View Single Post
  #160  
Old 06-22-2021, 06:09 PM
Peter_Spaeth's Avatar
Peter_Spaeth Peter_Spaeth is offline
Peter Spaeth
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 33,685
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobC View Post
Thanks! And I don't disagree with you at all. However, Beckett definition purists will of course argue against us. And I can more understand their disagreement over including something like a '56 Topps pin or a '69 Topps team poster as a rookie card item. But then you look at the '55 Topps Doubleheaders or '69 Topps Super cards, which are actual cards issued in a player's rookie year playing in the majors. You look at Topps today and all the different sets they put out each year, including Bowman which they still own, and for every different set they release they can designate a separate rookie card of a player for each and every different Topps set issued. So why isn't the same definition and thinking being applied to these 50's and 60's Topps sets we're looking at and talking about?

It is a debate that will likely continue for as long as people collect baseball cards.
What's your feeling about an All Star card from the base set, like the higher number 60T McCovey? Also a RC? I think multiple cards from the same set get RCd these days.
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions.

My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at
https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/

Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 06-22-2021 at 06:12 PM.
Reply With Quote