PDA

View Full Version : T207....indeed a strange set....let' talk about it ?


tedzan
05-28-2010, 09:50 PM
<img src="http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt113/zanted86/at207recruitboxncard.jpg" alt="[linked image]"><img src="http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt113/zanted86/bt207recruitboxncard.jpg" alt="[linked image]">



I started my T207 set in the late 1980's and completed it by the mid-1990's. In the late 1990's I sold it to one of our best liked Net54 guys.
This set has always perplexed me, in that none of BB "biggies" of that era (except Johnson & Speaker) were featured in it. But, there was a
lot of new name players that were not in the T206 or T205 sets. Guys like Lowdermilk and "Red" Hoff. For reasons like these, I have always
thought that this set was not printed by American Litho. In fact there is another 1912 set that closely resembles (front & back) the T207 set,
and that is the Imperial Tobacco (C46) set issued in Canada. I'd say that these two sets were produced by the same (unknown) printing firm.

My favorite card in this set is Chester "Red" Hoff. A southpaw pitcher, Chet started with the Highlanders in 1911....and the very first batter he
faced was Ty Cobb....Chet struck out Cobb on 3 pitches. When I sold my set, I kept Hoff, since he was still living at the grand old age of 107.

So, let's hear of your experiences collecting T207's....and, by all means show us some of your cards ?



<img src="http://i529.photobucket.com/albums/dd339/tz1234zaz/achethoff.jpg" alt="[linked image]">



TED Z

jcmtiger
05-28-2010, 09:57 PM
I don't want to plug up the board, here are my Tigers. I have all the Detroit Players, here are a few. i do like those boxes.

Joe

Abravefan11
05-28-2010, 10:03 PM
I know little about this set but here's my favorite T207 that I own.

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_UrSHvogCrmM/SykI2RqETXI/AAAAAAAAAac/rEMShd4AMF8/s576/T207%20Hank%20Gowdy.jpg

At the time that Hank was included in this set, like many others, he wasn't a big name in the professional game. The inclusion and exclusion of many players in this set is perplexing. Ted I think you may be onto something with your theory that this set was produced by someone other than ALC.

frohme
05-28-2010, 10:29 PM
I was about to post on T207 for a couple of reasons, both with news, and further questions.

First off, though, the quest is finally at an end - T207 is complete (http://imageevent.com/gspinf/t207images).

With help, generosity, and support from so many others (as I've said several times before) and collaboration with other board member(s) who are oh sooooo close as well, the set is finally complete. Lots of room for improvement, and the Lewis no emblem is still not included, but those of you that have one - congrats!

Donnelly just arrived from the REA lot - many, many thanks Ron.

http://photos.imageevent.com/gspinf/t207images/large/Donnelly.jpg

Some credits:

Rob D - I haven't forgotten what I owe you for your generosity.
Robert A, Bill T, Bob, et. al - thanks for the continued encouragement.
Ron R - Thanks for the help on the final push and all the discussion in between.
Tim N and Bob M - thanks for the VCBC articles which helped show just how dark and torturous a path it is/was.

As for the process - my first card was Miller (Pitt) from a David Festberg auction somewhere around 1991. I only got the bug for the set in 2006 after finding this site and reading up on the challenge. Being a Pirates collector, seeing a Donlin on eBay, and reading tbob's comments about it being one of the hardest cards - in his opinion - lit the fuse. The rest is, well, history.

If there's anything I'd say looking back, it would be that there have been a lot more quality cards come out over the last 18 months than in the prior 3 years. Still, finding any card in EX or better in this set can be a real bear. Some are still harder (much) than others.

--
Mike

ethicsprof
05-28-2010, 11:03 PM
congrats,Mike!!
a great conquest.

Ted, i have 2 recruit little cigar packs in order to represent the 2 different factories. i only have one card, the Wolverton, placed between the 2 packs,
framed.

They've never drawn me like the 206s in part because they lack the lithographic aesthetics of the 206s. They do seem to exhibit an oddity akin to the C46s as you suggest. Worth investigating further methinks.

great work.

best,
barry

Kawika
05-28-2010, 11:19 PM
Glory Hallelujah! That ImageEvent layout of T207s would make a grown man weep.
Well done, Mike!

http://photos.imageevent.com/kawika_o_ka_pakipika/bbbofsfirstclass/holygrailcards/websize/T207%20McDonald.jpg
My grandfather was Edward McDonald although at the time of this card he hadn't yet set foot in America, but was rather in the Irish Guard chasing the Mad Mullah across Palestine. He never mentioned any baseball playing.:)

teetwoohsix
05-29-2010, 01:27 AM
Just wanted to say congrats Mike !!!

Sincerely,Clayton

T205
05-29-2010, 05:58 AM
Mike,

Impressive! Congrats! I am having a hard time trying to put one team together (Boston Nationals) much less trying to take on the whole set. How hard was it to find the Lowdermilk?

marcdelpercio
05-29-2010, 09:52 AM
Ted,
That's a very interesting observation about the similarities with the C46 set. There are some definite parallels. Obviously the color scheme is quite similar and not used by any other tobacco sets of the era. C46 is a minor league set that features many players with major league experience while the T207's are a major league set featuring many players that barely if ever made it out of the minors. The quirky write-ups on the backs also seem as if they could have been done by the same writer(s) with many similarities in phrasing.

There was a discussion recently about the lack of evidence that the C46's were actually released by Imperial Tobacco so that also adds to the mysteries. I have many examples of other Imperial Tobacco hockey, lacrosse, and non-sports cards released during these years and none share major similarities in print design with the C46's.

Congrats on completing your set Mike! The T207's are my all-time favorite set. I have been working on this set for 10 years (and have gotten several from you during that time :) ) and I still need about 50 more cards. So I definitely can appreciate your difficult achievement.

tbob
05-29-2010, 10:51 AM
Mike- Thanks for the kind words and congratulations are definitely in order for your completing this set. I have always felt that this set is a real challenge. If you have enough money you can complete other sets like the T205 and T206 but completing the T207 set is a journey. I know some collectors don't like the dark brooding backgrounds and colors and others don't like it because Matty, Cobb, Wagner and others don't make an appearance, but I don't think there is a set around that is more attractive when you can find cards in the set in really nice shape. Besides, where else are you going to find some of the obscure players in the set? The Tinker and Donlan cards are beautiful and so many of the tough back cards feature striking, if almost surreal, pictures of the players.
The set is completeable but it is a journey. The 205s and 206s were a snap compared to this one. There are hidden minefields of scarcity even among some of the Recruit (common) players (and I won't divulge those now for those of you still working on the set who need them). Tim and I thoroughly enjoyed writing the articles and Tim's labor of love in compiling the statistics should prove invaluable to anyone collecting the set.
For those of you who have compiled a team set (like the Detroit group shown above), I can't see how you can stop your collecting there. The set is one of the few that is mainstream, attractive and requires interaction with other collectors to finish. And that's a good thing :D

frohme
05-29-2010, 10:52 AM
Thank you again to all that responded (and have helped).

