On the absurdity of parallels

[G1911]

Parallels can be fun, as a master set collector I kind of enjoy that you can build a run of many versions of the same card. It's almost impossible to complete in modern with the plates, /1, /5 etc., and I don't really play that game much but whatever makes people happy. I have nothing against them in theory.

This one, however, is a good example of when parallels go crazy and any sense goes out the window. I've been sorting through all my 2000's relics from my teen years (they are mostly super cheap to pickup now), and came across these Bowman Heritage's. Same stock, same color border, same color background, same thickness, neither is a patch vs. regular jersey. I cannot discern a single difference in the cards, except that one of them is the base and one of them is numbered out of /49. At what point is it not even a parallel?

[steve B]

Thats weird.
I tried looking up what the difference was, and there isn't much info other than the "white parallell" is numbered to 49.

Seems like they did simply serial number some regular cards.

[Mike D.]

Maybe the one on the left is actually a rare “SN missing” parallel?

[D. Bergin]

The parallel is absurd.

Also...for some reason, I immediately went to myself "what ever happened to Morgan Ensberg", and went down a really strange, dark and interesting rabbit hole.

Anybody remember when he came in 4th in the MVP voting one year?

[CobbSpikedMe]

I have the same issue with a Topps Finest Refractor (don't remember what year) of Stephen Strasburg. Two cards, exactly the same, one is numbered to 199 and the other isn't. I never understood it either.

[timzcardz]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Also...for some reason, I immediately went to myself "what ever happened to Morgan Ensberg", and went down a really strange, dark and interesting rabbit hole.

Read your post.

Googled.

Read.

WOW!