Set Collectors: anyone arrange cards differently?

[Vintagevault13]

As I was putting some recent pickups for my 1971 set into sleeves/toploaders, my mind began to wander back to my early collecting days and it hit me that I never arranged my sets numerically when I started collecting. In fact, I honestly don’t remember even paying any attention to the numbers until a few years later. I always arranged my sets by teams and subsets (all-stars, leaders, World Series, etc.). This got me to wondering if anyone does this anymore. Just for nostalgia, I pulled all of my 1971 Braves cards and found that it is really cool to look at them by team. You can seen patterns in poses, locations, etc. I enjoy looking at my sets often and am thinking about channeling my inner 9-year-old and arranging them like I did as a kid.

Does anyone have sets arranged this way (or another way other than numerically)?

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by Vintagevault13

As I was putting some recent pickups for my 1971 set into sleeves/toploaders, my mind began to wander back to my early collecting days and it hit me that I never arranged my sets numerically when I started collecting. In fact, I honestly don’t remember even paying any attention to the numbers until a few years later. I always arranged my sets by teams and subsets (all-stars, leaders, World Series, etc.). This got me to wondering if anyone does this anymore. Just for nostalgia, I pulled all of my 1971 Braves cards and found that it is really cool to look at them by team. You can seen patterns in poses, locations, etc. I enjoy looking at my sets often and am thinking about channeling my inner 9-year-old and arranging them like I did as a kid.



Does anyone have sets arranged this way (or another way other than numerically)?

I thought you were a binder man, Ed? The by team grouping is something I have always liked about the Fleer sets from the 80s.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Vintagevault13]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

I thought you were a binder man, Ed? The by team grouping is something I have always liked about the Fleer sets from the 80s.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Hey Robert,

Good catch. I am actually a binder guy, but I must admit that I have gone back and forth between binders and toploaders over the years. All of my other sets are in binders, but I am only about 1/3 through the 1971 set so I have been putting them in toploaders until closer to completion. I imagine that I will continue to use binders due to the storage, weight, and ability to easily flip through the sets. I confess, however, that I do miss holding the individual cards and reading the backs like I did as a kid.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by Vintagevault13

Hey Robert,



Good catch. I am actually a binder guy, but I must admit that I have gone back and forth between binders and toploaders over the years. All of my other sets are in binders, but I am only about 1/3 through the 1971 set so I have been putting them in toploaders until closer to completion. I imagine that I will continue to use binders due to the storage, weight, and ability to easily flip through the sets. I confess, however, that I do miss holding the individual cards and reading the backs like I did as a kid.

Ed, you are my inspiration for using binders. I hadn't used binders in years until I started seeing your posts. I have also been back and forth over the years but now I am back to my roots: ungraded cards in binders, the way it was meant to be and not trying to impress anyone by doing so...just pure enjoyment. Good idea of holding them in topladers until you get enough to transfer them to the binder. Incidentally, I have been thinking about building a 1971 Topps set.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Vintagevault13]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

Ed, you are my inspiration for using binders. I hadn't used binders in years until I started seeing your posts. I have also been back and forth over the years but now I am back to my roots: ungraded cards in binders, the way it was meant to be and not trying to impress anyone by doing so...just pure enjoyment. Good idea of holding them in topladers until you get enough to transfer them to the binder. Incidentally, I have been thinking about building a 1971 Topps set.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I 1000% agree with you. To me, this hobby is also for pure enjoyment. Good luck if you go after the 1971 set. I am having fun putting it together. I adjusted my tolerance levels just a bit re: corner wear due to the black borders. It hasn’t been terribly difficult to put together since I am willing to overlook a little chipping along the sides and corners. I still avoid creases, writing, etc. I am building it in the VG+ - EX range. I would suggest starting with the high numbers to knock them out. That is what I did and I found them about as tough as the more talked-about 1972 high numbers. It is a good feeling to know I have those out of the way. Again, good luck if you decide to pursue the 1971’s. Let me know if I can help with anything as you make your decision.

[JollyElm]

It's funny, what you call subsets my friends and I called "junk" cards. All the junk (checklists, leaders, World Series and such) went to the back. When you're a kid, it's so natural to set all of your cards apart by teams, because you are all about your team and who they're playing. My brothers and I hoarded Mets cards, because that was our hometown team. The Mets went in front. And if they were playing the Cubs that day, we'd grab our Chicago cards and 'scout' the team. When the game was going on we'd follow the players as the team made its way through the lineup and check out things like, "Hey, how did José Cardenal hit last year?"...or..."What happened to the guy on this card? Was he traded?"...or..."Hee hee, Pete LaCock. Don't let Mom hear you say that."

