What Do You Consider A "Complete" Set

Yeah that 22 Plain really gets to me, the one reason I have not bought a dansco for my Penny Collection...that one Hole is going to bother me.
But the Display looks great, I'm currently using this odd one that has 6 sliding tabs per page that hold 6 coins each.

I bought some Harris 2X2 plastic snaplock holders SPECIFICALLY to use the inserts to "plug holes" in a few albums that I never intend to fill. I don't like the empty hole - and don't want to use fakes or incorrect coinage.

My dilemma is that I one day may save enough or decide to splurge on some of those "rarities/oddities", but if I do I'd want certified coins as I don't want to pay big bucks for one that might be a fake(leg filed off to make it a 3-legger for instance). Well, at that point I wouldn't want to "crack the slab" and lose some "worth" off that big $ coin in that process - I don't mind that for $50 or less coins but it strikes me as counter-intuitive for anything bigger. So it's a catch-22, IMO. Thus I've resolved not to care about those few slots!

I still wrestle with using really poor grade coins in an otherwise nice clean set. I actually prefer the "roll your own" approach to creating your own criteria and pages anyway. I've filled a few albums and have some more work on a couple, but I find it less fulfilling than my "run of Xs" I think up on my own anyway. Like for certified I think of runs in multiples of 9 as each page holds 9 slabs. So I decided on the "last 9" certified proof Frankies and "the last 18" IHC's and "the last 18" certified Buffs and a typeset of my creation being "all 1910 coins". That kind of thing! If I were into 2X2's I guess I'd look at runs of 20,40 or whatever!

The irritations about the 22 Plain Lincoln Cent has come up before. Usually coins like that are a real irritation to collectors that put their coins in Albums. And same with coins like the 42/41 and 42D/41 Mercury dimes and lots of others. I've always thought that the Album manufacturers are doing something that the majority really don't want but don't know that. To bad there is no way to make petitiions on forums like this and send to places like Dansco, Whitman, Littleton, etc. on what we all want for Albums.
Not sure if anyome would listen anyway but sure would be nice to have a way to try.

I think I'm pretty much in agreement with most everyone here. The choices of varieties in albums are so arbitrary. Why the 1918/7-D over-date, but not the 1914/3? Why the three-legged, which is just an over-polished die error, and not the two-feathers errors?

To me, a complete set is a date/mint-mark set, plus the major types (significant and deliberate design changes), but not varieties. E.g. type 1 and 2 1913 Buffalo nickels would be included, as would type 1 and 2 1917 SLQs, copper and zinc 1982 cents. There is probably a gray area with certain subtle subtypes for some coins. Proofs are optional or a separate set. I have no interest in not-quite-proof SMS or "satin finish" coins, and I'm glad they did away with that nonsense.

Large and small dates... I could go either way. Again, albums include them arbitrarily. Why are '60, '70 and '82 small and large date types included in the Dansco, but not 1974 (which included other design changes, so is an interesting transitional type). It certainly can't be rarity or commonness or distinctiveness - all combinations for 1982 are common and easily distinguished, but 1970-S small date borders on fictitious.

The logical answer to this is that if there were 123456 coins of a type issued, then you would have to own them all to have a complete set.

However, the sensible answer must be that it depends on your level of collecting. A beginner would be happy with one of each year for each denomination of coin with an additional entry if the design changed during the year. He might then decide that he wants to concentrate on a specific denomination, or one of each type - question: "What is a type?" to which my answer is "Coins which appear the same (other than year) to the general public".

Notice that the coins so far included are those available to the public from circulation. Assuming a logical progression, our new collector might discover mintmarks. I suggest that this is where some experience is necessary and to get a list of possible mintmarks for a particular issue, a catalogue is required.

Here we have the real difficulty, as most catalogues list endless varieties, even coins of which perhaps only one example exists. Stop and think! What do I really want to collect? From this will stem the answer to the original question.

To me a coin is (quoted from the Oxford Dictionary) "a flat disc or piece of metal with an official stamp, used as money". If only one example exists, maybe only one was struck, and it certainly wasn't intended to be "used as money". Working to this, many of the catalogue entries can be ignored. Also, I do not want the occasional "error" coin in my collection as it usually wasn't intended. Likewise overdates, which might be either to correct an error in die making, or might be just to make use of available dies (for older coins). Likewise, I can ignore proofs and NCLT.

As you can see, I like to keep my collection simple. But it isn't! With, for example, British coins of the Victorian era, there are a surprising number of obverse and reverse combinations. But isn't this really the answer? One of each combination of obverse and reverse for each denomination. Mintmarks are another problem - ignore them or collect all? Added to this, some of our Victorian silver coins show die numbers!

So, set down the parameters of what you want to collect and work from there. I've given an insight of my opinion which hopefully will give some ideas.

Back in the 1950s when I collected coins as a schoolboy fad, we had Whitman folders and they were one-sided. As has been noted, the empty spaces are annoying. I got round this by, instead of displaying the reverse with the date, filling awkward spaces with any coin of the same era, but showing the obverse.

Bill.

I quit using the Whitman or Dansco, because of what is stated in above post. Also the last albums I got it was real hard to place coins in. I make my sets with 2 X 2s and I use self slabs. I have a complete set when I have the coins that are in series, have mints that are available, and No error coins. I do have the 2x2 made up already for the coin and if I don't have it the 2x2 is empty. I have 24 albums like this and I like it, but don't expect it to work for somebody else. My sets are complete when I feel these albums as I made them from what the Mint stated that series was. I show key dates and semi-key dates in each album just as the others do, just not the error coins.
Big Ed

Interesting question here, but I say that your set is complete when you say it is. Some people make a set of one coin for each date, some people fill albums, whatever it is that you do is your business. This is a hobby and no one can tell you that you are doing it wrong.
As far as what I do, I like dansco albums but I DON'T get the ones with the proof issues spots
I have heard people say those are "needed" to complete the set, but I just shrug it off
My sets are finished when I can't afford to finish them! Some times people are lucky enough to find semi keys and key dates, but when people start paying thousands for coins it gets kind of crazy. I know for a fact I will never do that. How many sets does that leave me completing? Jefferson nickels, jfks, franklins, Roosevelt dimes, maybe Buffalo nickels or Washington quarters. The thing for me is to have as much as I can get of it all, always striving for the finished set. Hey you never know what will show up