What is a complete set vs master set

[tonyo]

Originally Posted by Tomman1961

So......Bottom line. Can you sleep at night "truncating" and calling your set a "complete set"?

Short answer: Yes

I consider my self a set collector - I just define my own "sets".

For example my 58 topps "set" consists only of the members of the 500 hr club. My "58 topps members of the 500 hr club" set is complete. If somehow a random 58 topps that isn't a member of the 500 hr club found his way into my hands, I would get rid of him as quickly as possible because my tendency is to try for "complete" sets. Ok, we can call them sub-sets if we want, they are still complete

Same with my "56 topps hall-of-famers" set (or sub-set). It's complete and I don't want any more 56 topps....if I had a non-hall of famer, THEN I couldn't sleep at night.

I did complete the 52 bowman, 72 topps, and 73 topps within the last two years. One of each card number. I don't really even care if variations exist. But same principles apply; if I ended up with a variation, I'd pick the one I liked best and get rid of the other one as quickly as possible.

I did venture into a pre-war type collection. I'm up to 78 different types. It's been fun and I've learned alot about pre-war cards, but I've recently started trying to define a "set" so I can have a target to "complete". I'm leaning toward 100 different pre-war types.


Anyway, maybe you can ask your therapist if that approach would work and let you sleep better. Collect a set of "one of each low number diamond stars" and convince your self that is indeed a complete set!


Tony

[steve B]

I think that of you don't want to collect the High numbers for the diamond stars that's just fine. Some people wouldn't think of the set as complete, but that's ok too.

What you'd have is a complete low number set.

When you think about it, the lows were issued then the highs, so each is its own set.

A couple of the Topps sets I collected as they were issued, in series. So for 1970 I have a lot of series one, and fewer of the others.

I'm fine with not completing a set, it's nice if I can, and if I get close I'll put a bit more effort on, but it's not a big deal (Probably a mix of ADD and habit from always being on a tight budget.)

I do collect all the odd variations, recognized or otherwise. But I don't get crazy if I don't have them all.

That's part of the fun of any hobby, you decide what to collect.

Steve B

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by steve B

That's part of the fun of any hobby, you decide what to collect.

Exactly.

There are no rules.

Doug

[ALR-bishop]

Spoken like a true anarchist...

[mintacular]

I can see avoiding some variations and considering your set done but let's not go too far with that concept i.e. saying that you have a 1952 Topps Set complete without the high #'s--now that's going overboard (pun intended)

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by mintacular

I can see avoiding some variations and considering your set done but let's not go too far with that concept i.e. saying that you have a 1952 Topps Set complete without the high #'s--now that's going overboard (pun intended)

I don't consider it a "complete set", I consider it a "complete low number set"

Doug

[ALR-bishop]

And I have seen auctions listing such low number "sets" for sale. I guess someone who has all the low numbered cards can call it anything he wants. That seems a logical extension of Doug's No Rules principle

[Volod]

"...I do collect all the odd variations, recognized or otherwise. But I don't get crazy if I don't have them all. That's part of the fun of any hobby, you decide what to collect...."

Agreed, but, hobby fun aside, aren't most of us here because we are crazy?

[darkhorse9]

I learned the hard way that you can't collect everything. I'm working on a set from every year 1941-2012. Regarding variations, I've decided to only go with ones that have a dramatic difference on the front of the card (every set is in a binder.

I collected the photo variations of 1962 Topps but not the green tint. I didn't bother with trade/option varieties of 1966 or 1959 etc. I don't worry about DOB or statistic variations either.

That seems to help a bit.

[ALR-bishop]

Darkhorse---sounds like a great collection and a very sensible approach.

Now lets see, what would constitute a "dramatic" difference ? I guess you know it when you see it