Before I make any changes, I want to make sure that I am not overlooking something. I believe that this set refers to the REPRINT set issued by Card Collector's Company in 1988.

I don't think it should be listed as an 1888 issue; that is the year of the original Allen & Ginter World Champions set.

I just noticed that there are several reprint sets listed under the year of the original set. 

1887 Allen & Ginter's World Champions Baseball Only Reprint

1888 Goodwin Champions Baseball Only Reprint

1887 Buchner Gold Coin (N284) reprint

1887 Lone Jack Cigarette Co.

You'll need images to confirm.  If I remember correctly, Admin has stated that if there is a reprint date, such as 1988, on the card it gets listed under the reprint year (1988).  If no reprint date is on the card, it gets listed under the original cards' year of release (1888).  You can double-check with Admin.

And World Champions was a Multi-sport set but the partial reprint is not listed in the Multi-sport category.  IMHO, I think even though it is only a partial reprint it should be listed with the original Multi-sport set's category.

There's not a year listed on the card itself....but it doesn't take much research to find the year of issue (at least in the case of the A&G World's Champions Set). But if Admin wants them under the release year of the original set....then that's where they stay.

Thanks Chuck!

I believe the reason there is no printing date on many of these is that the reprinters don't just print them once. They print them year after year to sell.

I'm guilty of putting the Buchner Gold Coin reprint set in the 19th Century.  Poormanscards.com makes vintage sets to order with no specific release date (I'd rather have an illegitimate reprint set than no reprint set at all).  I wouldn't have done it otherwise (I don't think).  However, I don't file my reprints with the reprinted year, but with the original year.  My 1952 Topps reprint set sits in a binder between 1951 and 1953 Topps--not 1983 Topps--but I realize that I'm in the minority here (and not just racially).  I replace my reprinted cards with originals as I acquire them so that my sets are always complete--even if it's full of half-reprints and half-originals.  I think the issue comes when some reprint sets have the more recent year printed, while other reprint sets don't have the more recent year printed.  Inconsistency is what we get. 

If we had to choose, I'd prefer to list reprints with the orginal year, and not the year the set was reprinted.  When people go looking for reprint sets, it's easier to find them with the original year than with the year that they were released.  How many people know to go looking in 1983 for the 1952 Topps reprint set?  Also, sometimes the reprint sets were produced out of order like the Bowmans by CCC in the 1980's.  So you might get something like 1950, 1948, 1949, 1952, 1951, etc. if you organized by reprinted year.  I collect a lot of reprint sets, and so have given this a lot of thought.  I have 1952-1954 Topps, 1948-1953 Bowman, 1939-1941 Play Ball, 1933-1941 Goudey, 1920's American Caramel, all sorts of American Tobacco, and other more obscure reprint sets between 1887-1954.

Just my 2-cents.  Hope it doesn't get another one of my blogs or forums removed.  Unpopular opinions seem to come at a hefty price here.

I can see both sides/ways of thinking. Putting the reprints in with the original date is very logical. It seems to be the first way people think of things. I can also see putting them in the date of the reprint if known and if printed on the cards. From the collecting stand point it seems to be a matter of preferrence. From the database side of things it is more keeping things orderly.