David, Clayton - appreciate the kind words
Marc - best of luck on your continued journey - I'll be happy to continue to help out going forward - it is certainly not a sprint!

T205 - good luck! You picked the hardest team in the entire set. Boston Natl and Chicago Amer are at the top of the difficulty list, by good bit. Lowdermilk was definitely not the hardest - even some of the Recruit class cards are on par with his.

Using Tim Newcomb's rating (see the VCBC articles) averaged by team... my experience lines up closely with his survey data.


<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 251pt;" width="335" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"><td class="xl24" style="height: 12.75pt; width: 67pt;" width="89" height="17">Team</td> <td class="xl24" style="width: 66pt;" width="88">League</td> <td class="xl25" style="width: 59pt;" width="79"># Cards</td> <td class="xl25" style="width: 59pt;" width="79">Difficulty</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Boston</td> <td class="xl26">
</td> <td class="xl27">
</td> <td class="xl28">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Amer</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">18</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="30.944444444444443" align="right">30.94</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Nat</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">14</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="23.357142857142858" align="right">23.36</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Brooklyn</td> <td class="xl26">
</td> <td class="xl27">
</td> <td class="xl28">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Nat</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">14</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="30.857142857142858" align="right">30.86</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Chicago</td> <td class="xl26">
</td> <td class="xl27">
</td> <td class="xl28">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Amer</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">20</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="" align="right">23.45</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Nat</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">10</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="" align="right">36.40</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Cinn</td> <td class="xl26">
</td> <td class="xl27">
</td> <td class="xl28">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Nat</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">10</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="" align="right">31.40</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Cleveland</td> <td class="xl26">
</td> <td class="xl27">
</td> <td class="xl28">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Amer</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">18</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="34.111111111111114" align="right">34.11</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Detroit</td> <td class="xl26">
</td> <td class="xl27">
</td> <td class="xl28">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Amer</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">11</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="38.545454545454547" align="right">38.55</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">New York</td> <td class="xl26">
</td> <td class="xl27">
</td> <td class="xl28">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Amer</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">10</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="" align="right">40.00</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Nat</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">13</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="50.307692307692307" align="right">50.31</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Phila</td> <td class="xl26">
</td> <td class="xl27">
</td> <td class="xl28">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Amer</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">11</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="39.18181818181818" align="right">39.18</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Nat</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">9</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="39.111111111111114" align="right">39.11</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Pittsburg</td> <td class="xl26">
</td> <td class="xl27">
</td> <td class="xl28">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Nat</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">15</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="31.533333333333335" align="right">31.53</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">St Louis</td> <td class="xl26">
</td> <td class="xl27">
</td> <td class="xl28">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Amer</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">10</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="" align="right">30.40</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Nat</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">14</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="38.214285714285715" align="right">38.21</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl26" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Washington</td> <td class="xl26">
</td> <td class="xl27">
</td> <td class="xl28">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl29" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl29">Amer</td> <td class="xl30" x:num="" align="right">9</td> <td class="xl31" x:num="" align="right">48.00</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

frohme
05-29-2010, 11:03 AM
Bob,

Thank you (and Tim) for the articles - no telling how many times I've read them now. Our posts crossed in time or I'd have added this.

I think you really nailed it for some key reasons -


"It is a challenge". I'd call it a labor of love - you have to be in it for the long haul.
"I don't think there is a set around that is more attractive when you can find cards in the set in really nice shape". Could not agree more!
"It is completable, but a journey." Yes! 4 years for me, mostly 1 card at a time but for a couple of group purchases mostly early on. Scott B, Dan K, Paul S, Scott G.
"... requires interaction with other collectors to finish. And that's a good thing. :D" Absolutely!
etc...

OK, maybe I'm biased :).
--
Mike

sox1903wschamp
05-29-2010, 12:36 PM
Congrats Mike for completing the set and knocking down that last king pin in Donnelly. It is funny you mention David Festberg for your first card purchase as I also purchased my first T-207 Red Sox from him sometime in the mid 90's.

I do love this set and read the VCBC Part 1 and 2 articles all the time and although I concentrate on completing pre war subsets of Boston American cards, I have thought quite a bit about trying to complete this set. If I do a complete pre war set this would be the one, maybe soon :). Nice job and congrats again Mike.

Leon
05-29-2010, 12:37 PM
First of all a big Congrats to Mike F....completion is a great feeling.

And the T207 set has one of the rarest backs of any generally produced set. It still has Johnson, Speaker and some others....plus the hidden rarities....and, as mentioned, one of my collecting niches ...

uffda51
05-29-2010, 02:03 PM
Congrats, Mike. I completed the basic set in 2005 and it's also at imageevent. It's the first time I've ever put together a set that has all graded cards so I've displayed it that way.

http://imageevent.com/uffda51/t207heaven

http://photos.imageevent.com/uffda51/t207heaven/websize/T207Barry.jpg

Loudermilk was my first card. Hoff is a favorite as well.

Bosox Blair
05-29-2010, 02:34 PM
My favorite T207 from my collection (and at or near the top of fave Speaker cards):

Vintagecatcher
05-29-2010, 02:40 PM
It took quite a few years before I finally grabbed my Johnny Kling T207 with a BIN on eBay earlier this year. For whatever reason, it not only is a tough card to find, but it is especially difficult to find in nice condition.

Patrick

kmac32
05-29-2010, 02:53 PM
have a complete set of T207 Cubs minus Saier and Miller. Awesome cards and display very nicely. Classic set in my opinion.

Kmac

Bridwell
05-29-2010, 02:58 PM
I've fallen in love with this set, also. Warts and all. Some of the poses are truly artistic. Some not so much.

I've been working on a set for a year and a half. Kudos to Bob and Mike for completing it. That's incredible! I've found that about half the set is pretty easy and the other half is pretty darn tough. Some cards only appear for sale maybe once in a year.

It's a strange set in that the following star players are not included:

Cobb
Wagner
Evers
Eddie Collins
Crawford
Joe Jackson
Grover Alexander
Plank
Baker
M. Brown
Walsh

There are 13 HOFers in the set, but some of those were early in their careers: Carey, Wheat, McKechnie, Hooper. It almost feels like this set was supposed to be the first part of a bigger set, a set that might have been planned to have as many players as T206. But, obviously, that didn't happen.

