jmatchett
Banned User
I have a John Bucyk 01/02 Topps Archives Autograph. Beckett says it's #4, the card says, "Topps/OPC Archives Reprint #17. Is it #17 or #4?
Is this #4 or #17?
- Thread starter jmatchett
- Start date
Joe
On the reverse of the card, if memory serves me correctly. It has the original year look & number plus the 01/02 Topps Archives card number.
Hence the reason in all likelihood, that it's a might confusing.
Brian
On the reverse of the card, if memory serves me correctly. It has the original year look & number plus the 01/02 Topps Archives card number.
Hence the reason in all likelihood, that it's a might confusing.
Brian
jmatchett
Banned User
Yes, it does. But the card, at the bottom, as part of the 01/02 addition, reads, "Topps/OPC Archives Reprint #17." I can't find a #4 listed anywhere on it. The "original" card number is 166 or something.
Then the #17 wins out! IMO
Would appear to be another oversight on the part of the industry leader...
Would appear to be another oversight on the part of the industry leader...
Fritz
Nitwit in good standing,
Then the #17 wins out! IMO
Would appear to be another oversight on the part of the industry leader...
one of my favorite lines came from their very own cover a while ago
"The hobby's most reliable & relied upon source"
not to mention the redundancy goes without saying
burebuyer
Hockey Player Collection Winner,
Since not every card had an autograph parallel, it could be the 4th card counting up from 1 that had an autograph version. That might explain the stupid Beckett numbering.
Derek
Derek
jmatchett
Banned User
Eh, I'm just chalking this up to the know nothing's over there.
X-Head
Verified Trader
I think what happened is because there weren't as many autographs as base cards the autos wound up having different numbers on the CL even though they were identical (including the #17 in this case) to the base card.
