Mark Olver Forum

His 09-10 issued card is listed as his RC, but then all his 10-11 are as well. Which is correct?

Going by site guidelines, the 09-10 is from a major release and he is pictured/listed as an Avalanche. That in my opinion would be the one.

Thanks bud, just as I assumed. The industry and its RC obsession then the people who do not understand or read the guidelines that we very experienced collectors democraticly set out for the site. Thanks for the confirmation.

Maybe because it was a redemption/exchange it's not considered an RC?  The whole rookie card, RC logos, RC notes has become convoluted.

rmpaq5 wrote:

Going by site guidelines, the 09-10 is from a major release and he is pictured/listed as an Avalanche. That in my opinion would be the one.

This is why I pay little attention to RC (notes, logos, or listed as) for my PC.  Way too many different opinions.

Yeah, that's what it's come to. Everyone has their own opinion; no standard throughout the hobby (or this database).

Many moons ago, there was a fairly broad consensus on what it was but it seems that the site guidelines were approved by Admin but not overly accepted. Has there been any revisions to the guidelines since they were adopted all those years ago, I'd say what 5-6 years now. Are any of the bunch who finalized them even around anymore. C2 we valiantly tried to make this site consistent, if it has not become so then it is certainly not our fault, maybe the Admin/Owner doesn't really care as much as they used to?? I know that I had left because I was a broken down mess but it seems others have not followed suit. Maybe they are still using the "other" site to determine what it a RC and what isn't. Why I have simply added both years to my list, wouldn't want to anger any investors in the future when and if my son tries to sell the collection. Also wouldn't want to anger any of the card wranglers on here that stomp around runnin the place. LOL(ish).

This site still uses the guideline of first card found in a "Major Release" set. No inserts, no parallels (unless it's a Retail version of a Hobby base one), no On-Demands, no Oddballs, no Team Sets, no Team Issues. If you look at the list of sets with "RC" notation, they're mostly Major Releases with a few exceptions.

As this site is crowd sourced and almost anyone can add stuff that they think should be added.  We will keep getting stuff added that is not correct to the standards of the site.

Members have complained that they have changed stuff (too make it correct) and it is changed back in a day or two.

Thanks BigEd and budler as well for your input. I try to follow what we had all established but like C2 has said maybe the cards with a prefix before the number do not count (such as RED241, etc) however some are just letters (such as R-TC) they were all redemptions through either Panini or UD of course but the Artifacts cards were always considered a continuation of the base set even with the RED### numbering. Again I think I found 4 total maybe 5 in my updated Oiler list from 16-17 to date so am not going to worry about the hassle. Just all the trades to go through now, anyone know any good places to look up historical trade information based on a team by team breakdown??