Ron

Bridwell
05-29-2010, 03:15 PM
They look even more dark and mysterious in the SGC holders...

Steve D
05-29-2010, 06:49 PM
T207 has long been one of my favorite sets. I've always had an attraction to the "Old West", and the T207s just look like they came out of the Old West, with the dark brown backgrounds and gray borders.

Here are scans of my cards from the set:

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h8/steved80/T207BenderBresnahanCarey.jpg
http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h8/steved80/T207ChanceHooperJohnson.jpg
http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h8/steved80/T207MarquardMcGrawMcKechnie.jpg
http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h8/steved80/T207SpeakerTinkerWallace.jpg
http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h8/steved80/T207WheatDaubertGowdy.jpg
http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h8/steved80/T207VaughnWood.jpg

Steve

Matt
05-29-2010, 08:26 PM
Mike - congrats! I know you were after that Donnelly for a VERY long time. What's next?

Bridwell
05-29-2010, 10:55 PM
Another mystery of the T207 set is the Anonymous Backs. There are 2 different versions, with different factory numbers, but no brand listed. What cigarette brand would go to the trouble to list factory numbers but not identify themselves?

Ron R

frohme
05-30-2010, 12:07 AM
Agreed on the "anonymous" backs, Ron

Beyond that, there are all sorts of card/printing mysteries:



Why do some of the cards have silver/grey borders and others tan ... what are the distributions?
Why are some (small?) number of cards printed on the back with brown ink rather than black ... again, what are the distributions?
Why do some of the cards look really dull/drab (as if they are washed out) yet they are not obviously worn, bleached (maybe U/V?)
What was the printing process really like, and how does it compare to the T206 (or C46) process?
How common are the print freaks/errors?
Just how many "swapped/wrong backs" are there?
How many different Anon-3 Recruits are there, really?
Why are some of the Recruit cards so difficult to find in any grade at/above VG/EX?


--
Mike

marcdelpercio
05-30-2010, 10:15 AM
I have always found the theory very interesting that the Anonymous Factory 3 cards were a Coupon release. This would seem reasonable as it was a Louisiana factory. Perhaps the breakup of the ATC caused some legal situation which prevented the Coupon brand name on the back of some of these cards. This could also be a factor in the discussion of whether Coupon Type 1's should be considered as a T206 brand while the Type 2's and 3's (all three Louisiana Factory 3 releases...same as T207 Anonymous) released a few years later are clearly separate issues with unquestionably distinct designs.

caramelcard
05-30-2010, 12:29 PM
Marc,

Good points.

Red Cross could've been a possibility for the anonymous backs.

Only a few exist. Few enough to where they could've been part of a test sheet. I can't think of another fairly large issue where one back is so amazingly scarce. Not sure why they would've have followed through with more.

Rob

Bridwell
05-30-2010, 12:32 PM
T207's seem to have a laminate 'glaze' over the front of the card. It doesn't hold up very well, being prone to crazing and cracking. Handling T206's, it seems like T206's have more 'give' to them. A T207 is more likely to wrinkle, and the corners/edges more likely to chip, IMO. Thus EX or better examples are scarce.

Marc, the comparison to T213-2 is interesting because they seem to have the same type of 'glaze' on the fronts.

T207's are also somewhat of a 'ugly stepchild' to T206's. After millions of colorful T206's and E cards were in the hands of the public, then these darker T207's were released. I suspect they were not well received at the time. I've grown to love them, though.

Ron R

William Todd
05-30-2010, 03:45 PM
Mike, Congratulations on completing the T207 set. I know that you really were committed to the task. I too enjoyed Tim and Bob's aritcle in VCBC and it helped me to complete the set, except for Lewis " No Emblem". I even got crazy and tried to complete the Broadleaf class in all three or four possible backs. Try the Recruit class cards in Factory 240 PA, Factory 606 MD, and then an Anonymous 3 for the rarer Recruits, and then the Napoleons. The set has as many twists, not quite, as T206. Certainly the rarity of some is extreme beyond belief. I recently had a friend of a client come to me with 275 T206's that her father had collected and was able to view them and handle them and it was quite an experience. If only they were T207's in original form!

William Todd
05-30-2010, 04:13 PM
Mike, I just went through your whole set, it is quite an achievement. Thats a beautiful Lefty George and Barney Pelty, and your Donnelly is spectacular (pardon the Seinfeld reference).

tedzan
05-31-2010, 07:29 AM
Great going Mike on completing this very tough set. Now, don't do what I did, by selling it. Enjoy it, as I am sure you are.

There are only a few regrets I have in this hobby, and selling my T207 set is one. After all, it took me longer to complete
it than my first T206 set.


Regards,

TED Z

tedzan
05-31-2010, 07:33 AM
Hey guys, all these T207 cards on display, now this set is getting some respect here.

Keep showing them and telling us of your T207 stories.


From a US Air Force veteran, I wish you all a solemn Memorial Day.

TED Z

Leon
05-31-2010, 09:45 AM
I can't think of another fairly large issue where one back is so amazingly scarce.
Rob


I don't know what "large" is considered but I can probably think of a at least one and maybe more, E222- AWA back .....

frohme
05-31-2010, 11:12 AM
Thanks, Bill - you know your set was/is an inspiration. I've toyed with the idea - like you did - of a master set. I think that's one of the lines in the sand beyond which one is certifiable. I'll stick to my anonymous recruits - below.

Ted - many thanks as well - I plan to enjoy it as long as possible, and fill out the rough edges as wherever it makes sense. In keeping with your request, how about some Recruit-class anonymous-backed cards.

Thanks to board members for quite a few of these over the last 4 years.

http://photos.imageevent.com/gspinf/miscellany/t207brownbackground/anonymousbacks/large/Row1.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/gspinf/miscellany/t207brownbackground/anonymousbacks/large/Row2.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/gspinf/miscellany/t207brownbackground/anonymousbacks/large/Row3.jpg

Anyone have a Speaker they'd like to part with? :D

If you have images of anon-3 backs (Recruit) - show 'em.

Sixtofan
05-31-2010, 11:20 AM
This has been a tough one to work on though! I only need 7 more, three of which are currently available in auctions so hopefully I can knock them off the list. In some ways this has been the most fun of any set I have collected - I get genuinely excited when I can cross one off my list. Also, there seems to be good camaraderie amongst the folks working on this set. It truly brings back some of the joy of collecting.

William Todd
05-31-2010, 02:40 PM
Mike, Those Anon 3's are gorgeous and rare. That grouping really illustrates some of the tougher Recruit T207's.

