Master sets ?

[Coninefan]

Ehh, much like the term "rookie" card, the definition of a "master set" is now muddled.

Take for example Topps Heritage. A master set could be all of the base + SP's and the insert sets, as you brought up.

You could add the Real One auto set, along with the memorabilia cards (Clubhouse Collection?) and call it a master set.

Or, you could go with all the color swaps, throwback uniforms, intentional errors, gum damage backs, blue ink backs, traded notations, photo variations, Venezuelan backs, etc, along with the red auto set, all the chrome and refractor sets (including the gold /5's), the Target red border retail set, I think Walmart had a black set as well, the gold /50 game used set, the dual and triple auto sets, ad panel box toppers, promos, hell you could add the 5x7 jumbo team sets sold on Topps.com....call it a master pain in the ass.

The answer should definitely change not just pre- to post- war, but for each year and each set. A true "master" set of Bowman Chrome would include every parallel, including Superfractors. That's impossible, since not every Super will be pulled and/or sold publicly.

[mybestbretts]

In the PSA Registry player master set, it would be every card produced and sanctioned by Major League baseball during the years the player played. I think actually, they include the following year after they retire.

In the company master set, it would be every card produced for that player
during the years the player played.

[TAVG]

I think it's pretty safe to say that it's damn near impossible to complete a master set with todays products.

too may inserts/numbered/1of1's, etc.

kinda ridiculous.

[ALR-bishop]

It is not limited to modern. Try to get consensus among collectors of the Topps 1952 set as to what constitutes a master set. And, judging by multiple threads on pre war about the T206 set, the same is true there.

I guess as a collector, a person can define for themselves what they will consider a master set. I was just trying to solicit differing views by collectors here regarding whatever criteria they use. It would also be interesting ( to me) to know how many here even care about or seek to build master sets, however defined

[steve B]

My thinking is that unless you're doing it for the registry a "master set" is whatever you want it to be.

I'd typically think of it as the entire base set plus any listed variations. That would include SPs, but not inserts which I look at as a different set that just happened to be issued in the same packs.

Now in my collection - it's totally different. I separate and save the odd stuff like different holograms on upper deck, different die cutting and screening on 88 Score, Minor stock differences on A+G and Gypsy queen, the uv reactive backs on 91 topps (And other years! which I just found out) .....And any other weirdness I find.

I'm not really sure if some of that stuff should be considered part of an insane master set, or as a different set. The 88 Score could easily be considered as three sets since the differences are related to what press run it was, at least for the first three runs.



Steve B