Quote:
Originally Posted by Abravefan11
Leon -
Whether the original questions was why did Burdick classify T213-1's as T206 or was he correct in classifying them as T213-1's my goal in every post I have made has been to address one of those two questions or respond to questions as to why I believe how I do in either case. If it's "painfully obvious" that I am I off topic in either regard I'll gladly refrain from posting any further.
Great topic and one that will be debating for a long time to come I'm sure.
|
Hey Tim
I guess my original question could have been phrased differently.
I thought the question was-
Did Burdick get the classifications correctly? And my answer is an unequivocal, yes, and they should be just as they are.
I think you and I are on the same side of the debate, but for different reasons? I just keep seeing all of these convoluted (but very logical and good) explanations, however, I think they miss the mark of the original question, that is all. (or at least the intent of the question)
Please do keep discussing it as that was part of the reason I started the thread. I feel the debate is deeper than Mr.Burdick took it, that's all. I respect yours and Ted's analysis as they involve some great reasoning and research. I am only hoping the bit of common sense theory, pertaining to why he did it and if it was correct, could be interjected too, that's all. He had a huge undertaking and I find it hard to believe he got that in depth, in thought, with these few series. He was more involved with other series than sports altogether. I feel we have to analyze how he was thinking more than how these series were printed, to reach the answer. Maybe I am wrong though?