49leaf
05-31-2010, 05:21 PM
Mike congrats on finishing the t207 set. I know that you really worked hard to finish it. If anyone has any questions on this set please feel free to ask. Patrick McHugh

tbob
05-31-2010, 07:48 PM
Maybe the T207's inclusions and exclusions were based solely on economics. Perhaps it was a lot easier to sign up Lowdermilk and Lewis for a pittance than Cobb and Lajoie for big money.
I also think the set was put together in a haphazard fashion and the final series was to include some of the stars but who knows? Perhaps if the total set had come to fruition, we'd be showing PSA 5 Jacksons with a Cycle back or VGEX Lajoies with an Anonymous back and a G/VG Alexander with a Broadleaf back. The mysteries of this set run deep. :confused:

Bridwell
06-01-2010, 08:09 AM
After the anti-trust breakup of ATC in 1911, the number of tobacco baseball sets declined. The T207 set was 'caught in the middle' with a set in development. The timing of releasing this set in early 1912 probably had something to do with all the mysteries.

ATC was probably restructuring and we all know how chaotic that can be.

Ron R

tedzan
06-01-2010, 12:44 PM
<img src="http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt113/zanted86/at207recruitboxncard.jpg" alt="[linked image]">


I have a simple answer to why there are so many players missing in this set that were in the T206 and T205 sets.
Recall my comments from my initial post in this thread......

"I have always thought that this set was not printed by American Lithographic. In fact there is another 1912 set
that closely resembles (front & back) the T207 set, and that is the Imperial Tobacco (C46) set issued in Canada.
I'd say that these two sets were produced by the same (unknown) printing firm."

This would explain the missing stars and other guys in the T207 set, which were in the 2 preceding T-sets. Since,
the new printers most likely did not have the Rights to portray these players.

If my theory is correct, I sure wish we could discover who printed the T207 cards ?


TED Z

Bridwell
06-01-2010, 03:52 PM
Hi Ted,

About 85 of the 200 players in T207 were also in T206. That is a low percentage for only about 3 years later. Of the 85 T206 players, I don't believe any of the same poses or artwork were used for the T207's. It makes sense to think that a different printer/designer was used.

I don't think ATC or the other printer could have blocked the approval of T206 players to be in the set. Otherwise, those 85 would not be in T207, which is still a large number of players. It's possible a dispute occurred and the T207 set was halted before another series could be printed.

Ron

marcdelpercio
06-01-2010, 05:37 PM
Do we know for certain which cigarette brands remained with which companies after the ATC break-up? My theory is that the T207's are a half-aborted kind of set that was cobbled together in the midst of a chaotic time for the ATC and the subsequent post-breakup separate companies. I'm sure there were many legal ramifications of what advertising backs were allowed to be displayed which may explain the relatively few different backs as compared to the T205 and T206 sets. Perhaps Broadleaf, Cycle, Recruit, and Napoleon remained with one manufacturer while the Anonymous cards (Coupon and another brand distributing from Factory 25?) and possibly Red Cross were assigned to a different company, thus the extreme scarcity of Red Cross and anomaly of lack of advertising on the Anons.

On Ted's theory, I know from reading the original anti-trust lawsuit that ATC was a large stockholder in Imperial Tobacco so perhaps the 1912 C46 set (which also lacks advertising and has never conclusively been proven to be an Imperial Tobacco release) was printed concurrently with the stylistically similar T207 set and a different print company besides ALC was used due to whatever resources were legally available to the sub-companies that were releasing these sets.

Bridwell
06-01-2010, 06:40 PM
Hi Marc,
I have a partial list of ATC brands that went to Liggett & Myers in 1911. It includes Coupon, Piedmont and Fatima, and some others, then says '15 additional smaller domestic brands'.

I have Recruit, Napoleon and Coupon packs with Liggett & Myers printed on them. I also have Broadleaf and Cycle packs with no manufacturer listed, but those were probably made pre-1911. Broadleaf and Cycle did go to L & M in 1911, as well, I believe. I found one other web site that said they went to L & M. No idea about Red Cross. I suspect Red Cross went to Lorillard, since that's who made Red Cross when ATC acquired them.

Ron R

marcdelpercio
06-01-2010, 07:00 PM
Thanks for that info Ron. That would seem to exclude Coupon from my theory as one of the Anonymous brands (unless they simply chose not to advertise for some other reason) but all other brands would still fit and if Red Cross did indeed return to Lorillard, that may explain the extremely short print run. I also find it interesting that Piedmont was one of the L&M brands yet is not an advertising back on T207's after being the flagship brand for T206 and T205. I wonder if there is a chance that they were the Anonymous Factory 25 brand as they primarily distributed from Factory 25 on the T205's and T206's. Maybe Piedmont and Coupon were originally set to be T207 advertising brands along with their fellow L&M brands of Recruit, Cycle, Broadleaf, and Napoleon but something occurred to cause that brand to be removed from display.

Bridwell
06-01-2010, 09:03 PM
After the break-up of American Tobacco Company in May 1911, perhaps Liggett & Myers would have been required to re-sign the players to a new authorization agreement in order to use their names and images. Perhaps the players were more difficult to sign, after they saw how popular the T206's had become. Maybe the players wanted compensation. By 1911 some players were getting paid to endorse products and the game had increased in popularity compared to 1908. The players who weren't pictured on a card yet were easier to sign, if Liggett & Myers wasn't offering any payment.

I don't think the players received any payment for the use of their images on T206. The famous Neal Ball letter asked for his permission but doesn't offer any payment.

Ron R

marcdelpercio
06-01-2010, 10:16 PM
Good point Ron. It completely makes sense that any licensing contracts they had with the players would need to be reworked after the break-up. With the explosion of popularity of tobacco cards and the many competing caramel sets, I'm sure the top players' asking prices would have been quite a bit higher than 2-3 years previous when they were compensated very little if at all. That would certainly explain the lack of most of the major stars of the era and the inclusion of so many obscure players.

sox1903wschamp
06-02-2010, 07:27 PM
Here are a couple Anon 3's

marcdelpercio
06-02-2010, 08:04 PM
Here are a few Napoleon backs which I believe to be one of the most underrated as far as difficulty of any tobacco brand in any set. Also a super tough brown ink Anonymous and a blank back.

timn1
06-03-2010, 11:29 AM
Hi guys,
I've enjoyed reading this T207 thread.

-- The next issue of the Old Cardboard email newsletter will have a mini-article written by me and Lyman that will touch on a few of these issues, although it's meant primarily for neophytes rather than veterans, who will know most of it. Check it out, though.

