Originally Posted by marcdelpercio

I haven't gotten the impression (at least in this thread) that anybody is "offended" by the way that anybody else collects. I do think this is a very valid debate however as this is a widely collected set and whether a card is considered an addition to the checklist as opposed to simply a different ad back will affect how a number of people collect.

Obviously a card will only have increased value if there is an increased demand for it. I don't think that this is really a discussion about value so much as it is about set completeness. I have not seen anybody, including myself who originally posted about it, claim that the Doc White variation will have a significantly higher value as it is a common player with the variation appearing on a common back. The Mathewson variation commands a premium because he is a top level HOF player and the variation appears only with a scarcer back.

I think the term "master set" is sometimes misused in this discussion. No true master set will ever exist as that would have to include all Drum, Hindu, Broad Leaf, etc. As I said in the other thread, when somebody says, "I have a complete set of T205's", I don't think anybody would take that to mean that they have every possible front/back combination of every card in the set. What that person means is that they have one of every front/back DESIGN in the set. By definition, this would have to include the Doc White, Matty, and any other such variations.

It seems that the people who do believe that these cards are variations offer identical widely accepted examples from this set and others and present a logical analysis as to why they feel these should be variations. I still have not seen any answers to these points by those who disagree.