Page 1 of 2

Martin's Maxim Revisited

Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2016 9:24 am
by Idris
As many of you will know, the VBD yardstick for a new discovery being accepted as a new variation is "Martin's Maxim" (named in honour of Moderator and long-time Member Martin Avis). The criteria are simple: for a casting variation, a single example is sufficient, but for anything else, at least two examples are required.
Now, in the context of the GPW 28b, Nick suggests that these may have gone straight from the factory into collections, thus explaining why they are only ever found in mint condition. If that were so, then such models would not count as genuine variations in my book.
Dick (Kwakers) has pointed out that there were early collectors (like himself) who put in the hours and the legwork to go through toy shop stocks, picking out any oddities that they found, such models obviously being mint and boxed. However, it is implausible that 100% of any such non-standard output would be caught in this way, and some must have ended up in the hands of children and been played with.
I would therefore like to suggest that for non-casting variations, and with the exception of promotionals such as the 2c Muir Hill and the 10c British Sugar Corporation, we refine the second criterion to be a requirement for two or more examples, at least one of which must be playworn. Furthermore, if we do make that decision, then I suggest that some of the more questionable variations listed by Nick should be re-evaluated in these terms and, if necessary, relegated to the status of a footnote.

Re: Martin's Maxim Revisited

Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2016 9:15 am
by Idris
So, 50 views and no one has an opinion?
Come on people, this is important stuff! We're talking about what should and shouldn't make it into the variation tables. Do you really want to chase chimerae?

Re: Martin's Maxim Revisited

Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2016 7:39 pm
by Martin Avis
Idris certainly has a point. However, I'm not sure that the existence of a playworn example really proves much. Some of the variations we are talking about are of interest only to hardened collectors and are often not even particularly noticeable to the untrained eye. They are also likely to be very rare. As a result, the canny collectors may have kept an example in pristine condition, whereas anyone else may have just thrown out a playworn example without a second thought.

A playworn example would be nice to know about - and as Idris says, would prove a variation as being credible. However, the lack of one doesn't, in my opinion, prove anything.

Martin

Re: Martin's Maxim Revisited

Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2016 8:03 pm
by Idris
Good to see you posting again, Martin!

Re: Martin's Maxim Revisited

Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2016 11:31 pm
by GHOSTHUNTER
" but for anything else, at least two examples are required."...ideally this has to be from separate members, because if only the One member has the Two examples there must be some doubt in the authenticity of the models.

Ghosthunter.

Re: Martin's Maxim Revisited

Posted: Sun May 01, 2016 9:09 am
by Taniwha
It's hard to imagine any variation in normal production resulting in at least a few hundred examples.

I agree that with the more obscure examples, that many might exist having simply been overlooked by most collectors. I personally enjoy collecting playworn pieces - it is more affordable, and much easier to add scarce or rare pieces without bankrupting yourself.

Cheers,
Gavin

Re: Martin's Maxim Revisited

Posted: Sun May 01, 2016 9:19 am
by Idris
What I was driving at was not super-obscure minor variations, but major changes such as wheels (e.g. GPW 28b), colours (e.g. blue base 27c), and decals (e.g. two-line green 46b Pickfords). My contention is that if these only exist as mint examples, then they may have been 'Friday afternoon'/'lunchbox special' models or, in the case of the Pickfords, are simply out and out, post-factory fakes, produced specifically for collectors and sold directly to them. If they were not distributed through normal retail outlets, there will not be any playworn examples and, since they were not officially-authorised variations, they should not make it into the variations tables (except possible as footnotes).

Re: Martin's Maxim Revisited

Posted: Sun May 01, 2016 10:16 am
by Martin Avis
Idris wrote:What I was driving at was not super-obscure minor variations, but major changes such as wheels (e.g. GPW 28b), colours (e.g. blue base 27c), and decals (e.g. two-line green 46b Pickfords). My contention is that if these only exist as mint examples, then they may have been 'Friday afternoon'/'lunchbox special' models or, in the case of the Pickfords, are simply out and out, post-factory fakes, produced specifically for collectors and sold directly to them. If they were not distributed through normal retail outlets, there will not be any playworn examples and, since they were not officially-authorised variations, they should not make it into the variations tables (except possible as footnotes).
Thanks for the clarification. I agree with this 100%.

Re: Martin's Maxim Revisited

Posted: Sun May 01, 2016 3:23 pm
by GHOSTHUNTER
I agree as well, so is it possible to put a list here of what exists already that fits-in with this type of model, additional to what Hugh mentions in his post.

Ghosthunter.

Re: Martin's Maxim Revisited

Posted: Sun May 01, 2016 4:56 pm
by Idris
GHOSTHUNTER wrote:I agree as well, so is it possible to put a list here of what exists already that fits-in with this type of model, additional to what Hugh mentions in his post.

Ghosthunter.
Well, I think the 9a with 16-spoke escape wheels also falls into this category.