tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1986621680116407176.post5023322554168787103..comments2024-03-16T05:18:32.472-04:00Comments on 1973 Topps Photography: Now, Here's a Hitter!Chris Stufflestreethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04229983444919282224noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1986621680116407176.post-38905166648190976432010-09-22T16:55:34.655-04:002010-09-22T16:55:34.655-04:00Most definitely that the researchers are attacking...Most definitely that the researchers are attacking the old records. Remember, research by Retrosheet changed the RBI title for one year in the early 60's so that Jim Gentile got his $5,000 bonus.<br /><br />There was also a debate whether to use National Association stats (1871-75) as Major League stats. The old encyclopedias did not.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1986621680116407176.post-15972687946523984002010-09-22T11:12:47.827-04:002010-09-22T11:12:47.827-04:00It seems like Topps either had incomplete records ...It seems like Topps either had incomplete records for the pre-1900 hitters or there just wasn't as much info about pre-1900 hitters in 1972, as all of the players affected in the list the most are the pre-1900 guys.<br /><br />The back of that '72 card looks so primitive, esp. compared with the backs of the other '72 cards. It looks like someone stuck the back of the card in a typewriter and started tapping away!night owlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11673973790245316059noreply@blogger.com