Conditional or overall rarity? Which influences you more?

[Chicago206]

Which is a bigger influence on the items you collect? Conditional rarity, or absolute rarity? Does a high grade common player/common back T206 turn your crank as much as a poor grade BL460 backed card? I prefer absolute rarity. Whats your preference?

[Browncow75]

As someone just getting into the game of rarity, overall rarity is foremost for me. It is also difficult for me to afford "pristine" anything, so rarity has to take presidence over condition. Just my 2 cents on the subject!

[botn]

Absolute rarity.

[JP]

Perfect subject for a poll. Absolute rarity.

[mintacular]

Some things are RARE b/c they are the only ones in a high grade, put that in your pipe and SMOKE it!

[teetwoohsix]

I guess I'm somewhere in the middle-I like mid-grade common's & HOF'ers with semi-scarce backs........

Clayton

[JP]

Originally Posted by mintacular

Some things are RARE b/c they are the only ones in a high grade, put that in your pipe and SMOKE it!

Yeah, that would be one of the two choices -- conditional rarity. Me thinks you didn't read the thread starter...

[Chicago206]

Originally Posted by mintacular

Some things are RARE b/c they are the only ones in a high grade, put that in your pipe and SMOKE it!

Which happens to be the very definition of "conditional rarity".

[ullmandds]

JP and Chicago T206...were you guys separated at birth?

Absolute rarity reigns supreme...I'll take a box of g-vg's over a few mints any day of the year!

[rhettyeakley]

Chicago, rarity all the way.

You do realize there is more than one pre-war set right!?! (ie there are cards beyond T206's)

It is kinda funny hearing T206 and rare in the same sentence, while I admit there are tougher backs within the T206 set there are no RARE T206 players (outside of the Doyle perhaps).

-Rhett

[Abravefan11]

Rarity for me.

When dealing with truly "rare" cards you can't be condition sensitive, you take what you can get. If you can afford to wait for a better example to come along, it's probably not rare. IMO

[JP]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

JP and Chicago T206...were you guys separated at birth?

Why? Because he decided to write exactly what I did, 15 minutes after I did? I happen to disagree with almost everything he has said since he came here, so I doubt we're related.

One of the things I love in the t206 set are common backs that are condition sensitive. Like Polar Bears without tobacco stains or some ABs that look too thin to not be trimmed, but are legit.

[T206DK]

rarity , does not influence my collecting choices. I collect what I like and what interests me, not what I think will make me the most money later if I sell it.

[E93]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Absolute rarity reigns supreme...I'll take a box of g-vg's over a few mints any day of the year!

I think the question was would you take a few g-vgs that are super rare, or a few nm/mt condition rarities. You don't get a hole box of g-vg rarities, or they would not be that rare.

[E93]

I like both.

[JP]

Nice Comiskey!

[Bridwell]

I hate poor condition cards. They are ugly, to me, even if they are rare.

Ron

[Bicem]

what Rhett said.

[fkw]

Rarity ..... Low grade is fine with me, as long as the players image is OK overall.

I like pinholed rare cards

PS Love that E223 Comiskey, thats a truly rare card!

[3-2-count]

Originally Posted by E93

I like both.

Me to......

[quinnsryche]

Originally Posted by Bridwell

I hate poor condition cards. They are ugly, to me, even if they are rare.

Ron

Me too. They don't have to be perfect but holes and tears and such are visually unappealing. That said, I'd rather have 1/2 a Wagner than no Wagner at all.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by mintacular

Some things are RARE b/c they are the only ones in a high grade, put that in your pipe and SMOKE it!

And more are being made each day. That is the problem. And those not only don't smoke well they are also worth a fraction of what people think they are.

[frohme]

For me, neither, really. Rarity (or more appropriately scarcity) affect how I collect, more than what I collect. What I collect is and has been for a while fairly narrowly defined, surprisingly. T207 and pre-war Pirates.

Knowing which ones are mostly likely not to be seen again - in any condition - drives purchasing priority. After that, relative rarity within the set of collecting interest is the deciding factor. This can be either conditional or absolute.

T207's in SGC 70 or above aren't that plentiful, but seem to be showing up a little more often lately... yes, they're out there, but tucked away in collections, but I'd take either of the "Red"'s in (almost) any grade over any common... and similar to what Ron said above - I'm not a big fan of really ugly cards. I own them purely out of necessity (as if we ever really need cards)...

--
Mike

[buymycards]

I would rather have a PSA 1 T206 Demmit or O'hara than something like a T206 Cobb in a higher grade. Conditional rarity doesn't really mean much to me.

Rick

[Exhibitman]

I don't think high grade common cards are rare because if you need an example of the card to complete a set you can easily get one. I think a card is rare if it is very difficult to find one to acquire in any condition. I prefer to have common cards in common conditions. What interests me most are cards that are very, very hard to find in any condition. Cards that have only a handful (or even one) specimen are the tops for me. I'll take this over a mint common Exhibit any day of the week:

[joeadcock]

Prefer the rarer card, irrespective of condition.

Frank

[JamesGallo]

I will take a rare low grade card over a high grade common every day of the week.

James G

[Orioles1954]

I'm a mid-grade collector of semi-rare sets. I have beaters, I equally dislike ultra high grade cards. Rounded corners and crease-free are just what I like.

[albrshbr]

Overall rarity for sure. Not too long ago, I picked up an E135-type Sam Crawford with a blank back. As far as I know it's only the second one known to exist. It's one of my favorite cards.