Quote:
Originally Posted by richtree
The reason I chose "impact" is that being rare or valuable had less meaning to me.
Its really more around "having meaning".
For example, the Ripken card is not rare, its not that valuable but it has more meaning than even some really great players on older, rare errors/variations.
That was my headspace. Like the Pancho card has a lot of meaning to me as well because it has been around so long, and thought of as a valuable piece to own, even the the randomness of the A missing seems no different that the 87-91 print defects......but the meaning separates it from them;..
Best I could come up with so far --- but trying to refine that in this process as well...
Lots of help here so far., its been very valuable to those that have replied....sorry I didn't thank you each individually so far...
rt
|
Cool, that is so good of you to chime in and better explain where you are coming from. And I like where you are going with this because it is not all just about value then.
So as previously mentioned, along with the 1958 Pancho Herrera/Herrer error/variation, I think you have to include the 1957 Gene Baker/Bakep error on your list somewhere as well. Those two errors have been well known and listed in pretty much all the price/listing guides, going back as far as I remember.
And since you are including variations and not just errors on your list, I would also suggest/nominate the two 1952 Topps #311 Mickey Mantle card variations as well. Being one of the most well-known and collected sets of all-time, and the #311 Mantle being arguably the most iconic and valuable card post-war, it would be hard for such a well-known variation to not be included in a top list of all-time E&V cards. Actually, kind of surprised and shocked no one else had mentioned it yet.
There are many other well-known variations out there, including those that cover more than just one card. So as another possible question, when looking to list as an E&V, are you going to include say all the yellow team 1958 Topps variation cards as one total E&V item on your list(s), or will you simply pick say one of the more/most significant cards that are included in that variation group and just include a single card from that group (think 1958 Topps Aaron yellow team card) on your list(s)?
Same thing would go for the 1962 Topps green tint variation cards. All 86 cards in the entire second series (1962 Topps cards #110 - #196) can be found either with or without the green tint. Are all the green tint cards to be considered as just one single E&V for your list(s), or are you going to pick just what you think is/are the most significant/valuable green tint card(s) and list it/them separately? The green tint variation cards include the 10-card Babe Ruth subset (#135 - #144), Tim McCarver's rookie card (#167), and Ron Santo's 2nd year card (#170), as what are think are probably the most important/valuable green tint cards. So, there are several to choose from if you want to have just one represent this very-well known and desired variation subset, or several that you may choose from among that may deserve to be separately listed on your top list(s) if you feel any one or more of them has enough hobby impact to deserve such a spot(s). And for info purposes, I believe the green tint Ruth-Gehrig card (#140) from the Ruth subset is often considered the most valuable of the green tint cards, if that helps.
Another question for you, are you including uncorrected errors on this E&V list of yours? Technically, if a card is not corrected, is it actually a variation? And as previously mentioned/asked, cards that supposedly feature pictures/images of different people are somewhat akin to uncorrected errors. If the card isn't also printed with the changed and corrected image, are you including it as a legit E&V for your list(s)?
I guess the same can be asked for cards that are simply reversed negative images, unless they were at some point corrected and also printed with a non-reversed image. If they were never corrected, is it really an E or V, and if not, do they really have a place on your E&V list(s) then?
And along with the T206 Magie/Magee error, I think you have to include the T206 Joe Doyle N.Y. Nat'l variation card(s) as one of the top E&Vs on your list(s) as well. Kind of hard to include one of the two E&Vs that make up part of the Big Four of the most iconic set in the hobby on your list of most impactful E&V cards in the hobby, without also including the other. Don't you think? And if you're putting the Magie/Magee at #1 on one of your lists, how is Doyle not at least in the top 5 also?
The 1954 Bowman Ted Williams/Jimmy Piersall card #66 variation is another that is well known and legendary in the hobby. As is the Johnny Sain/Joe Page error/variation cards that are also part of the 1952 Topps set. These E&Vs have been around for so long, and are so well known and have been listed by the major card price guides/publications forever. For these not to be part of your "Top" lists is almost unconscionable.
As someone else already suggested, you simply need to go back and find and reference some of the old Beckett and other price guides, along with the Krause/SCD catalogs, and look for the various E&Vs that were initially and prominently being listed in them for decades. These are the E&Vs that are going to have had the most overall exposure, and thus most likely the most impact, in the hobby. That is where I would start.
Good luck, keep us posted on what you think and come up with. I think it is a cool project.