No Disrespect Intended

[jingram058]

Honestly, I think I have always collected this way: build certain complete sets. Then, separate out the stars and/or players I have actually heard of, and then display them that way. That is how I put my 1962 Topps set into a binder. I arranged it thus. A nice 2 page write-up on the 1962 Topps set, then the American League teams by the order they finished the season, then the Ruth and World Series subsets, then the National League, then Rookies "floating heads" subset, then checklists. All the guys I simply never heard of are nicely stored in a cardboard card storage box.

I don't mean any disrespect to these guys. It just is what it is.

My 1953 Bowman set is different. I have knowledge of every one of these guys, color and black & white.

I have sorted my pre-war cards like this as well. All the n72, n82, t205, t206, t207, etc., are stored in binders by stars, and the guys I simply have no knowledge of are put away.

Do any of you collect this way?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

you're sick and must be stopped

As an auction owner there's nothing more annoying than getting a set (especially one that has numbers) in anything other than traditional order, but rest assured you are not alone in having a unique way of handling your sets. At least you didn't colorize an entire 1948 Bowman Set, which is something else we have seen!

[commishbob]

When I was actively blogging I 'knew' a lot of fellow set collectors and quite a few of them bindered them similar to what you described. It wasn't something I'd ever consider but whatever gives you the most enjoyment is the right way for you.

That 1962 set was really fun to put together. It's challenging but attainable. I did the 'numerical order' bindering as always, but then the question was what to do with the Green Tint series. I ended up with them in pages behind the 'standard set' and a couple of pages of the variations, Reniff, etc, etc.

Like you, I included set descriptions and backgrounds when I could find good ones. And a checklist. I've sold off most of my vintage sets and I may miss that '62 set most of all. It wasn't my favorite set (59T takes that spot) but it was the most memorable and satisfying set chase of them all.

[ALBB]

Nice,
there's lots of cool ways to display sets, ..a wax wrapper on front of album, etc..

My problem is .I do all that.. then end up never looking at the sets !

[JollyElm]

All collectors are collectors, but some collectors are more collectory than others.

[Balticfox]

I'm a straight by-the-numbers guy.

[molenick]

When I was buying packs of cards as a kid (ca. 1966-1971) I kept them in piles on a bookshelf organized by teams (and by years within each team). I recall that the St. Louis Cardinals had the biggest pile.

Now I keep the sets I collect in card boxes either in numeric or alphabetical order (whichever is appropriate for that set).

I separate the type cards by E, T, or "other" (D, F, M, etc.) and keep them in ACC catalog order (for example, E90-1, E90-2, E90-3, E91-A, E91-B, E91-C, E92...) within each group.

The Zeenuts are in chronological order.