Appease me, please....one more time T206/T213/T215?

Leon · #1 01-29-2011, 08:44 PM

Really now, guys. The original question of this thread had to do with the thinking of T213-1 being classified, by Burdick, as a T206. It is painfully obvious ya'll don't care about the original question posed and are going off on more tangents than the number of liver pills Carter had. I think this is all great information about series', number of cards in rows, super duper Willy Wonka theories of short prints etc.....but it really has nothing to do with the original question. If ya'll really think Burdick gave that much thought to all of these elongated theories ya'll have surmised, then I need some of what ya'll are on. There is an elephant sitting in the corner of the room, his name is "Common Sense" and just like the emperor's clothes, no one sees it. I really feel it was as simple as Burdick seeing the different types of Coupon cards, seeing they didn't fit in with the T206's, and labeling them T213. He absolutely made a very concerted decision in how he classified them, keeping T206 in mind the whole time. Please carry on now

.

Abravefan11 · #2 01-29-2011, 09:05 PM

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.

Leon · #3 01-29-2011, 09:26 PM

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?

Abravefan11 · #4 01-29-2011, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leon

Did Burdick get the classifications correctly?

Leon - I answered that question several times during the discussion including Post #40 and #121 in which I said:

"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.

T206Collector · #5 01-29-2011, 10:29 PM

Honestly, Leon, its like you haven't been reading the dialogue. To want this all to go away based on what burdick was or wasn't thinking at the time is lame. Duh.... We all agree why he made them 213, common sense and all. He wasn't an idiot. But that's hardly the end of the debate ....or what makes the original posted question interesting or entertaining.

To me, the interesting question is really whether the logic burdick utilized in classifying 206 can be faithfully applied to 213 -- not whether he was right or wrong in not doing so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leon

Really now, guys. The original question of this thread had to do with the thinking of T213-1 being classified, by Burdick, as a T206. It is painfully obvious ya'll don't care about the original question posed and are going off on more tangents than the number of liver pills Carter had. I think this is all great information about series', number of cards in rows, super duper Willy Wonka theories of short prints etc.....but it really has nothing to do with the original question. If ya'll really think Burdick gave that much thought to all of these elongated theories ya'll have surmised, then I need some of what ya'll are on. There is an elephant sitting in the corner of the room, his name is "Common Sense" and just like the emperor's clothes, no one sees it. I really feel it was as simple as Burdick seeing the different types of Coupon cards, seeing they didn't fit in with the T206's, and labeling them T213. He absolutely made a very concerted decision in how he classified them, keeping T206 in mind the whole time. Please carry on now

.

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