Posted By:
nolemmings (Todd)I know it was not Beckett who numbered the sets-- I was wondering if back in 1981 there indeed had been a belief that both sets were issued in 1916.
Incidentally, my 1956 reprint copy of Burdick's ACC makes no distinction of the two sets, instead referring only to M5 as "200 small, b&w, The Sporting News". Thus there was not even a distinction of m101-4 and m101-5, at least in my copy. Does anyone know when this designation first stuck?
Finally, I wondered about the values associated for the TSN Ruth cards. As we know, the Ruth cards for both m101-4 and m101-5 are identical in picture and card number. Curiously, my 2000 SCD big book (my newer copies are at home)shows the earlier Ruth, ostensibly his rookie card, being worth less than the 1916 issue. Why is that? Has anyone seen a graded 1916 m101-4 Ruth with a sporting news back? I have seen the "rookie" m101-5, and wondered how the deceision was made to call it an m101-5 and not the other? Thoughts?
Regards......Todd