Question for you set builders

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

I have said (at least twice) that I wasn't going to try and build any more sets. However, I keep getting sucked back in. Anyway, here's my question : How much variation within a set is acceptable to you? I mean if the "big" card in a set was a 3.5, would it look out of place if the rest of the set were made up primarily of 5s that were probably better centered? I am thinking as long as I stayed within a grade or grade and a half, I wouldn't mind it. Thoughts?

[KCRfan1]

I don't get caught up in the numeric grade if the card looks nice. So, like many others here, I buy the card and not the holder. My guess is, if you wait for the right card ( lesser graded than the rest of your set ), by appearances, the card will fit right in with your set. Just buy a nice ungraded example and save some $$$. Centering plays a roe for me, but not as much as the corners. I love sharp corners if I can get them.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Lou, most of what I build probably won't be graded. I also couldn't care less about the number on the holder...just using the #s as a point of reference. Thanks for your input.

[almostdone]

I agree with the above statement. I would figure out what's important to you when you look at a set, ie corners, creases, edges, centering etc. If all are important then you will have a high grade set but if you can give give on one or more and keep the set consistent then you won't be bothered looking through if later.
Surface wear and registration are my big issues. Centering, border and corner wear don't bother me so much. Even minor surface creases aren't a big deal as long as not every card is affected.
My take in your question is if you were building say a 1954 Topps set you gave to deal with two Williams as well as the three big rookies plus other HOFers. If it were me and I could handle the big ones in VG or vgex condition then I would get the entire set in that grade to save some money and be consistent. If you wanted the set in ex shape then I would save for the big boys in that grade and not go down to save the money. Every time you look at your set you will wish the key cards match the rest of hand set and then you will probably regret it or wan to upgrade and get them anyway.
Just my rambling opinion.
Drew

[Econteachert205]

I just try to build a set that if someone who knew nothing about cards looked at it, nothing would stand out. As in holy crap what happened to that card?

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

I agree with the above statement. I would figure out what's important to you when you look at a set, ie corners, creases, edges, centering etc. If all are important then you will have a high grade set but if you can give give on one or more and keep the set consistent then you won't be bothered looking through if later.
Surface wear and registration are my big issues. Centering, border and corner wear don't bother me so much. Even minor surface creases aren't a big deal as long as not every card is affected.
My take in your question is if you were building say a 1954 Topps set you gave to deal with two Williams as well as the three big rookies plus other HOFers. If it were me and I could handle the big ones in VG or vgex condition then I would get the entire set in that grade to save some money and be consistent. If you wanted the set in ex shape then I would save for the big boys in that grade and not go down to save the money. Every time you look at your set you will wish the key cards match the rest of hand set and then you will probably regret it or wan to upgrade and get them anyway.
Just my rambling opinion.
Drew

Dang, Drew, you must be psychic because 1954 Topps is exactly what I am thinking about! Over time, I just happened to have picked up the #250 Williams in centered PSA 5 EX and an Aaron rookie that is a 3.5 VG+ The centering on the Aaron isn't quite what I usually go for and not as good as the Williams. However, I do like the card and got a pretty good deal when I bought it. Having these two and liking the 1954 set anyway, I have thought why not just put it together? ? I am just trying to decide how to proceed with the remainder of the set. My inclination is to buy stars graded in the 4 to 5 range and buy ungraded commons in that range (I usually have graded stars and Ungraded commons). I think the Aaron would fit well enough with such a set. I really don't want to buy a different Aaron, and I don't want an entire set VG+.

[Volod]

I just try to build a set that if someone who knew nothing about cards looked at it, nothing would stand out. As in holy crap what happened to that card?

Yeah, I think that's why I wouldn't let someone who knew nothing about cards look at my '52 Topps set and choke when he or she came to the Mantle filler that cost a hundred times more than some of the EX-MT commons.:)

[brewing]

I prefer to have the key cards on the higher end condition of the rest of the set condition range.
Those are the cards that a future buyer will focus on.

I also agree with econteacher than there should be no cards that stand out as holy crap what happened there.

