UD ICE are true RCs?

[chocolate799]

Nugent-Hopkins /99 UD ICE and Landeskog /99 UD ICE who can be found in BD product are declared true RCS by Beckett...???

plmk

thanks

[stamkos]

Yes, they are true rookies

[chocolate799]

and how about those Seguin, Skinner, Hall, Eberle, Schenn ICE RCs...also true RCs declared by Beckett?

I know there was alot of discussion because of that

[ClaudeGirouxTML]

Yes, all Ice RC's are "true RC's".

[Phoenix]

Nowadays the 'definition' of a true rookie card is about as relevant as the book it comes in. Collectors will decide for themselves what a RC is.

[lumm0x]

I was always under the impression a true RC would be any card that is part of the base set of the product release.

Regardless, the concept of collect whatever you want always prevails.

[30ranfordfan]

I think that's a pretty good answer.

Based on the traditional definition of a "true RC" they are not.

If you've got 1 (or more) and want to call it a RC - I say all power to you.... and you're certainly not alone.

The fact that some people may consider them RCs while others don't hasn't hurt their value.

Nowadays the 'definition' of a true rookie card is about as relevant as the book it comes in. Collectors will decide for themselves what a RC is.

[Wickabee]

I was always under the impression a true RC would be any card that is part of the base set of the product release.

Regardless, the concept of collect whatever you want always prevails.

Check out 11/12 O-Pee-Chee. There is a base Cody Hodgon in addition to his actual RC.

[kapital]

nowadays the 'definition' of a true rookie card is about as relevant as the book it comes in. Collectors will decide for themselves what a rc is.

+1

[gfel2795]

I always thought that in order to be a true RC it had to be in an originally released product and not inserted into another one. That to me eliminates: Ice RCs from 2009-10 to this yr, UD MVP both series/OPC2 etc. It now occurs to me that under this definition UD Victory RCs that are inserted into UDS2 should not be considered true RCs but that is not the case with past sets. For example, Crosby's UD Victory always seemed like an RC to me but would not be under this definition.

I would love to diversify my RC collection with Ice RCs as I think they're really nice but have been turned off by the fact that I thought they weren't true RCs.

This issue has been brought up in the past and each time people have said that Ice was not a true RC although the /99s sell like hotcakes.

Can anyone provide some updated clarification now that UD continues to come out with RC attempts from discontinued releases?