General Forum

In my set collections where I'm putting together the base and parallel sets, I like to page up the base set in order, nine to a page.  I then put the page for the first parallel in front of each base set page.  Then the next parallel level in front of that one, and so on.  That way, early on I can see exactly where each parallel card goes in the page (right in front of its matching base card), and later on when looking at each parallel level's page, if there are any cards missing I can see through the space to the set behind it and know which card is missing.

-Tom

I know it is my collection and I can do what I want with storage, binders, etc. Just trying to get some others opinions about a Parallel Sets in pages. I have been working on the 2008 Upper Deck Masterpieces Hockey set and it comes with 5 different colors plus the base card. The set only includes 87 cards for the base set and was trying to figure out if I want to put all the different colors with the base card essentially putting one page per card series? One of the colors is SN1 so probably never get that portion done since I have only seen one for sale ever. 

Storage, binders or pages is not a problem. Just thinking it would be cool to have the rainbow together on a page. 

Comments or suggestions?

Mark

87 card base set with 5 parallels in the same binder.

I currently have a 700 card baseball set in a 3" D-ring binder, with a few more pages of inserts for the set.

Using 1 nine pocket page per card number would come up to 87 pages.  87 multiplied by the normal 9 cards per page would come to, oh, 783.  I believe you could still squeeze that into a 3" binder, with page lifters, since I would think the end pages will try to sneak around the ring at that max limit.  A 4" binder would do nicely though.  I like the idea of using a separate page for each card number, so that all the parallels are right along side the base card.

Lea DeFoote's idea of stacking the parallel pages over the base set page of nine different cards is very interesting.  I never thought to do it that way, and his method would certainly allow the set to be squeezed into a 3" binder, since the 3 empty slots are being used up, that would be empty in the one card number per page method.

I would try the one card number plus all parallels method first, staggering the six cards to the top 6 pockets, then the bottom 6 pockets on the next card number page.  Trying to balance out the binder evenly as possible.  I have to admit that Lea DeFoote's method is intriguing though, and I would certainly try it out sometime with a smaller set to see if I completely like it that way.  

Just my .02 worth of jibberish.

After seeing your sample page, I see it will be more like a base card and 4 parallels, since the black SN1 will likely be hard to acquire.  In this case I would use the "X" pattern for each card number page, with the base card in the middle, and the four parallels spaced out in each corner.  That way the binder stays balanced since each card is basically supporting the one on the next page.

So, let's see, that would put me to .03 worth of jibberish now.