-- Given the discussion above about the breakup of the ATC, here's an excerpt from the final paragraphs of my VCBC article that I thought might lead to some fun speculation--

"For some reason, enthusiasm for the whole promotion dries up earlier than anticipated, and all production ceases at once, leaving the “second series” Recruits and the Broadleaf-Cycle group forever scarcer than the rest. This could have been caused simply by the end of the baseball season, or more momentously by the fallout from the 1911 breakup of the American Tobacco Company under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, which brought the great age of nationally issued baseball tobacco cards to an end.

An abrupt ending to production might help to explain the set’s strange lack of big stars, and the inclusion of so many obscure figures. The cards of Hank Butcher and Buddy Ryan both refer to their play alongside Cleveland’s slugging young outfielder Joe Jackson, who had hit .408 in 1911 and would hit .395 in 1912. Given the copywriters’ interest in him, why does Jackson himself not appear in T207? Were these references to Jackson on other cards meant to hint at his eventual appearance?

Was T207 originally conceived as a successor to the massive multi-series set which had just ended in 1911? Could the original plan have been to produce several hundred cards over a period of years, as T206 had been? The lack of star players in the set makes more sense if we imagine it as the first issues of a larger set.

We may never know for sure why the set never got past 200, or if it was ever meant to. But there may be enough evidence at least to imagine a larger T207 including such legends as Cobb, Mathewson, Lajoie, Plank, and Joe Jackson."

Bridwell
06-03-2010, 12:36 PM
Hi Tim,

Your articles on T207 are the best I've seen. Congrats!

If my figures are correct, there are 199 different players in T207 (Mitchell is pictured twice, confusing Mike with Willie). Of those, only 13 are HOFers (6.5%).

By comparison, there are about 389 different players in T206. There are 38 different HOFers, some with multiple poses. There are also about 260 different players in T206 that are on major league teams. 34 of the HOFers were major leaguers at the time. The others were minor leaguers. So 34 HOFers out of 260 is 13% stars.

T207 could have been originally designed as a bigger set, but maybe not much bigger. Without minor leaguers and multiple poses, there are almost as many players pictured as T206! (199 players vs. 260) Yet there is half the percentage of stars (6.5% vs. 13% for T206). To match the T206 numbers for major leaguers the speculative 'unpublished series' of T207's would have to contain 61 different players, with 21 being stars. It seems unlikely that the set designers would save so many stars for the final series. Therefore, the theory that halted production explains the lack of stars in T207 is not a good theory IMO.

Ron

Drew
06-03-2010, 02:00 PM
Hi Everybody
Congratulations Mike on completing your T 207 set. I started my set in
2001 and finished in 2004. It was a bear of a journey but enjoyable. I got lucky
at the Fort Washington show in September of 2002 when I came across a
dealer who had just purchased a near set of the brown backgrounds.
When I saw the four stacks of cards he had I became very excited and nervous.
Well I spent all of the cash I had on me. Forty-one cards at one show. He had many of the
tough cards like Donlin,Downey,Butcher,Rasmussen,Tyler,Ragan,Gregg, Blanding, etc. He had the
Ward Miller but I was broke. I made arrangements to send him a check
for the Miller. The forty-one cards brought my total to 173 cards.
I stll needed the Lewis,Saier,Lowdermilk,Speaker,Weaver,Thomas,Bauma n,White,
Phelan, plus others toughies and Livingston C,which was the last card I got from Dan M to finish the
set.
While bidding for 207's on ebay I noticed a familar name who would always be
a regular bidder Bob M.
TBob was the guy who helped me the most,sharing his knowledge of the set
with me, anwering all my questions and going head to head with me on ebay
battling for cards. We partnered along with Dan M to win a three card auction in
one of Lew Lipset auctions. I got the Lewis with emblem card i dont remember what
the other two cards were now.
I am now in the process of doing a bit of upgrading to my set.
drew

tbob
06-03-2010, 02:55 PM
Hi Drew, long time no hear ;) Glad to know you are doing well and you don't hold it against it me that we had some spirited bidding wars. Your story about finding a dealer with all those T207s reminds me of what happened to me back in the early 90's at a National when I was putting together a T207 set, I asked a dealer if he had any T207s because none were displayed on his table and he pulled out two small boxes which contained almost the entire set wrapped in tissue paper. The cards were all EX to EXMT. My heart stopped and I bought a ton of them. Had I known about the wonders of the ATM back then, I would have bought them all. In the 15 years since then I have never had anything like this happen even remotely close at a National or show.
tbob

timn1
06-03-2010, 03:56 PM
Hi Ron,

I see what you mean: holding back that many stars from the initial offerings of a set would be pretty unusual-- but not inconceivable.

However, in terms of raw numbers, I don't see why they couldn't have come up with at least 50 more MLB players, possibly 100 more.

If I am right that the scarcer Recruits and -- clearly --the players found with Broadleaf backs were issued in series of 50 at a later date than the first 100, I can imagine that one or possibly two more series of 50 were envisioned for the following season.

200 players/16 ML teams is 12.5 players per team. Given how many marginal players are among the 200, I can certainly see 6 more players per team being issued, which would make another 100. We could even go through 1912-13 rosters and come up with a likely list of possibilities.

Re Mitchell: not sure why you feel that the two Mitchell cards picture the same player. One is in a Cleveland uni, one in a Cincy uni. Even if they screwed up the writeups, it still seems like two different players, no?

Tim

timn1
06-03-2010, 05:24 PM
Just playing around, I decided to see how difficult it would be to generate 100 more players for the phantom "T207 extension set." Pretty easy, actually! Based on the 1912 rosters, all these guys played regularly or semi-regularly (100 IP or 150+ AB), yet are not in T207. They WOULD have been in the next group if the ATC had not been broken up :) -- A lot of big names in there, even more than I thought--

Athletics
Frank Baker
Boardwalk Brown
Eddie Collins
Jack Coombs
Ben Egan
Byron Houck
Harl Maggert
Stuffy McInnis
Eddie Plank

Braves/Doves/Nationals/whatever
Buster Brown
Vin Campbell
Walt Dickson
Otto Hess
George Jackson
Bill Rariden

Browns
Mack Allison
George Baumgardner
Elmer Brown
Pete Compton
Frank LaPorte
Jack Powell
Del Pratt
Burt Shotton
Gus Williams

Cardinals
Jack Bliss
Rube Geyer
Arnold Hauser
Miller Huggins
Lee Magee
Mike Mowrey
Slim Sallee

Cubs
Jimmy Archer
Mordecai Brown
Larry Cheney
Johnny Evers
Solly Hofman
Jimmy Lavender
Lew Richie
Jimmy Sheckard
Heinie Zimmerman

