View Single Post
  #47  
Old 01-19-2023, 11:05 PM
BobC BobC is offline
Bob C.
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ohio
Posts: 3,275
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharleyBrown View Post
Bob,

I have provided research on this very forum which indicates the number of portrait BB cards distributed in 1947.That research has been used by all the major auction houses, and it appears Beckett as well. To call that card a limited release or a regional release is to ignore that research to fit a narrative.

The set of 13 is a true card set. Its distribution has been documented. Of the 13, the portrait was released first and constitutes his true RC. Following the Portrait and prior to the release of the Swell Sport Thrills set, 6 more Bond Bread cards were distributed, as was the Kneeling Old Gold card (Sept 47 release). None of those take away from the value or significance of the Swell Sport Thrills, which is a beautiful card that deserves its increase in price.
Great Shaun,

All I was ever asking was for some factual or other logical or detailed information as to the distribution and such for the '47 Robinson Bond Bread cards to then explain why it seems there are so few of them still available then. Also, I had merely said that some people believe the Bond Bread cards are more of a regional or limited issue, which some do, and is therefore an absolutely true statement. I also said that I agreed that the Bond Bread cards first came out in 1947, the year before any other of Robinson's ML cards issues did, which is also absolutely true, and makes the 1947 Bond Bread card Robinson's first ML card appearance. But there are still many people that do not consider food/bread or other such specialty/advertising issues as a "true" baseball card set, and therefore eligible to include a player's "true" rookie card. And for you to state otherwise, and say that without a doubt you are right, is really nothing more than simply your opinion, which you are entitled to. But so are the other people that don't necessarily agree with you that a '47 Bond Bread is Robinson's "true" rookie card, regardless of your research, AND THEY ARE ENTITLED TO THEIR OPINIONS, AND JUST AS RIGHT ABOUT THEM, AS MUCH AS YOU ARE TO YOURS!!!

I am all for learning and finding out new things in the hobby, and that is why I very often ask questions of others. I also often make very long and detailed posts myself, just like this one is turning out to be, trying to be thorough, and giving as much factual, logical and common sensical info and data as i can to put forth my own theories and thoughts, and still retain an open mind. But unfortunately, at least on this site, I've found only a very few people that even try to return the favor, without being ridiculous, demeaning, or simply pushing their "I'm right and you're wrong!" mantra over and over again. I always try to keep an open mind and am very willing to look at things from different viewpoints as well. And I absolutely don't mind telling people I was wrong about something if they can actually show me facts and evidence, along with other logical information and arguments, which can convince me their point or theory is actually the correct one, and not just another opinion. Sadly, I usually only get back a couple lines or so from people responding to me for something like this, and they never seem to bother answering any of my questions either, or they just blow me off with their TLDR crap, and/or continue throwing the previously mentioned "mantra" at me, over and over.

You state that you've done research showing the number of portrait cards distributed in '47, and it has been used by AHs and Beckett, and that you've provided that very research here on this forum. Great, then why didn't you just lead with that and at least provide a link to where this data and research is here on the forum, or just recreate and include the research here in this thread? Instead, you say it proves that people that believe this '47 Bond Bread issue was a limited or regional release are ignoring your research. Did it ever occur to you that no one is ignoring it at all, because maybe no one knows it even exists?

I've been a collector and in this hobby for decades. And I've seen many auctions and used to buy Beckett price guides/magazines myself back in the day. I've never seen or heard of this research of yours before now, and I'm going to go out on a limb and make a wild guess that a vast majority of those in the hobby haven't seen or heard of your research either. Otherwise, if it were that overpowering and convincing, why would there be many collectors out there that still don't seem to think of the '47 Bond Bread cards as Robinson's true rookie card? And that isn't pushing a narrative, that is just stating a fact!!!

So, I asked a previous poster to answer a question. And now I've got one question and one request for you.

1. What is this research data you are mentioning, can we actually see it?

2. Do some research and come back to share with everyone in this thread what you find is the definitive definition of what ALL baseball card collectors throughout the ENTIRE hobby have agreed to as the one and only complete and accurate definition of what is an MLB player's "true" rookie card. (And make sure it has been affirmatively agreed to by everyone in the hobby, and that you can actually prove that is true!)


P.S. As for how great the research you did for Beckett and others was, go back to Post #38, and the article that packs linked to in trying to debate some of my thoughts/thinking. I believe that is a Beckett article, right, same people you gave/showed your research to? You did such a fantastic job convincing everyone over there that you are right about the '47 Robinson Bond Bread card as being his "true" rookie card that they couldn't help but talk about it in articles they published about the set. Just read the very first line of that article saying how everyone was now convinced those '47 Bond Bread cards were his "true" rookie cards, oh........wait.....................hmmmmmmmmmmmmm!

Last edited by BobC; 01-20-2023 at 01:04 AM.
Reply With Quote