Just to clear this up a bit, I was NOT the one who made those Racing CL's. I might have added some scans there, but I was just adding some extra info to this whole conversation about playing-style cards. I really like the way the Red version is listed and I think that should be how all similar sets should be listed (even if they are actual playing cards). I have the 1991 U.S. Playing Cards MLB All-Stars set, but haven't looked at how they are listed yet. I have a note here to remind me to add those cards to my collection (but it's been here for a couple of weeks now).

I just wanted to point out my preference based on what I had already seen listed here. I am glad you two agree with me, at least with that one set of insert cards based on real playing cards.

All good here spaz, no worries. =D

Yes. This was the "approved by Admin" format.

CAD, I assume that you probably haven't seen Dan's list either then.

-Tom

Dan sent me the template via email, so I can create future playing card checklists. But I can't copy and paste the logos into the number field, I get a notification that something is not supported. I don't remember the exact wording. 

I find some thing and was wondering why.   The 1973 sets are listed as sets.

1973 Nebraska Cornhuskers Playing Cards (Red Backs)

1973 Nebraska Cornhuskers Playing Cards (White Backs)

The 1974 the one set  (should be White) is listed as base with the (Red back) as a parallel set.

1974 Nebraska Cornhuskers Playing Cards     

1974 Nebraska Cornhuskers Playing Cards  - Red Back

I was going to do an IR to add  White to the name and have some one change the Red to a set not a parallels set.   

Is that the way to go?????

Sorry to hijack the posting

Yes, this is hijacking.

They both are incorrect, and should actually be 2 "parallel" sets with no base set.