what constitutes a master set?

[tasti1]

Ive been thinking about this on and off fora few years now. Ive asked MANY, MANY people their opinion on the subject but everyone seems to have a different answer. WHAT CONSTITUTES A MASTER SET?
It is my opinion that...(and this goes for any set you're trying to build) if the set you are building has a checklist, then all the cards listed are part of the master set. Now of course in any given set, there will be at least 3-4 inserts and for every insert at least 2-3 parallels. Does that mean i need to have all the parallels for all the inserts? For example:
Let's say there is a base set of 100 ( and i have that already), then there are 2 inserts with 3 parallels each( /50, /100, /500). Now i already have both sets of inserts /500 plus the base, but i dont have the /50 and /100's. Do i still have a master set? Or do i need all three sets of parallels for both inserts in order to have a full on master set?
Please give me your opinion or an actual answer! The set im building could kill me! Im either really close or really far.

[K.Pop]

Basically anything and everything that particualer set was made. You couldm say you have a complete set of the base and then a complete set of the /500. Until you get all the #/rd inserts(/50-/100 and so on...) sets complete it isnt consider a master set.

Here is a very good example of a master set completed.
https://www.sportscardforum.com/showthread.php?t=713338

[helstad]

Even including the 1/1´s? Because if so, then recent sets are impossible to be finished.

[leopards40]

i think a set isnt the parreles no way all u need is the regular ones

[tutall]

I started to put the entire 02 topps master set together and i was going after anything that you could pull out of the box of 2002 topps.

[tasti1]

yeah i gotta agree with helstad. sets these days have sooo many parallels and 1/1's, its **** near impossible to have a master set. Not to mention the numbering on inserts are getting lower. years ago, they had serial #'s to 5000 and 10000. recently...i think the highest number ive ever seen a card get stamped was 1000. The set that K-pop referenced is nice and all but if you compared that to a set today, it'd be 1/3 of the total cards. i believe there was 363 total cards in that 1997 set. Today? 363 cards total?! pfft..thats like a base set PLUS its parallels and we havnt even begun the inserts. I think we should amend the definition of a master set. who's with me?!

[K.Pop]

yeah i gotta agree with helstad. sets these days have sooo many parallels and 1/1's, its **** near impossible to have a master set. Not to mention the numbering on inserts are getting lower. years ago, they had serial #'s to 5000 and 10000. recently...i think the highest number ive ever seen a card get stamped was 1000. The set that K-pop referenced is nice and all but if you compared that to a set today, it'd be 1/3 of the total cards. i believe there was 363 total cards in that 1997 set. Today? 363 cards total?! pfft..thats like a base set PLUS its parallels and we havnt even begun the inserts. I think we should amend the definition of a master set. who's with me?!

Yea, It is difficult to master a set in this era of collecting. I am taking a shot at 08 Press Pass Legends master set. Its not to big and has some cool autos. Look at National Treasures, Thats a good example of to much, then again it is a high end product.

Pre-war-80's=Card Board
90's=Inserts and Game Used
00's=AUTOS! AUTOS! AUTOS!

[OnePimpTiger]

In my opinion, a master set is everything produced and sold of that set, including every parallel set, every auto set, and every 1/1 and anything else....that's the whole concept of "master." If you get the full base and a couple of the parallel and auto sets, that's great, good accomplishment...but it's not a master set.

Yeah, it's extremely hard to do and in some cases probably impossible, but you can't change the definition of "master" just because you can't finish the set.

[tasti1]

hmm...i think he does have a point. man this sucks....