| Posted By | Message |
|
Ganonthegreat
Posts: 19
Joined: Dec 2023
|
| Friday, January 19, 2024 6:16 AM | |
I'm going to preface this by saying I know nothing about sports cards, so I'm only passingly familiar with the idea of rookie cards. But the definition I see thrown around is "the first card released after an athlete participates in the highest level of competition in their sport."
Now obviously these aren't sports cards, and King Charles III is not an athlete, but the idea's in my head so I have to ask, does card #001 qualify as the King Charles III rookie card?
|
|
|
|
|
captkirk42
Posts: 2,269
Joined: May 2011
|
| Friday, January 19, 2024 6:24 AM | |
I would say no. I'm pretty sure that sometime over the years He appeared on a card when he was still Prince. I'm pretty sure somewhere there is an early 80s card or set featuring him and Princess Di to celebrate their 1981 Wedding. It might be a first card of him as KING but wouldn't be his RC.
-------------------------------
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 |
|
|
|
|
Ganonthegreat
Posts: 19
Joined: Dec 2023
|
| Friday, January 19, 2024 6:27 AM | |
Yeah that's fine if the definition is the first card in his whole life, I think the first one then is from 1953. It all depends if being king/queen is the "highest level of competition".
|
|
|
|
|
BuccaneersDen
Posts: 653
Joined: Jun 2018
|
| Friday, January 19, 2024 6:55 AM | |
-------------------------------
"They've done studies, you know. Sixty percent of the time it works every time." - Brian Fantana from the movie Anchorman |
|
|
|
|
PAHSports
Posts: 190
Joined: Oct 2022
|
| Friday, January 19, 2024 7:01 AM | |
I wouldn't consider not sports individuals as having RC's. However, if that is not the site definition then you could argue that his Prince Charles cards would be like a minor league card; which aren't considered a RC. His King Charles cards would be his "MLB debut" and therefore be his RC.
|
|
|
|
|
myrke
Posts: 789
Joined: Aug 2020
|
| Friday, January 19, 2024 7:14 AM | |
Whatever card is his actual 'rookie', could we please begin to call it 'the royal rookie card' out of respect? Please?! By jove already. ;D
Edited on: Jan 19, 2024 - 8:04AM
|
|
|
|
|
mp775
Posts: 202
Joined: May 2019
|
| Friday, January 19, 2024 7:57 AM | |
Cards of Charles as Prince would be like minor league cards for athletes and not rookie cards. I agree that his first King card would be his rookie card, but since this one is from Topps Now and not the base set it doesn't get the RC tag.
|
|
|
|
|
T206
Posts: 778
Joined: Feb 2018
|
| Friday, January 19, 2024 8:24 AM | |
I think things a little differntly Prince Charles would be his rookie card and King would not
Take Tommy Lasorda 1954 is his rookie card but he moved up to Manager in 1976 that would not be a rookie card
Just using him as a comparison You have several others as well Frank Robinso, Babe Ruth (coach) Ty Cobb ect
|
|
|
|
|
BigEd76
Posts: 4,008
Joined: Nov 2016
|
| Friday, January 19, 2024 8:37 AM | |
Nothing from Topps Now (or any instant-type set) gets RC notation here
-------------------------------
* Ed * L8 * Cards in my personal Collection are unavailable * |
|
|
|