[K-Nole]

We do have "must", but as far as compared, to others on the set.

As long as their are no pin holes, writing, paper loss, trimming or rips, then we are fine with it. Creases and soft corners don't bother us at all.
The no writing especially goes for checklists too.
No marked on any of them.

[kailes2872]

Robert,
I am a set builder and have done it 4 primary ways.

1.) Buy the complete set. I did this for quite a few of the 70's sets and most of the 60's sets. My standard is no creases, trimmed, or writing. I target the stars in Ex to ExMT and then attempt to have the commons look similar. In these cases, there are usually less than 20 upgrades needed.

2.) Buy a distressed complete set - especially with the stars. This was the case for 1959. I had to upgrade over 120 cards including the majority of the stars and HOFers. What looked like a nice deal at $1200, turned into a $4000 all-in exercise s I got all of the stars and HOFers in at least PSA 6 with several in PSA 7 as well. In the end, it was a 9 month labor of love and one of my favorites in my collection.

3.) Build card by painful card. I did this with '67. It seemed like a good idea at the time. This was pretty early in the process and I was learning on the fly. I spent too much for low number commons and did not buy high enough quality Aaron, Mays, Clemente, Mantle, Rose, etc. By the time I got to the high numbers, I was about $1600 in and thinking that I was making good progress. 2 grand later, I had my Seaver, Carew, Robinson, Red Sox, John, Cash, and the rest of those painful high numbers. I still walk with a limp and speak with a twitch. After putting so much into those (I bought graded examples of all of the key ones), I decided to go back and upgrade the aforementioned Aaron, Mays, Clemente, Mantle, Rose, etc. into PSA 7 and 6 examples. This started when I spent $90 on a lower graded low number lot - of which I might have used 10-15 cards. It was a lesson in sunken costs, as I would not just admit the mistake and buy the set in full. It is one of my favorites sets now, however, after all of the time, energy and money that I put into it. I built 56 card by card with a 100+ starter lot that needed about a third upgraded. Again, it is an expensive proposition, but the set (now 3 short) is beautiful with all of the HOFers graded as a 6 or higher and over 50 graded cards in total.

4.) Buy near sets with nearly all of the commons accounted for and in nice condition. This is the approach that I took for '55 and 54. I would want the big dogs slabbed anyway, so it doesn't bother me that I don't get them - as I would just upgrade them and put the others into my doubles piles (and I have a tough time parting with my doubles so it would just be extra cost). This allows me the opportunity to avoid buying the commons card by card and getting some value in bulk, but still being able to have it customized to how I want it to look. The challenge now is being paitient to find the right Clemente, Banks, Mays, etc - as I have an overwhelming urge to get them complete as soon as possible.


My hope is to never have to sell. However, if there is an emergency and I need to liquidate, I think about what sells well in the AH catalogues and PWCC - A nice mid-grade set with several of the key stars in slabs. If I have the stars and 6's and 7's, then I assume that the rest of the raw cards will naturally be in that condition as well. I know that I have way more into the card than I would be able to get out (especially with the juice), but I feel like this would be the best possible way to maximize. It also allows me then opportunity to put my lower grade doubles in the '59 back into the binder and then sell the graded stars one by one if that is the best way to maximize the return. Again, I hope that i never have to do this, but I want to try to keep everything as close to liquid as possible in a worst case scenario.

Best of luck!

[LuckyLarry]

I built my sets "any condition" and I mean ANY! Hole punched, wrote on, creased, bent, trimmed, it didn't matter. Over the years I've upgraded many of the real "beaters", and now my sets present very well. "Quantity over Quality" and bent over digging through the bargain boxes at all the shows. Welcome to my collecting style:)
Larry
I have said (at least twice) that I wasn't going to try and build any more sets. However, I keep getting sucked back in. Anyway, here's my question : How much variation within a set is acceptable to you? I mean if the "big" card in a set was a 3.5, would it look out of place if the rest of the set were made up primarily of 5s that were probably better centered? I am thinking as long as I stayed within a grade or grade and a half, I wouldn't mind it. Thoughts?