OT: Who Determined That Mantle's Rookie Card was the 52 Topps

[rats60]

Originally Posted by tedzan

After reading 94 posts here, all I can say is this "rookie" discussion is approaching the ridiculous. As, ridiculous as those votes in the poll that claim the 1952 Topps Mantle
card is the "rookie".

Anyhow, I collected these two Jackie Robinson cards as a young kid in 1947 - 1948. And, some on this forum would say that these 2 cards do not qualify as JRobby's real
ROOKIE cards (since they were not in a nationally distributed set).

...................... 1947 Bond Bread .............................................. 1948 R346 (Blue Tint)




Well then, shall we consider Yogi's 1947 TIP-TOP Bread card his true "rookie" ? Hey guys....this set was nationally distributed.

.




Furthermore, I'll include these 5 additional cards into this "rookie" debate. As they obviously precede their 1948 (or 1949) BOWMAN cards, or their 1949 LEAF cards.




I hope you guys get what I'm driving at ? ?


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Yet, I wouldn't have been able to collect them despite living in the 4th largest city in the USA. That is why the hobby, for the last 40 years, has required a card be issued nationally for it to be a "rookie card."

[tedzan]

With all due respect........this hobby has been around for approx. 150 years, so who (or what) dictates this "40 year" edict you are alluding to regarding rookie cards ?

Besides, I'll reiterate: Yogi Berra's 1947 TIP-TOP Bread card qualifies as his true "rookie" card. This set was nationally distributed. So, so much for that "requirement".


.



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[glynparson]

Nobody has ever correctly determined that the 1952 Topps was his rookie card and the 1951 Bowman was not. People incorrectly identifying something doesn't make it fact. His 1951 Bowman, by standard hobby definition, is his rookie card, because some people and services call the Topps a rookie card does not make it so. The 1952 Topps is more valuable but nobody ever said that a Rookie card needed to be a players most valuable card.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by tedzan

With all due respect........this hobby has been around for approx. 150 years, so who (or what) dictates this "40 year" edict you are alluding to regarding rookie cards ?

Besides, I'll reiterate: Yogi Berra's 1947 TIP-TOP Bread card qualifies as his true "rookie" card. This set was nationally distributed. So, so much for that "requirement".


.



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

https://www.sportscollectorsdaily.co...aseball-cards/

At 163 cards, this set was one of the largest to come out of the early post-World War II era — and in fact, it was one of the largest sets in many years. But that number is deceiving, because the ’47 Tip Top set actually was made up of a group of regional issues. The Boston Braves, Boston Red Sox, Chicago Cubs, Chicago White Sox and Detroit Tiger regional sets appear to be the toughest to assemble.

Is this article wrong? Was that Yogi Berra card available all over the country or only close to New York City?

About 40 years ago, the hobby decided to classify certain cards as rookie cards. Earlier you said that you bought up 1963 Topps Pete Rose cards in 1981, but no mention of Reds Team Issues, Jay or French Bauer.

For a long time the hobby didn't place any value on "star" cards either. I have a Card Collectors CO. catalog from the early 60s where the 52 Topps Mantle was 1.00, the same as all other cards in the high series. Most of the catalogs that I ordered from in the 60s and 70s didn't charge more for stars, or if they did, it was just a few of the biggest names. That is not to say that early issue cards that aren't rookie cards can't carry premiums, whether they are a first card issue or rookie year issue, or even a second or third year issue.

[packs]

Isn't known that the Tip Top cards were distributed regionally? That would make it decidedly not a nationally distributed set, unless you're talking about the cards as a whole and not as individual cards. That to me makes these cards a premium issue and I would call the Berra a rookie issue and not a rookie card.

[darwinbulldog]

If a regionally distributed example can be considered a rookie issue but not a rookie card, that means it isn't considered a baseball card. Two questions:

1) Is it fair to say then that T215 Pirates are not baseball cards?

2) Why is it that the only people I know who don't know what a baseball card is are baseball card collectors?

[packs]

The Pirate set is a subset of a larger set that is contained to the T206 set, just as the other various backs are subsets of that one set. We give them different designations as collectors, but it's my opinion that they fall under one large master set. I'd include the Red Cross, Coupons, and their counterparts under that umbrella too. I would also say that in their time it is probably unlikely that anyone collected the cards for the backs, so the backs and their individual appeal to modern collectors is not something I think existed in the minds of the creators or collectors of the sets in the time. I would say the cards were collected for the fronts.

[darwinbulldog]

And another thing -- if 1955 Topps cards were not sold in, say, Hawaii, Oregon, Montana, or West Virginia but 1956 Topps cards were, would 1956 Topps be considered Roberto Clemente's rookie card now?

[ALR-bishop]

Who is in charge of this hobby anyway ? Whoever it is should issue an authoritative definition of a "rookie card" And while at that also define a "true variation". I have been at this since 1957 and need some clarity . Seems simple enough

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by rats60

Yet, I wouldn't have been able to collect them despite living in the 4th largest city in the USA. That is why the hobby, for the last 40 years, has required a card be issued nationally for it to be a "rookie card."

I doubt if you would have seen these BOND BREAD (BB) cards while living in Houston in 1947. It is my understanding that the 1947 BB cards were inserted in the BB packages
that were shipped as far West as St Louis and as far East as Boston. BB had 50 bakeries located in 18 States in the late 1940's. I don't think the employees at these bakeries
were discretely stuffing cards into the bread packages as a function of the ballplayer's team. Not at the rate of 1.5 Million loaves of bread per day.....certainly not. These cards
were stuffed into packages randomly. And yes, wherever you resided, you could get a Berra, Hodges, Kiner, Musial, JRobby, Thomson, or any other subject in this 48-card set.

These cards were my very first Baseball cards which I collected in my youth in 1947. In the past 40 years (since I have been collecting as an adult), I have compared notes with
other collectors (who also collected them as kids) from various parts of this country, and their experiences were similar to mine.

Therefore, if you want to continue thinking that these cards were not a "nationally" distributed set, that's you prerogative. However, I know different from actual experience.









TED Z

T206 Reference
.