Dodgers/Superbas
Frank Allen
George Cutshaw
Bob Fisher
John Hummel
Herbie Moran
Red Smith
Earl Yingling

Giants
Red Ames
Fred Merkle
Chief Meyers
Red Murray
Tillie Shafer
Jeff Tesreau

Indians/Naps
Ray Chapman
Art Griggs
Joe Jackson
Nap Lajoie
Steve O'Neill
Roger Peckinpaugh
Bill Steen

Phillies
Pete Alexander
Gavvy Cravath
Mickey Doolan
Bill Killifer
Hans Lobert
Fred Luderus
Sherry Magee
Erskine Mayer
Eppa Rixey
Tom Seaton

Pirates
Babe Adams
Art Butler
George Gibson
Claude Hendrix
Hans Wagner

Red Sox
Hugh Bedient
Hick Cady
Ray Collins
Jake Stahl

Reds
Johnny Bates
Rube Benton
Dick Egan
Jimmy Esmond
Dick Hoblitzell
Bert Humphries
Bobby Keefe
George Suggs

Senators
Carl Cashion
Eddie Foster
Chick Gandil
Bob Groom
Tom Hughes
Danny Moeller
Howie Shanks
Rip Williams

Tigers
Donie Bush
Ty Cobb
Sam Crawford
Jean Dubuc
Davy Jones
Joe Lake
Baldy Louden
Ossie Vitt
Ed Willett

White Sox
Wally Mattick
Ed Walsh

Yankees/Highlanders
Ray Caldwell
Hal Chase
Birdie Cree
Russ Ford
Earl Gardner
Roy Hartzell
Jack Martin
George McConnell
Hack Simmons
Dutch Sterrett
Jeff Sweeney
Guy Zinn

sox1903wschamp
06-03-2010, 05:39 PM
Nice job on the list Tim. I see only 4 additional Red Sox on your list because that is one team that was well represented in the original set with most of the team already included. What is interesting is that the Red Sox are not well represented in T-206 (only 10 I think, maybe less with a couple of multi poses on Wagner and Stahl). Sure would have been nice to see an extension of the T-207 with more stars.

marcdelpercio
06-03-2010, 06:30 PM
Thanks for the info Tim. I still consider your articles the "bible" of this set and I refer to them constantly. It is easy to imagine additional series scheduled to be released as with the T206 set. In that set there are obviously certain players/series that appear only with certain backs. So I imagine with the T207 set, there may have been other brand backs that were originally on board with the set and scheduled to release over the next several months. It is inexplicable to me, for example, that there are no Piedmont T207's as that brand was the flagship of the T206 and T205 sets. Perhaps that series was scheduled to release but was aborted due to the ATC breakup or other reasons. Or perhaps Piedmonts are the Anonymous Factory 25.

One thing that suggests AGAINST a future series with a lot of stars and other big name players is that the later Broadleaf/Cycle class series that WAS released and comprises a full 1/4 of the set, contains a grand total of zero Hall of Famers or major stars. Logically it doesn't seem likely to me that an even LATER series than that would suddenly be overflowing with all of the big name players which were omitted in the previous series.

JasonL
06-03-2010, 07:18 PM
Thanks for starting this one, Ted. The most fascinating part about this set, to me (aside from the lack of starpower that has been discussed thoroughly here) is the card surface, or gloss that was mentioned once above in passing. Perhaps I am way off base, but I find that to be the most significantly unique thing about this set, when compared to its contemporary issues. Are there others with this same gloss? what is known about it? was it a new technique in making cards at the time? perhaps this might narrow down what printers could have been making these cards?
any thoughts on this?

I have endeavored to collect the Cubs team set. I have completed it, less the extremely tough Ward Miller. The degree to which the gloss is intact on some of the lionel Carter examples that I own, is fairly impressive, in my humble opinion. Here's half of the 10-card team set...very unique cards, indeed!

PS - Drew: I don't suppose you have a beater duplicate of Ward Miller ? :)

toppcat
06-03-2010, 09:00 PM
Not sure it was mentioned prior but T207's seem to have more top to bottom miscuts than other tobacco sets. I wonder if the gloss added some friction in the cutting process that led to this?

Bridwell
06-03-2010, 09:16 PM
Hi Tim,

That list you made of the next 100 players would make a great addition to the set. I'd certainly be collecting them, if they were made. Lots of big names in there.

I'm thinking that the designer of the set was unable to secure the written authorizations of most of the star players. I do agree that there are enough unpublished players that the original design could have been 300 players, instead of 200. They may have, very simply, sent authorization requests to every team, who handed them out to each player. Some came back signed and some didn't. They may have tried a 2nd time when there was light response. They probably weren't offering any payment, so the stars may have passed on signing it. By then, the stars were getting paid for various endorsements but the common players were happy to just be included. Once they had about 150 authorizations they started making the cards. They later added another series to reach 200. That would explain Marc's observation about the lack of stars in the Broadleaf class/series which was printed a little later. The lesser players might even have asked to be included, while the top players didn't care either way. Maybe a few more authorizations trickled in, but not enough to add another series of 50. Or production was halted, by then, for other reasons. Just wild theories.

Ron

tedzan
06-04-2010, 07:09 PM
Sorry guys, but I don't agree with the contention that the 1911 divesture of the ATC monopoly had anything to do with
the make up of the T207 set. I base this on the fact that American Lithographic continued printing white-bordered sets
(T213, T214, and T215) well into 1919. And, their T205, T201, and T202 sets from 1911 to 1912. One constant factor in
all these sets is the repetiveness of the same subjects (stars and commons) from the T206 set.

Therefore, as I've speculated in my initial post here....this set was not printed by American Litho. For whatever reasons,
ATC contracted a different printer to produce these cards. And, therein lies the enigma of why so many of the usual stars
and commons particular to all the above noted Tobacco sets are not in the T207. In my opinion, this is really the only ex-
planation that makes sense.....what are your thoughts on this ?

Eventually, given a sufficient amount of research, we will discover who printed the T207's.


TED Z

marcdelpercio
06-04-2010, 08:30 PM
Ted,
Are you suggesting that the players contracted directly with the printing company rather than with ATC? Otherwise, I don't understand why the use of a different printer would affect the player selection as presumably all of the same players would remain under contract for any ATC release, regardless of the printer they used.

kmac32
06-04-2010, 09:13 PM
Jason L,

You have one more than me but love the Cubbies

tedzan
06-04-2010, 09:57 PM
Originally, in the early months of 1909 the Greater New York Baseball Association (GNYBA) was mailing out letters to
the players on behalf of American Lithographic Co. seeking their permission to portray them in the forthcoming T206
set. The well known Neal Ball letter is an example of this. And, I would say this practice continued by GNYBA (or some
other intermediary) when new players were added in subsequent sets of that era.

