Does set consistency matter to you?

[Archive]

Posted By: BlackSoxFan

We all collect something. Somehow we derive a 'concept' of what it is we collect. Do you try and keep consistent grades when collecting? I don't. Many of the cards on my want list are not commonly found, so as long as they look good to me and the price is right, I pick them up. What about you T206 collectors or Goudey collectors? I'm sure that there are exceptions (ie..i don't think anyone would complain about the condition of their Wagner if they could afford one), but lets assume all things are equal for the purpose of this discussion.

Regards,

Black Sox Fan

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

email me

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

THough not always possible, I try to keep consistent condition in the sets I collect. I think they are more pleasing to look at as a group that way. Actually with T206s I have generally tried to go with a little higher grades on HOFs than commons.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

I buy the nicest ones I can stand to pay for. A Cobb may be a presentable 1, a Chance a 3 and a Wallace a 4 or 5.

[Archive]

Posted By: Harry Wallace (HW)

I try and collect in the best possible condition that I can afford, based upon the condition scarcity of the set.

For example, I would accept T222 Fatima cards in Good or better since they are near impossible to find in better condition, but I want my N28 Allen and Ginters in EX or better since they are relatively easy to find in nice shape.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

to see how consistant I'd been without trying (except in thr 19th century--all over the map). I guess when you get more than 4-5 cartds in a set, you start looking for the same characteristics.

[Archive]

Posted By: barry arnold

I have found that my 206 commons tend to be in the best condition, while
HOF's are not. In a similar vein, my rare backs tend
to be like the HOF's.
Obviously, this is primarily,if not solely, due to the cost of things.


Barry