Posted By | Message |
C2Cigars
Posts: 11,335
Joined: Oct 2014
|
Thursday, October 15, 2015 8:47 AM | |
I think a set Sample Card should be of the design of the regular cards in the set, not a card from a subset. The Sample Cards frequently helps me quickly identify which year is which. The 1985 Topps baseball Sample Card is from the Olympics subset. I think it should be changed. What's your opinion? Here's what a regular 1985 Topps card looks like:
-------------------------------
Someday my cards may double in value and then be worth half of what I paid for them.
|
|
|
|
captkirk42
Posts: 2,266
Joined: May 2011
|
Thursday, October 15, 2015 9:11 AM | |
I agree that a sample card should be one of the regular cards from the set not a subset. Imagine the confusion if for say the 1961 Topps and 1970 Topps both had an All Star card as the sample?
-------------------------------
I collect: Baseball, Football, Hockey, Mostly Vintage pre1980, My Homie teams - Washington/Baltimore Teams Senators (Twins, Rangers), Expos/Nationals, Redskins, Capitals, Bullets/Wizards - HOFers - Non-sport (mostly TV shows and movies). My Trade List is very much a work in progress CaptKirk42s Trading Card Blog Curly W Cards Strive For '65 YouTube klandersen42
|
|
|
|
vrooomed
Posts: 14,820
Joined: Dec 2012
|
Thursday, October 15, 2015 9:26 AM | |
Even though the McGwire RC has long been regarded the most popular (or valuable) from the 1985 Topps set, you guys are right - the design of that card doesn't help people who are looking at the standard cards from that set. It would be as bad as using one of the League Leader cards as the sample. :)
-------------------------------
-- Dan -- Note: Please see my profile for more info regarding trading (section updated 3/4/2024). I have added a large portion of my inventory to the site, and currently have trading turned on (details are in my profile).
|
|
|
|
NJDevils
Posts: 6,343
Joined: Sep 2010
|
Thursday, October 15, 2015 10:38 AM | |
For me, any card in the base set could be the sample card, even a checklist. If you need to see a sample of the card, you can easily click on the checklist. That said, whenever I put a sample out there, I usually put the plain vanilla base cards out there. But if someone does otherwise, I am happy with that. What I am not happy with is many of the cards that are put out in a rush and are uncropped and sloppy. Now that really bothers me.
|
|
|
|
C2Cigars
Posts: 11,335
Joined: Oct 2014
|
Thursday, October 15, 2015 11:11 AM | |
There are a lot of good rookies to choose from as a Sample card; Clemens, Gooden, Puckett, Davis
-------------------------------
Someday my cards may double in value and then be worth half of what I paid for them.
|
|
|
|
vrooomed
Posts: 14,820
Joined: Dec 2012
|
Thursday, October 15, 2015 12:03 PM | |
-------------------------------
-- Dan -- Note: Please see my profile for more info regarding trading (section updated 3/4/2024). I have added a large portion of my inventory to the site, and currently have trading turned on (details are in my profile).
|
|
|
|
Admin
Posts: 619
Joined: Oct 2007
|
Thursday, October 15, 2015 1:12 PM | |
Let the voting for a replacement begin.
-------------------------------
Vote for and track new site features in theĀ FeatureĀ Tracker.
|
|
|
|
C2Cigars
Posts: 11,335
Joined: Oct 2014
|
Thursday, October 15, 2015 1:42 PM | |
I may be a Mets fan but I vote for Roger Clemens #181.
-------------------------------
Someday my cards may double in value and then be worth half of what I paid for them.
|
|
|
|
wjsenke
Posts: 165
Joined: Jun 2015
|
Thursday, October 15, 2015 1:51 PM | |
-------------------------------
Baseball: 1957 + 61 Topps, 1950 + 53 Bowman (Color), If i win the lottery maybe i will try to finish an 1887 Buchner Gold Coin and the 1914 and 1915 Cracker Jack Sets too
|
|
|
|
NJDevils
Posts: 6,343
Joined: Sep 2010
|
Thursday, October 15, 2015 2:01 PM | |
I vote for Franklin Stubbs or Jaime Cocanower. Both rookies and probably not a sample card on any set. Too many guys are used as the sample card repeatedly. I like to give some ink to the no-names.
|
|
|
|