So, my point here is, that the Rights to portray the players was not directly related to the American Tobacco Co. (ATC);
but, the outfit doing the printing.

The influence that ATC had in the printing of the cards was related to the advertising info on the backs of these cards.
For instance, in the ATC divesture period (early 1911), when the American Beauty, Piedmont, or Sweet Caporal brands
were transferred to the L & M plant in Durham, NC....the backs were changed to reflect this new Factory #42 location.


TED Z

marcdelpercio
06-04-2010, 10:37 PM
Thanks for the info Ted. I always assumed that the players contracted with the ATC as suggested by the 1912 Sporting News article which stated that the tobacco manufacturers collaborated with sportswriters to help secure the printing rights of the players (or at least Wagner specifically). I figured that once the rights had been secured by ATC, they would then sub-contract with the printer to physically produce the cards.

I realize that the Ball letter does directly reference American Litho so perhaps they retained the printing rights rather than the tobacco companies. If that is the case, then your T207 theory certainly is plausible.

Bridwell
06-05-2010, 09:58 AM
Good points, Ted and Marc. Perhaps American Litho was unable to strike an agreement with Liggett & Myers Tobacco Co. after the break-up of ATC. If I was with ATC, and had been using American Litho, I would not want American Litho to just take the authorizations from the baseball players and create a set for Liggett & Myers. That would be disloyal to ATC, and there was probably a contract between ATC and American Litho about the development of the T206 set. ATC & Liggett became competitors in 1911. As we've shown, most or all of the T207's were distributed by Liggett & Myers, not ATC.

Furthermore, the T207 cards seem very different from T206's and other issues. Another observation is that none of the images used are the same as the T206 images, I don't believe. It certainly seems likely, as Ted said, that a different printer & designer was used. If American Litho already had the authorization and the artwork, they could have included Cobb, Eddie Collins, Evers and other stars that were in T206. They could have easily made sepia-toned images from the T206 images. But they didn't.

That's why, Ted, I feel the ATC break-up had an influence on T207.

Ron

tedzan
06-05-2010, 03:53 PM
I see your point since the great majority of the T207 backs are Recruit; therefore, the T207's were inserted
in the L & M packs. But, we still don't know what printing company L & M contracted to produce the T207's.

But, we do know that the other 1912 BB card set, ATC's T202, was produced by American Lithographic, ad-
vertising the Hassan brand (which was retained by ATC). And,the T202's virtually include a full complement
of the stars and regular players of the T205 set..

Here is the bigger picture of how the various brands were allocated amongst the four Tobacco Company's in
the Fall of 1911 by the divesture ruling.


Liggett & Myers was given about 28 % of the cigarette market:

American Beauty
Coupon
DRUMmond
Fatima
Home Run
Imperiales
King Bee
Piedmont
Recruit
Red Man


P. Lorillard received 15 % of the nation's tobacco business:

Egyptian Deities
Helmar
Honest
Mogul
Murad
Mogul
Polar Bear
Turkish Trophies
Union Leader


American Tobacco retained 37 % of the tobacco market:

Bull Durham
Hassan
Mecca
Sweet Caporal
Tuxedo

R. J. Reynolds received 19% of the tobacco market.



TED Z

Bridwell
06-05-2010, 04:33 PM
Hi Ted,

I agree with what you're saying. You can definately add Napoleon to the Liggett & Myers list. I have a dated cigarette pack to prove it, dated 7/1/1912 with L & M logo. I also saw a web site that claimed that Broadleaf and Cycle went to L & M, as well. One site I saw, said that 15 smaller domestic brands went to L & M, besides the ones you listed. Thus I think that would include Napoleon, Broadleaf and Cycle.

Ron

Bridwell
06-06-2010, 05:50 PM
I was watching 2 auctions on ebay today: a T207 Matty McIntyre SGC 30 and an E93 Davy Jones SGC 30. They were both advertised as a 'tough card'. The McIntyre sold for $32.99 and the Jones went for $133.50.

Here's the populations of the 2 cards (SGC/PSA combined):

McIntyre: 31 graded, with 18 better
Jones: 59 graded, with 32 better

T207 seems like an undervalued set, compared to E93. I would think that the McIntyre is the tougher card. Granted, the Jones was a better looking card for an SGC 30, but it sold for 4 times as much!

Ron

marcdelpercio
06-06-2010, 06:27 PM
Geez...don't say that Ron. These are tough enough already. The last thing we need is more people realizing just how scarce and difficult this set is :)

JasonL
06-07-2010, 07:00 AM
if you factor in a particular BIN listing, you would think otherwise...check out the $2000 ask for the Ward Miller which is barely a card! outrageous. That is one of the set's toughest cards, no doubt, but that is just silly.

(until someone pays for it, then I am the stupid one, I suppose!) :D

tbob
06-07-2010, 01:33 PM
I was watching 2 auctions on ebay today: a T207 Matty McIntyre SGC 30 and an E93 Davy Jones SGC 30. They were both advertised as a 'tough card'. The McIntyre sold for $32.99 and the Jones went for $133.50.

Here's the populations of the 2 cards (SGC/PSA combined):

McIntyre: 31 graded, with 18 better
Jones: 59 graded, with 32 better

T207 seems like an undervalued set, compared to E93. I would think that the McIntyre is the tougher card. Granted, the Jones was a better looking card for an SGC 30, but it sold for 4 times as much!

Ron

Ron- I agree the T207 is an undervalued set. I didn't have any problem finding McIntyres when I put the sets together but the Jones WAS a tough card to find in the E93. I stick by my guns on that one, it was the last card I found each time I put together a nice E93 set. Maybe there's been a lot of resubmissions on that one but anytime you can find a nice Davy Jones, you grab it.

tedzan
06-07-2010, 04:28 PM
I reluctantly started collecting this set in the late 1980's, since I picked up a Lowdermilk. I figured that I had it made
by starting off with this "toughie". I was naive, because I quickly discovered that Lewis and Miller were tougher. Any-
how, here are some tidbits I've gathered regarding these three cards......

Lou Lowdermilk.....pitched in 16 games in 1911 for the St Louis Cardinals and only in 4 games in 1912. So, my guess
is that he was short-printed since he had a short career in the majors.

