ok Folks,
This is the first and final follow-up thread for the type registry. I appreciate everyone who offered their intelligent opinions on the last one. This particular thread is not for the folks that don't want a registry. This is the thread for the folks that want to share and compare with others through an SGC type registry. I can think of several type collectors that I would really enjoy sharing collections with. Maybe this will be the catalyst, maybe it won't. Can't hurt to try. Again, PLEASE folks do not post on this thread except for ways to help the registry proposal. I also know that follow up threads like this usually don't spark a lot of interest, or posts, and that is ok too. So far the best options are as follows:

1. 19th Century 1800's
2. Pre-WWI 1900-1917
3. Post WWI-Pre-WWII 1918-1941
4. T-cards
5. E-cards
6. HOF's of each set pre-'42

I do have a couple of questions right now, myself. Will an individual card be able to be used in more than one category? Will grade come into play in these categories ?...and a few others....

Sean, at SGC, and I will be talking in the next few days and see if we can put something together. Thanks again and best regards..

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

looks good to me except #6. Can you axplain that one a bit. Do you mean aone registry for all cards from HOFers from the time frame or do you mean a seperate registry for each set that only involves HOFers? I really like the t and e set registries. You could also add D and W sets too. Don't think there are too many in this area that fall into the R sets.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Hey Jay,
Good question on #6. What I was meaning is a "master" type set. It is a little self serving as that is my ultimate goal (obviously unattainable but what the heck)....which is to have 1 HOF card from each set pre WWII.....so the set would be something like "PreWWII HOF master set" or something like that. Maybe even get more loose and skip it having to be an HOF. But then too that would be somewhat self serving. I can't imagine how often I will get a chance to upgrade my very nice common T208 Cullivans Fireside to an HOF of the same set. Good idea on W's (which I don't collect yet) and on D's, which I do collect.... regards all and thanks again....

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

I'm building a collection of HOF'ers who played prior to WWI and after 1900 - it doesn't matter what set each example comes from, but I'm trying to obtain my favorite cards of each. It's kind of like Halleygator's collection, only more limited in time-frame. I know that others have similar collections - it would be very interesting to see what "types" they pick for each HOF'er.

[Archive]

Posted By: petecld

What about for those collectors who just collect one player adding to the registry a "player/type collections" which would be one card from every set a particular player appears in BUT just the sets issued during their active playing days.

Maybe limit it to just HoF players?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Hey guys and girls ...that are interested,
I spoke with Sean this morning for quite a while. He is going to talk to his programmers about doing an open ended registry.....no competition just good ole fun.....so for instance I could have my collection be "Leon's type collection" Pete could potentially have his...."Pete's caramel collection"...and Scott could have "Scott's HOF collection" etc....and Adam and Jay and Andy....could keep theirs stashed away for no one to see....(although your website is great Andy, I was just making a point that no one is forcing anyone to do anything and there is no downside in that respect....it costs no one anything)....regards all

[Archive]

Posted By: Andy Baran

I was never opposed to the Set Registry idea, I just didn't think that my collection would fit into any pre determined category. If what you are proposing actually happens, I may consider joining. Keep us posted.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Hodes

Basically a registry that featured all HOFers from during their active days would encompass most (if not all) of the suggestions above. Sure Leon's Kelly card would be far more interesting than mine (which is "just" an old judge/color card) but we could both be listed their. Likewise, Runscott's cards could be there with whatever HOF card he thinks is most interesting (even if it is "just" a T206) as well as Andy's which are generally Rookies as I understand it.
Obviously, the competition aspect of this would be kinda silly since a Fan Craze 8/88 of Lajoie would be worth more in grading points than a Bresich Williams 5/40 of the same subject even though we all know that the Breisch-Williams example is exponentially more difficult.
Most of all all of these collections would be displayed together so that they can be "shared" which to me is one of the best reasons for such a collector-created set registry.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

SGC weights the cards based on desirability and rarity, so the B-W would have a higher weighting than Fan Craze card. It hurts you in over all grade beucase they a card with a rating of 8 and grade 50 would count as 8 cards grading 50, which is a stiff penalty, but the get your set superiority score moved up quiet a bit. Haven't seen how they figure that out yet, but would be interested in seeing the formula

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

I couldn't care less if my collection is judged "#1", so the point value is irrelevant to me. But I think it would be really cool just to see what others are collecting, online - wish MW had included scans in his Hockey set.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

I'm collecting football cards of every player who played for Texas A&M (vintage of course). This could also apply to baseball, but you wouldn't find as many vintage cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Scott --

I should have some images up for both the Hockey and 1937 OPC Baseball sets within a week or so.