Site Forum

I sincerely hate to belabour this issue, but it remains a point of contention in my daily activity here.

I have recently raised the subject of card numbering, and the varying views and preferences among collectors. Letter suffixes added to a card's number to indicate a variation was seemingly initiated by Beckett, among others, long ago. It began with good intentions, and in itself is a helpful idea. Beckett's search function provides a card's entire inventory, including variations, when entering just the basic number, with or without the suffix. The search function here at The Database works differently. Search results mirror precisely what is queried, so that if one enters the number which is actually seen on the card, any cards listed with a suffix do not show up. This potentially creates a frustrating problem for any collector unaware or inexperienced with variations. What our search DOES offer is the ability to see ALL of the variations of a card using the simple number, when the cards are properly scanned and identified in the notes as to their respective differences. Relatively speaking, this makes the adding of letters both unecessary and impractical for our site. We have endeavored to make this site the best around with new ideas of simplicity, accuracy, and elegance. This should be one way to continue these efforts, if we can all agree as to it's relevance.

When I brought this item to the forums recently, I observed virtually no opposition to the idea, even garnering several hearty responses of approval from some of the most respected members here. This was very promising!  

I am, nevertheless perplexed to notice that, on a daily basis, many members, including several who claimed a dislike for the letter designation altogether, have continued to "correct" and "re-correct" the very same cards which were changed, by myself only days earlier, adding the letters again. 

We can make this site however we wish, beyond the bounds of what is accepted without question somewhere else. That is the point of a mutually participatory community such as this. I would never propose anything which I didn't feel would benefit every member here.

I ask respectfully that we all give this our earnest consideration (and efforts!)   Thanks all

I hear you - can't stand it when people undo the work we've done here - especially when it goes against the guidelines set here.

Anyway, I'm in FULL support of doing away with 32a, 32b when 32 is what is on the card. It will be a huge undertaking to fix what we have, but let's do it.

I know what you mean.. Whever I have a card that has variations I open a new tab to see what one I have... Would be easier if the variaton came up rather than a letter. 

I'll be the first to reply ............ I'm a little lost, I am a pretty simple guy everyone will agree. ;)

You do not like, let say, a card that is "L-22"? You would prefer it to be simply "22"?  Cards that are letters such as  "A-BR"? I'm think I am way off base here and your talking more about variations (five versions of one card within a base set) in baseball, football, etc. I am thinking it all goes back to the "Beckett" differences we have come across in the past and how to deal with it, I do believe this site is accuracy first, everything else second. I can see the point of the lettering for variations but in the end it is not actually on the card. So it is something that you could easily be frustrated about. I know frustration on here for sure and more often than not it is a "Beckett" or "Hobby" debate. I always defer to the more knowledgeable on here and use their advice but if I need something difinitive I go to Admin to make my point. Hope my ramblings were not too far off base.

Make that the third ...... =)

First, you've never explained your "Search". How? Where?  The only Search I know of on this site is at the top of the home page.

Second, that search works fine and contrary to what you've stated.  I've put in a known card with lettered variations. 1991 Pro Set #375 Anthony Munoz . I just put "375 Munoz".

And the results come back with all the cards with their "a", "b", "c", "d".

And lastly, the site's card numbering guidelines still state to use letters for cards with the same number.  So, until Admin changes them, you shouldn't get upset with members following the stated guidelines.

I don't have a problem with removing the letters. What irks me is when someone removes the letters but fails to ensure the variation, error, etc is annotated in the Note, Note2 fields.  Makes it look like a duplicate entry for one card, instead of two versions of the same card.

ranfordfan, the examples that you mention are somewhat different than what I am referencing. The ones you mention have a letter prefix, which most often is how inserts are numbered, not to mention what is actually on the card.

Billy helped me out long ago when I was having difficulty finding the most expeditious method for searching. In the Filter section for any particular genre, enter the name/title of the card's subject and the card number, and there you have all of the cards in the Database listed under those two simple identifiers, precisely.

The problem is when I don't know there is a VAR/ERR/COR associated. If I just enter all that I know (what I see on the card), any variations won't appear in the results, and as far as I know, there aren't any. Not completely helpful at all!

The guidelines state to submit information as closely/exact as possible for a reason. Ultimately, it will help to avoid these "unknown" cards for many collectors. As Dan says, it is perhaps a huge undertaking, but what else are we here for, but to wrangle these little squares of cardboard into a meanigful, enjoyable hobby for everyone. Personally, my greatest love of this hobby is the "doing" rather than the "having".

C2C-- The Search you use is fine, and I have used it. What I don't care for about it is, it is a Google powered search, and generally returns too many, and (sometimes) irrelevant options to my particular card, not to mention ads and whatever else Google wants to throw in there.  I use the Browse function, which searches from within the Database itself, and helps alleviate some of the guesswork.

Thank you for reminding me of Admin's instruction about adding letters, I had actually missed that for some reason. I do think that in light of that rule that searching in the Browse area should accommodate those suffixes, or else it serves only a partial "service".

To your last paragraph, yes, a thorough description and labeling of BASE, VAR, ERR, COR, etc. is critical when finding my card in a checklist, and must be a standard step when submitting cards.

Well.........

   Very disturbing posts; #1 - I understand the prefix letters, ex. AR1 and that is exactly what's on the back of the card, makes sense.

  #2-  Being a collector of variations and errors eliminating their existence doesn't set well with me at all. If you enter a known variation, letter it and then explain the variation [which we don't completely do either]. Which is a an issue that can be discussed at another time. You can standardize whatever method you want but then reference it somewhere. Just don't eliminate it. Everybody quotes Beckett in these forums, never used Beckett, never liked Beckett. I always used SCD or Tuff Stuff but that was my personal choice.

   IF, TCDB does away with identfying errs / vars  and corrected cards....sorry to say but I would have to leave and find a site that recognizes them, identifies and explains them. TCDB would be taking away my collecting focus.....just the way it is.

Regretfully,  ~BOB~

You're right Bob. The little a, b, c's cross-reference Beckett and by default many, many other sites (COMC, ebay, etc). And thanks (or no thanks) to Beckett it has become a hobby standard that some collectors rely on.

Bob-

Nobody is suggesting that the Database stop tracking/identifying errors and variations.

The issue at hand is the little a,b,c.etc. that gets added to the card number to differentiate them.  These suffixes do not appear on the cards themselves.  They  are an ambiguous and archaic method of differentiating the various versions of the same card, a method that was developed for the print listings in the Beckett monthlies/quarterlies/annual books.

The meat of this discussion is whether or not the modern technology of the database would allow us to come up with a clearer, more descriptive, more search-friendly way to list these variations.  

Everyone is trying to make the listings better, not eliminate them.

-Tom