Ward Miller....In 1911 he played with Montreal (Eastern Lge.). Joined the Cubs in 1912 for 86 games and batted .307.
My thinking is that there was a final print run of T207's late in 1912 (as there are quite a few subjects in this set that
started their Major Lge. careers in 1912). Ward Miller would have been printed in last series. And, typical of many last
series press runs, they most likely were short-printed. Here is a 1913 photo featuring Miller and his teammates at the
Polo Grounds......
http://www.flickr.com/photos/library_of_congress/3641570218/

"Irving" Lewis....a big mystery, as he appears no where in the BB books. I think this card is an error. The T207 printer's
must have confused him with Jack (John David) Lewis who played in 18 games for Boston (AL) in Sept 1911. Therefore,
due to his very brief career, they printed very few cards of this "Irving Lewis" guy.

Vic Saier....wasn't tough for me. I lucked out in the early '90s, as I acquired a 40-card lot of T207's that included Saier.

Anyhow, let's hear your thoughts on these T207 toughies, or any others that you found difficult to get ?


TED Z

tedzan
06-07-2010, 06:45 PM
Hey guys,

Anyone out there figure out who the printer was that had barrels of BROWN ink to print the T207's ?


TED Z

Bridwell
06-07-2010, 06:56 PM
Hi Ted,

Keith Olbermann wrote a good article on Irving Lewis and his 'career'. See:

http://research.sabr.org/journals/irving-lewis-the-boston-brave-who-never-was

Ron

Abravefan11
06-07-2010, 08:13 PM
Hey guys,

Anyone out there figure out who the printer was that had barrels of BROWN ink to print the T207's ?


TED Z

Ted - A real shot in the dark but the pack in your initial post reads "H. Ellis & Co. Baltimore."

There was a large lithograph company named A. Hoen & Company based in Baltimore with another factory in Richmond, VA.

A. Hoen printed the covers for cigar boxes. The link below contains the line "In the newer Richmond plant the quality of inks and paper stock, as well as the multi-layer lithography process itself saw great advances, to the point where most Hoen-produced covers and cigar boxes from the 1890s forward still retain their original hues after more than a century. "

http://www.perfessorbill.com/artists/ahoen.shtml

tedzan
06-08-2010, 12:30 PM
Thanks....I hadn't seen that article.

But, it still leaves me wondering about this Irving Lewis card.


TED Z

tedzan
06-08-2010, 12:36 PM
Tim

I have researched A. Hoen & Co. and cannot find anything that suggests that they printed the T207's.
Another Litho. company in Baltimore was the Isaac Friedenwald Co. that produced colorful non-sports
cards at the turn of the Century. But, I could not find any ties indicating that they printed the T207's.


TED Z

tedzan
06-08-2010, 02:33 PM
Your earlier discussion regarding the Anonymous backs is interesting, as it reinforces my speculation
that an independent printing firm produced the T207's.

1st........T207's that have Anonymous backs with "Factory #3 Louisiana" were indeed destined to the
COUPON cigarette factory.
2nd.......T207's that have Anonymous backs with "Factory #25" were most likely destined to the SWEET
CAPORAL cigarette factory in Richmond, Va.

Federal Law required that L & M identify the Factory #'s on the backs of all cards. However, they could
not print their corresponding brand names on the T207 cards, since ATC still owned the Copyright's to
them. This factual is substantiated since American Litho. (ALC), subsequently, issued their T213-2 & 3
sets with the COUPON brand name.
Now consider this, if ALC had printed the T207's, they would have printed these brand names (instead
of leaving them Anonymous).


Recall, the Fall of 1911 ATC divesture ruling assigned ATC and L & M the following tobacco brands........

American Tobacco retained 37 % of the tobacco market including:

Bull Durham
Hassan
Mecca
Sweet Caporal
Tuxedo

Liggett & Myers was given about 28 % of the cigarette market including:

American Beauty
Coupon
DRUMmond
Fatima
Home Run
Imperiales
King Bee
Piedmont
Recruit
Red Man



TED Z

marcdelpercio
06-08-2010, 06:56 PM
That makes a lot of sense Ted. Though I have long suspected the Factory 3 Anons to be an intended Coupon release, it does seem strange that they would use entirely different artwork (and quite possibly another printer as you have suggested) and then revert back to American Litho with previously used artwork just a couple of years later with the T213's. Perhaps L&M was in a transitional phase and legally unable to use American Litho during the divestiture procedings (which would have been occurring just as the T207's were beginning the design phase) but then was able to renegotiate with American Litho in time for the kickoff of the T213-2 release 2 years later.

Bridwell
06-11-2010, 09:00 PM
After working on sets of T206 for 25 years and T207 for the last 2 years, I've noticed some interesting comparisons between the 2 sets.

The most common commons in T207 have 70-80 graded examples (SGC & PSA). The most common commons in T206 have 400+ graded examples (SGC & PSA). Yet those commons sell for about the same price as T206's, in similar condition. I guess there is about 5 times more collector demand for T206's than T207's.

The toughest non-HOF's in T207 have only 20-25 graded. Southern Leaguers in T206 have about 200 graded. The tougher non-HOF's in T206 (such as Dahlen/Brooklyn or Frank Smith/Chi.&Boston have about 180 graded.

So the ratio of tough T207 pop numbers to commons is less than 1:3, while the tough T206's are in greater supply and have a ratio of almost 1:2. Hence, the tougher T207's are surprisingly hard to find, if any condition. They can sell for ridiculous prices, sometimes, while other times can be found at near the common price. The opportunity to find some rare cards at great deals helped draw me to keep working on this set. From the set registries and networking, I can identify about 10 sets, or near sets of T207's. There may be a few other 'raw' sets out there. With a total population of 20-25 of some cards, that leaves very few T207 cards in circulation for collectors to bid on. The 20-25 pop number might even be overstated, since there have been some crossovers occuring in T207's. There seem to be about 20-30 players in T207 that are the toughest ones to find. The toughest of all are from the Broadleaf Class, which includes Broadleaf, Cycle and Anonymous backs.

The most common T207's are all from the Recruit Class, which includes Recruit, Napoleon and Anonymous backs. The 10 cards I researched seem to have high populations of Recruit backs, but hardly any Napoleon backs and I'm thinking there are no Anonymous backs of these. The 10 sample cards are: Devlin, Konetchy, Wilie, H. McIntire, Wolverton, Devore, Simon, Crandall, Knabe and Covington. So it leads to more theories. I'd say that a portion of the Recruit Series cards, perhaps 50 players, were double printed with Recruit backs, but not made with Anonymous backs. I have no idea why. That would help explain why some Recruit Class cards have populations of 25-35, while many others have pops of 60-80. It also seems that the low pop Recruit Class cards are regularly found with Anonymous backs, when they do turn up.

Perhaps T207 collectors can share their thoughts and keep this thread going... As Ted said, it is a very strange set.

Ron R