 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
01-30-2011, 11:48 AM
|
||||
|
||||
#1 and Last Card $ Bump: Fallacy?
Just wondering if you felt that the #1 card/Last card of a set is worth much more than other commons or is this a fallacy? Were these cards really much more likely to bear the brunt of the rubber band or is this an old wives tale? I've noticed Beckett book buys into this concept but I feel like this is an artificial "book" construct. What is your experience with the value of first/last cards???
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Threaded Mode