The older you get, your childhood teams vanish into the ether and you begin arranging your sets in numerical order...as you come to realize your innocence is lost. Whoa...that took a dark turn there. Too much?

[Vintagevault13]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

It's funny, what you call subsets my friends and I called "junk" cards. All the junk (checklists, leaders, World Series and such) went to the back. When you're a kid, it's so natural to set all of your cards apart by teams, because you are all about your team and who they're playing. My brothers and I hoarded Mets cards, because that was our hometown team. The Mets went in front. And if they were playing the Cubs that day, we'd grab our Chicago cards and 'scout' the team. When the game was going on we'd follow the players as the team made its way through the lineup and check out things like, "Hey, how did José Cardenal hit last year?"...or..."What happened to the guy on this card? Was he traded?"...or..."Hee hee, Pete LaCock. Don't let Mom hear you say that."

The older you get, your childhood teams vanish into the ether and you begin arranging your sets in numerical order...as you come to realize your innocence is lost. Whoa...that took a dark turn there. Too much?

Haha, good stuff Darren. Definitely not too much. I also began putting the cards “in order” as I got older. Love the “junk cards” part. I recall call them “special cards”; not sure why 🤔.

Cards in numeric order in binders all the way. I just completed 1972 and am about to start 1971 myself. I have been fearful of the black borders. Hopefully, I will not drive myself crazy.

[commishbob]

I enjoy hearing folks ideas and experiences in set building/storing. Growing up I had my cards in cigar boxes that I got both from the corner store/soda fountain where I bought 90% of them and from my uncle's pharmacy. They were rubber-banded in number order. Dupes went with me to school for flipping and trading.

Nowadays I put sets into binders when I get past the 50% mark. We should form a '71 set chasers club it seems. I just got back from several hours at the Houston TriStar show banging away at my wantlist for that one. I'm not real fussy on condition generally which is good because finding NM '71s would be the death of me (and my hobby budget). Decent corners, no creases and no writing is all I require.

[Vintagevault13]

Originally Posted by commishbob

I enjoy hearing folks ideas and experiences in set building/storing. Growing up I had my cards in cigar boxes that I got both from the corner store/soda fountain where I bought 90% of them and from my uncle's pharmacy. They were rubber-banded in number order. Dupes went with me to school for flipping and trading.

Nowadays I put sets into binders when I get past the 50% mark. We should form a '71 set chasers club it seems. I just got back from several hours at the Houston TriStar show banging away at my wantlist for that one. I'm not real fussy on condition generally which is good because finding NM '71s would be the death of me (and my hobby budget). Decent corners, no creases and no writing is all I require.

Count me in on the “1971 club”! Fun set but it can drive you crazy if you let it. Sounds like you and I are building similar sets.

[TheNightmanCometh]

Back when I collected sets, I always put them together by team; it just seemed natural to me.

I'm a binders guy, all the way. I'm a little torn, though. When I first started my Braves goal, I thought putting every card in a binder would look great, but now I'm a little concerned about the idea of $1000+ cards being put in a binder.

Anyone out there said, "Screw it!" and did exactly that; i.e. putting $1000+ cards in a binder?

I'm thinking of just buying reprints, and keeping the originals in a safe. That's probably the smart thing to do.

[rkrolewicz]

Originally Posted by commishbob

I enjoy hearing folks ideas and experiences in set building/storing. Growing up I had my cards in cigar boxes that I got both from the corner store/soda fountain where I bought 90% of them and from my uncle's pharmacy. They were rubber-banded in number order. Dupes went with me to school for flipping and trading.

Nowadays I put sets into binders when I get past the 50% mark. We should form a '71 set chasers club it seems. I just got back from several hours at the Houston TriStar show banging away at my wantlist for that one. I'm not real fussy on condition generally which is good because finding NM '71s would be the death of me (and my hobby budget). Decent corners, no creases and no writing is all I require.

I’ve been collecting ‘71 for several years. I have definitely lowered my condition standards especially for the higher numbers. I put them in a binder, but the pages I used are side loaders which are very tight. If I were to do it again I would use top load pages. The sensitive borders and corners make it challenging to get the cards in the side load pages tight slots without “flipping over” the black layer of the paper on cards with corner issues. I’d love to help other to complete or start their sets, maybe this week I can publish my list of the hundreds of extras I have accumulated. .

[JollyElm]

I'm looking to upgrade my '71 set, so I'd be up for trading, too. I have a good amount of nice shaped lower numbers, and my high number extras in pretty decent shape can be seen in the vintage high numbers album in my flickr bucket. I'd be glad to trade some of those for similar looking high numbers that I could use as upgrades.

