Quote:
Originally Posted by buymycards
The problem with using the thin paper of the Type 1 Coupon's as a reason to exclude it from the T206 set doesn't hold water. What about American Beauty, which are narrower than other T206's. Should they also be excluded?
We have discussed this on the board many, many times. The reason for the T206 set being defined the way it is, is that one person, many years ago, with very limited information, made this decision. I am in awe of the work that Burdick did in regard to cataloging the sets, but in some cases, new information has come to light that Burdick wasn't aware of.
Rick
|
The paper is the issue. E90-1 cards share the same fronts with other caramel issues and a tobacco issue. It isn't an issue that they are catalogued as different sets. In the 90s, I collected basketball cards because of Michael Jordan. I would never dream of putting a Topps card in a Topps Chrome set. The cards are nothing alike except for using the same picture. It is the same with t206 and Coupon Type 1. They aren't the same cards, they aren't the same set. I would never buy a coupon card to fill a hole in my t206 set.
You make a good point on the American Beauty cards. I noticed that when I started collecting t206 35 years ago and I deliberately avoided buying any of those cards for my set. If there is any change to be made with the backs in the set, in my opinion it should be excluding the card backs that are not like the others, American Beauty and Ty Cobb, not adding more backs that have little in common with t206. I have no problem leaving them as is, it is Burdick's work not ours.