1968 Topps Milton Bradley help

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by G1911

How many times do you want to have the same exact debate that was already had? What do you want?

Doesn't look like I am the one who keeps bring it up:

Originally Posted by G1911

From the SCD article above: "The number of cards per game ranges from 86-105 cards...". A 131 card basic set nor a 132 card master set would be present in a game.

Originally Posted by G1911

The master set is ALWAYS the correct answer .

Perhaps, if you let it go, then it does not keep getting brought up.......just saying.

[G1911]

As said, multiple times, I am going to maintain the classic hobby definition of a unique card and a variation. I am not going to use your new definition that treats the MB's unlike every other set ever issued, including the 1968 Topps regular release where nobody thinks the Marichal checklist variation, resulting from it's different sheet slots, is necessary for a basic set.

I do not know why you want to do this again and are upset that I use the traditional standard when talking to other people. There's no point in having this loop over and over again. We disagree, who cares? You want to call it something else, that's fine. You do your thing. You are free to bitch about this every single time I post, I suppose.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by G1911

I am not going to use your new definition that treats the MB's unlike every other set ever issued

Not clear as to why you are not comprehending the fact that I don't have any type of "new" definition for this set.

I merely share an opinion with an author who had an article on this topic published....this shared opinion dates back to well before his article was published. I also agree with PSA's defining of this set via it's registry which for this set has been around since 2013. However, I guess in the scheme of card collecting 9-10 years is "new".

You're welcome to use whatever definition you like........I could give a flying flip less.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

Not clear as to why you are not comprehending the fact that I don't have any type of "new" definition for this set.

I merely share an opinion with an author who had an article on this topic published....this shared opinion dates back to well before his article was published. I also agree with PSA's defining of this set via it's registry which for this set has been around since 2013. However, I guess in the scheme of card collecting 9-10 years is "new".

You're welcome to use whatever definition you like........I could give a flying flip less.

If you don’t give a flip, then stop

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by G1911

If you don’t give a flip, then stop

Why dont you?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

Why dont you?

.... You are the one who brought it up again and are trying to do the debate all over, not me...

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by G1911

.... You are the one who brought it up again and are trying to do the debate all over, not me...

Oh my, you are confused, check post 55.