[nolemmings]

I started collecting postwar again several months ago, and definitely enjoy sorting the cards by team rather than random sequencing assigned by Topps. Like many others, I have vacillated between card holders and binders over the years, and still have some in each, but presently I prefer the binders. I have even cracked out several PSA 8 commons--only non-valuable ones thus far-- since quality raw cards seem to command decent interest these days, and who knows where grading will be in a few or several years.
I really like the 8 pocket sheets, stored flat. I place each card in a vintage card penny sleeve (larger Topps/Bowman size), that fits snugly in the pocket and allows me to remove the card for individual viewing with minimal handling/risk of damage.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I started collecting postwar again several months ago, and definitely enjoy sorting the cards by team rather than random sequencing assigned by Topps. Like many others, I have vacillated between card holders and binders over the years, and still have some in each, but presently I prefer the binders. I have even cracked out several PSA 8 commons--only non-valuable ones thus far-- since quality raw cards seem to command decent interest these days, and who knows where grading will be in a few or several years.
I really like the 8 pocket sheets, stored flat. I place each card in a vintage card penny sleeve (larger Topps/Bowman size), that fits snugly in the pocket and allows me to remove the card for individual viewing with minimal handling/risk of damage.

The 8 pocket sheets with the vintage sized sleeves is a GREAT idea! With smaller sets, I have used 4 pocket pages with Card Saver 1s but have looked for alternatives to 9 pocket pages for larger sets. I think this is it. Thanks for sharing.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Vintagevault13]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

The 8 pocket sheets with the vintage sized sleeves is a GREAT idea! With smaller sets, I have used 4 pocket pages with Card Saver 1s but have looked for alternatives to 9 pocket pages for larger sets. I think this is it. Thanks for sharing.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Agree! Great idea

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by Vintagevault13

Agree! Great idea

I went shopping for some, but all the 8 pocket sheets I see are horizontal. Is this right? This won't work for me with vertical cards.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[nolemmings]

As are mine, which can be seen from the scan.

[Steve D]

When I was collecting complete sets, I always put my cards in numerical order in binders, and like a previous poster said, I like the way Fleer did their cards numerically by team in the 1980s. Now that I no longer collect complete sets however, and only collect cards of certain teams, I put them in chronological order, alphabetically within each year. I have separate binders for Topps, Fleer, Donruss, Upper Deck, and any other miscellaneous companies.

I have been thinking recently about taking my cards out of the binders, and putting them in card saver 1's. That would allow me to store my graded and raw cards together, and I would also be able to remove some bookcases, and then be able to hang some lithos and other items on my walls.

Steve

[steve B]

My sorting progression
69- sept 73 wherever they ended up, usually in the toybox.
sept 73 - mid 74 By team
mid 74 till now - by number The change was difficult since I placed each card in a grid sort of layout on my floor -Yes, all 660 + cards had their own spots while I was sorting. Not the most efficient scheme. (with exceptions, like prewar cards. I used to sort the T206s by league because the checklist I had listed them that way)


Storage, mostly loose in boxes until mid 74 as well, then I got that little plastic binder and a few pages where all the special cards went.


since then I've used almost all the products available.


Back then the cigar boxes were for the bug collection.

[tschock]

For you team collectors that use binders, how about the starting 9 for that year in the first sheet?

From top to bottom, left to right:
LF - CF - RF
SS - P - 2B
3B - C - 1B

[Steve D]

Originally Posted by tschock

For you team collectors that use binders, how about the starting 9 for that year in the first sheet?

From top to bottom, left to right:
LF - CF - RF
SS - P - 2B
3B - C - 1B

I like that idea in theory. Unfortunately though, it won't always work, as there are numerous instances where a regular starter for a particular team, did not appear on a card that year, for that team.

One instance that comes immediately to my mind is the 1984 San Diego Padres. Their regular centerfielder, Kevin McReynolds, did not appear on a Topps card that year.

Another instance is the early-mid 1960s Dodgers. Maury Wills was their regular starting shortstop, but didn't appear on a Topps card until 1967, after they had traded him to the Pirates.

Stan Musial is another "problem"; he didn't appear on a Topps card until 1958.

Steve

[jason.1969]

My sets are all by number except 1978, which was the first I collected as a kid.

For nostalgia I organized those by team in...the Topps Super Sports Card Locker!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk

[Vintagevault13]

Originally Posted by jason.1969

My sets are all by number except 1978, which was the first I collected as a kid.

For nostalgia I organized those by team in...the Topps Super Sports Card Locker!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using Tapatalk

Ahhh, the sports card locker. I had one and your post brought back great memories.