Sorry Adam, but Alan is right on this. I saw one of these albums on eBay a little while ago and immediately asked my 2 dealer friends in Sweden about it. They both said that it was 100% from 1936, so I stayed away because that means it wouldn't contain any top Heavyweight Champ Rookie cards. They also said that I probably would not consider them cards because they are more like glossy photos on regular paper, glued in to a photo type album. I have no idea if I would consider them cards or not but both dealers have dealt with me long enough to know the things that I would consider cards and to know the things that I would consider plain old photos.
As for what Alan considers Ali/Clay's rookie card I couldn't agree more. The 1960 Hemmets Journal was never meant to be cut out as a card. You can tell this by the fact that:
1. None were ever cut out before card grading came to be. They were meant to be kept in a two ring binder (look at the binder holes on the side).
2. You can not cut all 4 cards out with enough border for grading, which again proves that they were never meant to be cut out in the first place. If this were from 1968 would these have ever been cut out? Doubtful, but because someone found a picture of Clay published before any of his other cards they thought that they could cut it out, with proper borders, and sell it as his true rookie cards. You can also look at the back and realize that if it were meant to be cut out, then they probably would have made things a little more symmetical and clean looking than what is on the back. If this is a "card" than any magazine cut out that could resemble a "card" has to be a card.
With the 1962 Rekord Journal "card" it comes down to whether you consider magazine cut outs to be cards. I do not because I think this is really a stretch to consider these things cards. I go back to my "Faces in the Crowd" argument. If you consider the Rekord Journal picture cut outs, with Bio's, on regualr magazine paper then you would have to call "Faces in the Crowd" picture Bio's cards as well. "FITC" picture Bio's are pictures of the athlete that are a section of every Sports Illustrated magazine, just like the picture card was a part of every Rekord Magazine. By calling the Rekord Magazine picture bio a "card" it sets a horrible precedent for any magazine picture that is part of a regular section of a magazine/newspaper like "Faces in the Crowd" in SI top be called a card. If you have ever dealt with the Rekord Magazine cut outs they clearly are not cards. They are regular paper cut out pictures. I thought they were cards until I handled one and realized that all they were, were picture cut outs from a magazine. Just because there is a picture bio on the cover of every Rekord Journal magazine that does not make it a card.
The 1964 Simon Chocolates on the other hand meets every definition of a card and predates his Lampo and Panini, which makes it his True Rookie. It was distributed randomly, from a set, with a product (chocolates), just like tobacco cards at the turn of the 20th century. They are also factory cut and are on real card stock. This is the first card that is by all definitions a true undisputed card. It predates all of his other cards, besided the MacRobertson, except the "cards" that are really just magazine cut outs being passed off as cards for money reasons. As for the MacRobertson this can also be considered a rookie of his but if up against the Simon Chocolates I think the Simon wins for a couple reasons:
1. The eyes test- the Simon Chocolates looks like your typical card while the MacRobertson looks like a quiz game card, which it is.
2. Distribution_ The Simon card was distributed randomly from a set while the MacRobertson was distributed in the Quiz Game it went with, therefore it was not random (I think haha)
I have no problem with people considering the MacRobertson his true rookie but have no idea how anyone could consider his 1965 Lampo, which is not from a major card company, like Panini, a rookie card when at least 2 cards predate the Lampo. Some people will still consider the 1966 Panini his rookie because they only collect major manufacturers as rookies, which is all preference.
Those are my thoughts and I am sticking to them hahaha! Except, of course, the Swedish Album being from 1936. That is not a thought but a fact. Sorry Adam.
|