Babe Ruth Rookie

[joshuanip]

I’m biased but it’s the m101 issue. First featured card of him as a professional. Not going to chime in on the postcard as I’m not a postcard guy. Let market demand decide that.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by joshuanip

I’m biased but it’s the m101 issue. First featured card of him as a professional. Not going to chime in on the postcard as I’m not a postcard guy. Let market demand decide that.

I dont own one but dont understand why there is any debate on this one. Seems quite obvious.

[oldjudge]

Different people have different "rookie card" definitions. For me it is the first individual baseball card as a major leaguer. This would eliminate the Baltimore News Ruth which is a schedule, not a baseball card, and is not a major league representation. The 1915 Ruth is a team postcard, eliminating it on two accounts (not individual, and for me not a baseball card). That leaves the M101-4/5 Ruth which fits my criteria.

[Bestdj777]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Different people have different "rookie card" definitions. For me it is the first individual baseball card as a major leaguer. This would eliminate the Baltimore News Ruth which is a schedule, not a baseball card, and is not a major league representation. The 1915 Ruth is a team postcard, eliminating it on two accounts (not individual, and for me not a baseball card). That leaves the M101-4/5 Ruth which fits my criteria.

By that definition, the 68 Nolan Ryan and 63 Pete Rose wouldn't be rookie cards, which just doesn't make sense. I can sss eliminating the postcard on the grounds it's not really a card, but the fact that there are multiple players depicted shouldn't make something not a rookie.