What is a complete set vs master set

[ALR-bishop]

I wouldn't worry about it. I collect Topps sets and have them all --48 and 51 to 2012. Up until 1994 ( when I stopped putting my sets in binders) I tried to assemble "master sets". For me, this simply meant all "variations" listed in the SCD Standard Catalog of Baseball cards. But for others it may be only those variations listed in the PSA Registry, or maybe Becketts.

Many variations listed in such publications/forums are not variations at all, but mere print defects that have caught the fancy of the hobby, such as the 57 Bakep or the 58 Herrer. Some are real variations, such as the 59 Spahn DOBs or the 59 traded/option cards.

I assume for 55 you may be referring to the fact the Williams card can be found with or without a dot on the i in the signature, or with various degrees of the dot present. That made it into SCD, as did the 3 59 Sullivans with out a circle on the CR, or without the period in USA. Are these mere print defects or corrected defects. Who will ever know ?

Collect what you like. I like my SCD parameter because almost all sets are listed there and with Bob Lemke retired, the list is likely to be fixed

But I still sometime collect non listed oddities, which my friend Doug would call "glorified print dots"

[BearBailey]

Yes I see a master set as everything, every variation etc. But to me a complete set is 1 of each card number that is intended for the set. So for 1954 bowman regardless of Williams or Piersal one 66 equals a complete set. If it is a mis-number such as 61 topps you need both numbers to have the complete set because they should have had seperate numbers. In my opinion for the diamond stars you need the high numbers as well for a complete set. Or you can say you have a low-numbered set. Most importantly collect what you like!

[ALR-bishop]

...and a collector knows he has every "variation" to a set at any particular time how ? And, what is a variation ? Do you believe it to have some standard definition, and if so, what is the source of it ?

Not rrying to be argumentative. I think the OP has raised a good question about how a collector knows he has a master set...and just saying he needs all variations I think does not answer it. Now if you are a PSA Registry collector the answer is easy at any given point. But, I'm not one.

Come on Doug, straighten us out

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

...and a collector knows he has every "variation" to a set at any particular time how ? And, what is a variation ? Do you believe it to have some standard definition, and if so, what is the source of it ?

Not trying to be argumentative. I think the OP has raised a good question about how a collector knows he has a master set...and just saying he needs all variations I think does not answer it. Now if you are a PSA Registry collector the answer is easy at any given point. But, I'm not one.

Come on Doug, straighten us out

My definition of a "complete set" is one of each card listed in the SCD, which as Al (ALR-bishop) points out, is probably never going to change now that Mr. Lemke has retired.

The definition of a "master set" is, I think, more of a moving target. As Al mentions, having "all" variations really only means have all variations at the moment. Variations are constantly turning up, and always will. And, just because some people think a card is a variation, does not mean that all people agree that it deserves status as a "needed" card for your master set. And vice versa.

As an example, if you believe that all print dots are variations, then you will have a massive set, because I guarantee you that if you have 100 copies of a given card, you will find 100 tiny little print variations.

There are numerous threads on the forum regarding what does and does not constitute a variation. All of the ones that I have written are correct and complete, those written by others may not be.

Insert smiley face here.

Also, I don't consider the registries of third party graders to be relevant, just as I don't consider third party graders to be relevant.

I'll bet that every collector of master sets has at least one card that he believes to be a valid variation, that nobody else has on their list, and probably has at least one card that most people believe to be a valid variation, that he thinks shouldn't be. For me those cards are the 1958 Aaron blue background, and the 1958 Herrer.

Al and Dave are the kings of Topps baseball variations, although Al likes to avoid the title.

Doug