Site Forum

Pure madness. Same with those crazy UD holos on their cardbacks.

 I am with you on this one.   I am a one card guy unless it is a major error, not a variation.  I really don't care if there is a period after the copywrite or not.   Yes, and dont care about holograms used by UD.    Others enjoy this and that's great and if I had cards for them, I would help them out.

Getting really tired of this BS about ERRs and VARIATIONS. There are many TCDB members that enjoy that part of the hobby, I DO and always WILL ! It's very interesting when new VARs are brought to light on the site. I had a post a while back that drew some cryptic comments, I brought it to ADMINs attention.

AS LONG AS A CARD CAN PROVE THAT THERE ARE 2 OR MORE VARIATIONS, ERRORS AND/OR CORRECTIONS IT CAN BE ADDED TO THE DATABASE. If you have 30 cards with a . and 30 cards without a period, these cards can be listed as variations, errors or whatever.

If this "variation" mania bothers you, don't look, don't collect and don't bother the ERR/VAR/COR collectors. Just because I don't like Tennis Cards doesn't give me the right to bash Tennis Card collectors ! Are there really Tennis Cards and collectors out there....what a silly sport!!!

Now did you like that? Of course not..so Be positive, not negative, contribute to the database in a meaningful way. We can certainly discuss, ERRs/VARs/COR cards, but don't even hint that it's a worthless part of the hobby.

~BOB~

I'm just annoyed that I just listed about 250 cards from this set on my tradelist, and now I have to remove them until I can sort my set back into order and figure out which ones I have...which won't be possible until I finish scanning everything, which I predict will be 2021 or later.

I'm always up for learning about new variations, no matter how trivial. There are some obscure players that don't have many cards and I would be grateful to be able to add a new one to my collection- even more so if it already resides among my many thousands of duplicates.

There is an IR in for this set to add these variations.

Do we do it or do we leave them as is?

Edit: A REALLY old IR!!!!

I agree with BOBSCARDZ...What if Beckett had pointed this out?  Would this site follow?

We don't follow Beckett. We have marked several (hundred, thousand?) cards as UERs that Beckett has never marked as such. Who cares what Beckett does. Question is, do we differentiate this that we have seen?

Just my personal opinion.  I vote no and to keep it as is for the same reasons I stated in my original reply.  And I don't mean to be negative about it at all if some may think that, I just don't think it should be officially catologued here when it seems to just be a printing process difference of the same set.  

I think we HAVE to. I know we've gotten away from exactly matching the cards lately, but who are we to say "this variation matters and this one doesn't"? If we know something exists, and in this case we have absolute proof that it does...then it must be listed.

Sorry Dan, i wasn't clear in what i posted earlier...." if this had been pointed out by Beckett, would this site follow?"

This was meant for the nay-sayers...my opinion is that this site should not wait for legitimacy from any other site.  If the variations are legit, post them here first.  If the other sites choose to adopt the variations, great!  If they don't....at least you saw it/ were made aware of it  here first.