Posted By:
davidcyclebackA collector can collect anyway he wants. If one collector wants to specialize rookie cards as defined by Beckett magazine, and another wants to collect fuzzy dice, they're both right. The rookie card designation was in part invented as a device to focus one's collecting. Some people collect cards of their favorite player, others build a set, others collect rookie cards as defined by a price guide. If collectors consider Beckett's official rookie card list to be the word of God, they're overreaching. But if they use the RC designation as a way to collect, that's reasonable.
I suspect that even those who don't like the RC designation would take interest if Rob Lifson says he will be posting a picture and history of the first known card of Ty Cobb, or the first card to picture Cobb as a Detroit Tiger.
A definition of rookie card is a definition, not a definition of quality. If I were to say Willie Mays's 1950 minor league card isn't his rookie card because he's a Minor Leaguer, one would be incorrect to think I was saying the card is lesser than his 1951 Bowman. Just as if I were to tell the definition the color red it would be incorrect to interpret that I was saying red was a better color than green.
The 1914 Baltimore News card is not Babe Ruth's rookie card. No matter how early, a Joe DiMaggio minor league card is not his rookie card ... If you read those two sentences as a slight against the cards and a comment on their financial worth, realize that is a reflection of you rather than the two sentences or the author (me).