 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11
01-29-2011, 10:06 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
"Rob - I think Burdick as several others have said grouped the Type 1's separate from the T206 because the Type 2 and 3 cards existed. If there were no Type 2 or 3 then Type 1's would be part of the T206 set. So in my opinion he got the designation correct but for the wrong reason." I don't believe he ever thought as deeply about whether to include them or not as some of us have. I'm certainly not trying to get the discussion off topic and I have probably said enough about the matter. Again great topic and I'll step aside and let others continue the conversation from here. 
|
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| First Time Submission | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 03-06-2009 01:28 PM |
| O/T - best all time | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 33 | 01-06-2009 09:24 PM |
| *** Time to fire up the Network 54 Cabal again....d311s this time *** | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 5 | 12-01-2008 01:55 PM |
| My first time at the National | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 07-29-2008 04:15 PM |
| OT but it is time for the 134th Kentucky Derby | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 100 | 05-17-2008 07:45 PM |
Threaded Mode