Posted By:
MarkBarry - I guess the rule, as you expressed it, is slightly different than I have heard it before. I thought Hal's rule was that a card had to be "nationally distributed" rather than merely "not regionally distributed."
Either way, does the rule preclude a 1936 WWG Joe DiMaggio from being his rookie since it presumably wasn't issued in any U.S. state? What is Hilton Smith's rookie, his 1948 Toleteros or his first widely distributed U.S. issue? 1975 Topps Minis were only distributed on the West Coast, but I've never heard anyone state they were ineligible for rookie card status.
I would also think T206 should be viewed as multiple issues, rather than one big issue, depending on the back (issuer). Still, I would regard regionally released t and e cards distributed in New Orleans as rookie card eligible.
To sum up, non-regional distribution is not part of my definition of a rookie card. I think it leads to odd results contrary to what the hobby has come to regard as rookie cards. I also do not understand why in theory the distribution should make a difference.