Quote:
Originally Posted by bn2cardz
You really are missing the point the two numbers don't contradict each other. Not every card has a number. The number given by the CSGB is a pose number. It allows you to know what pose would be found in each subset and distinguish each. You can still use the short number or 0 numbers for their corresponding sets, but you can't use those numbers on sets that don't have them. At times the short number and 0 don't even correspond with numbers, and again, they cross over to subjects outside baseball. The CSGB number set is only for baseball poses (they have numbers for the other poses of non baseball players).
For instance tell me what number do your eyes see on the burns in the OP?
|
If you give any card two separate numbers, and on of those numbers is found on the card itself, and the other number isn't, then which number is really the number of the card? I'll tell you that it is the number found on the card. The CSGB can give it whatever number they wish, but so could anyone, and in that perspective the Mack could have an infinite amount of numbers associated with it... but you are missing something quite obvious... despite the potentially infinite amount of numbers a card
could have, there is an actually number printed on the card itself that it
does have.
The CSGB, they can use whatever methods they wish, but that doesn't mean the card is really number 252-2. Same for SGC. They could say that a Burns card is "1887 Old Judge" although it is says "Copyright 1889" on it, they have a right to call it whatever they want. If they wanted to call it a 625 B.C. Old Judge, they could call it that, but that wouldn't make it any more produced in 625 B.C. than in was in 1887. No matter what their methods, both of those numbers are equally wrong because it was really produced in 1889.
So by your standards, anything could be called anything if some grading company or cartophilic society said so. If they decided to call a "hat" a "shoe", and vice versa, you'd be putting shoes on your head and walking down to the drugstore in your new pair of hats. Now, they might have their reasons for doing it, but that is their business - I know what a hat and I know what a shoe is, and I've never walked to the drugstore in my new pair of hats or worn shoes on my head. Not sure if you can say the same.