2017 Panini Torque Racing Forum

Jason's proposed method is the way TCDB should have these listed.

And this is exactly why I never tackled these when they were released.

Dan and Jason, I have to disagree with you here. Each 1/1 card is an intentional logo difference and they should all be listed separately. If someone has the AXALTA logo and someone else has the Liberty University logo, how is the 2nd person supposed to list their card AND post scans of it? The only CL's that would actually matter which patch is used would be "NASCAR", "GOODYEAR", and car manufacturer and those should be grouped together in their own CLs. As far as sponsors, it doesn't matter which one gets added to which CL for the cards. The Note2 can be filled in as people add scans of them. These cards are very similar to the nameplate MEM cards in other sports. When the set spells out a name, team or company, each card gets listed individually. I can give many of examples on how this has been done in the past in NASCAR, MLB and NFL. 2008 UD Icons Lettermen comes to mind first both MLB and NFL with player names spelled out 1 card at a time. But there was also a set of NASCAR cards from Press Pass that spelled out GOODYEAR so there were 8 cards for each driver in the set. This has been done before and I think these cards fall into that exact same category.

Then, like the lettermen sets, they need to be combined into one set, with each 1/1 having it's own listing AND the reason for each clearly listed in Note2.

That’s what I suggested. The only issue is Panini does not release a list of what sponsors will be featured, we just have to add it as we go. 

And THAT is precisely why Jason's original method is preferred. At least with the Lettermen sets and the other sets we've done like this, we know what the differences are. Based on this info, I will re4vert back to saying these should be listed with 1 entry per card number (or driver if they don't have actual card numbers) and the Note field should indicate "SN1, PR#" wit hthe appropriate number of 1/1's issued per card number/driver. Else, if someone gets one, it's the wild west as to where the images go and collection info. Thanks for the clarification on this!

Well then let’s pick one way and keep it consistent. Again - 2017 Absolute seems to be the only outlier with PRXX. 
 

Regardless, I still disagree as Panini does recognize each as an individual card. But we need it to be consistent. 

So, couple things here that I will try and address in my post - forgive me if it's long. First, I want it known that I consider myself a racing collector. I don't have nearly the extensive collections as some of you, but I want to make sure it's understood that I'm not trying to give a racing set "baseball treatment". I know Billy K feels that way sometimes, and I assure you that's not what I'm trying to do here.

The Letterman sets are unique in a few ways. One major way is that some, if not a majority of them, are MANU sets - meaning the company intentionally produced fake memorabilia to include on these cards. I think those are a separate topic and as such, I'm going to ignore them here to focus only on MEM cards.

With Letterman sets, we know what the cards are spelling (or are able to figure it out, if it isn't a last name), so creating one long checklist is easy enough to do. Here, as noted in the last reply, we have no way of knowing what the individual associate sponsors are unless we find a 1/1 online or someone here has one (or more). That's really the big key here and the driver to how these should be listed. We could launch into a conversation about collectibility and the purpose that the manufacturer has, but that seems moot to me because we can't really be the interpreters of that.

Spaz, to your point about the images, they can still be tracked. If I have Liberty U and you have Axalta, and you add the images for Axalta to the Database, I can still go into the set, add the JP-WB card to my collection, use "Detailed Add" to add a comment that says "Liberty U", and then have the ability to add my own images, which will then appear when I go through my collection. These tools exist and are perfect for situations like this, in my opinion (just like that Bryce Harper card I made up earlier, where one card has a red swatch and one has a white one). 

I know there will be plenty of disagreement with this, but I don't see how we can list these all out as VARs of each other without knowing what each one is.

My official suggestion would be to have one checklist with one listing for each driver, and a Note noting the PR of each driver as well. Release Notes for each set that explain that each driver has between 1 and x distinct patches available, all SN1. We can use the Comments on each card to keep a running list of each sponsor found - for example, on the Kurt Busch card, we can have a comment that says "10 Associate Sponsor cards produced. Known sponsors: Busch, Monster Energy.". Comments can be edited by the original user, so as we discover new ones, they can be added to the running list.

Side note - Panini and their considerations are often inconsistent. They routinely refer to subsets of the base set and parallels as their own insert sets, and that's not even considering the card number debacle. Also, I've been working on this for an hour or so (I keep getting distracted by work), so some of these points I've had to go back and edit to account for new posts.

When creating the set, I wasn't really thinking on the variation side of things. I was thinking each as it's own set, and I also thought of the cards like Adam mentioned as I have a couple NFL cards with different letters that spell something when seeing the original comments in this thread stating they should be merged. I do understand the database's procedure for listing sets though, so whichever way is deemed the proper listing format by the members as a whole is OK with me. I can help change either the Absolute or the numerous ones from NT, Chronicles, Prime, Torque and other sets we locate so that all the sets follow the guidelines and are uniform in their listing.

A few quick questions though (apologies if they seem dumb or are previously explained).

Question 1: In the given example above of Jason and Adam both owning a version of the Byron patch, would the second image uploaded be available to the general public as a drop menu or something to see all submitted images of the card or only available to the uploader in their personal collection listing?

Question 2: The adding of comments listing known sponsors is one I hadn't thought of before so when stating that only the original user can edit comments, would this mean that if I was to create the Comment listing with the known variations, another member would have to message me with what Sponsor they own/found for me to add to the list or would they be able to comment/reply to my comment and state which one they find? If option 2 is the case, would the comment/reply be removed after being added to the original list or would there potentially be a long list of comments replying to the original?

I don't have much personal experience in using the detailed add for images or the comments section on cards, so apologies for my lack of knowledge in this category.

I can agree with that.

The problem with only having one card listed instead of each different one that is available is that only the owner of the card can see their Detailed Add info! Say you sell or trade that card that only has the info in your collection but not on this site, the new owner is then going to want to know why the card isn't listed or shows the wrong scans in the CL.

One more thing, we CAN find out most of the sponsor logos for each driver. Each patch is from the sponsors on the chest or sleeves of their firesuit, we just need to know which firesuit Panini used. It would be extra work but not hard work. Just need a clear picture of them on a base card from that release.