T206Resource.com - a new T206 site

[Leon]

I received this email a few minutes ago and with the permission of the owners am posting this for them. They put a ton of work into this project and I wish them all the best with it. I am very excited for my fellow collectors and friends. LL


Hi Leon,

As you know Jim Rivera and I, along with help of Art Martineau and Brian Weisner, have been working on a new T206 website. This site will always be a work in progress but we have reached a point where we feel there is enough quality information worthy of sharing.

Though a great deal is known about the T206 set we believe we have been able to break new ground and have presented several aspects of the set in ways not seen before.
This site is a way for us to share with everyone the information and ideas a few of us have been sharing privately for some time. We hope that all collectors of the set will find something useful or of interest on the site.

In an effort to make sure no one that has helped us goes unnoticed, we have included on the site an “About Us” page. This page lists anyone that has contributed directly in some way to the site and new names will be added as additional information is shared.

Jim, Brian, Art and I would like to thank everyone that has helped with this project.

Regards,
Tim Cathey

http://t206resource.com








.
.

[BobbyVCP]

Nicely done.

[Jantz]

Thanks for posting this Leon. I'm headed there now.

Jantz

[Bicem]

AMAZING site, and I don't even collect t206's!

[Mikehealer]

Just briefly scanned the site, looks great. Looks like a lot of very helpful information to all T206 collectors. Nicely done to all involved.

[iggyman]

Ahhh! Thanks! Fantastic site! Great T206 fix! Ahhh! Thanks!

Lovely Day...

[AndyG09]

Great site guys! Doesn't look like there could be anything more 206 on it. Thanks for putting it together!

Best,

Andy

[buymycards]

Very nice - very thorough. Thank you very much. I find it interesting that a link to T213-1 is included.

Rick

[Northviewcats]

Very nice work. I especially like the checklist and the article section. I've got it bookmarked.

Best regards,

Joe

[sreader3]

Hey Tim,

First of all, thanks for the hard work and congratulations on a fine site.

I'm just starting to comb through it. There is some great new stuff--like the discovery that Crawford (Throwing) is unavailable with Sovereign 150. I also really like the Olbermann proofs page--I had never before seen a color version of the Schulte (Front View Chicago On Shirt) proof.

The thesis that the 150 subjects printed with Sovereign 150 were the "original" subjects is also interesting, although I'm not quite sure how that jibes with the fact that the Magie error was corrected before the Sovereign 150 printing.

Best,

Scot

[Gradedcardman]

Looks great !! Kudos to all involved !!

[Zach Wheat]

Wow great looking site guys with some interesting stuff. I am sure I will be back on a regular basis. It is obvious a lot of effort went into this site.

Zach Wheat

[Abravefan11]

The thesis that the 150 subjects printed with Sovereign 150 were the "original" subjects is also interesting, although I'm not quite sure how that jibes with the fact that the Magie error was corrected before the Sovereign 150 printing.



Thanks everyone for the kind words.

Scot - ALC did not consider the Magee a new subject but rather a correction to a current one. Also as you get deeper into the information you will see that they didn't consider same image team changes for Dahlen, Elberfeld, Browne, O'Hara, Demmitt and several others as new subjects.

We as collector's have classified them as two subjects, but the people responsible for the set treated them as updates to a current subject.

[spacktrack]

Fantastic site guys...a great contribution of information to the hobby. The Olbermann section is awesome--didn't know a lot of the info posted there.

Brian

[Ronnie73]

Who should we contact about unconfirmed cards in the checklist? I have a Dick Hoblitzell Cycle 350 and a Paddy Livingstone Tolstoi.

[cfc1909]

You can send confirmations direct to admin@t206resource.com or use the Contact Us section on the site. The Contact Us page has a file upload tab so you can include scans. We do need to see good scans of the front and back in order to confirm cards.

We look forward to hearing from anyone that can confirm cards for the checklist.

[Runscott]

Nice....

Leon - didn't want to share your Matty white cap?

[Leon]

Nice....

Leon - didn't want to share your Matty white cap?

Last time I looked it was there.

[Ronnie73]

Just sent an email using the "contact us". Not sure if the file attach works but if it does, I guess you can only attach one file per email. Also after the email is sent and you get redirected, graphics don't load properly. I'm using Internet Explorer.

[Abravefan11]

Just sent an email using the "contact us". Not sure if the file attach works but if it does, I guess you can only attach one file per email. Also after the email is sent and you get redirected, graphics don't load properly. I'm using Internet Explorer.

Ronnie - Thanks for the scans and for catching that glitch. It was an error with our email software that I have corrected. You can now upload four images per email and the redirect takes you back to the sites Home page.

[Tom S.]

Tim and Jim (et al.),

Great site! Thanks for all of the hard work that went into providing such a valuable resource for the T206 collector. I know I will go to it a lot!

Hopefully the scans of my Billy Sullivan SC 150 Fac. 25 that I sent from the "Contact Us" page made it to you so that the appropriate checklist can be updated.

[Abravefan11]

Hopefully the scans of my Billy Sullivan SC 150 Fac. 25 that I sent from the "Contact Us" page made it to you so that the appropriate checklist can be updated.

Tom - Thank you for the confirmation. The scan was received and the checklist has been updated.

[terjung]

Impressive work and effort! Thank you for sharing this authoritative information with the hobby!

[barrysloate]

Hi Tim and company- want to say this is a beautiful site, and congratulations to all the hard work that went into it. And thank you for including the article Judd Hamlin and I wrote way back in 1995. In those days we knew woefully little about the set. Today, the amount of additional information available is staggering; things collectors know casually were not imagined by us in those pre-internet days. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to add something to your site down the road.

Regards,
Barry

[jp1216]

Barry,

So true. The 'pre-internet days'.... Now information like this is everywhere. It's great that people can still contribute 'new' information 100 years later.

[joeadcock]

Tim(and others)

Nice site. Well set up.

[Big Ben]

Congratulations to everyone involved in putting together a great site! The Olbermann proofs section was a very interesting read!

[dog*dirt]

Congrats to everyone who helped put in the work for this site. Very well done with lots of info to be found all in one place. What I wouldn't give to have that that Collins proof

[ZernialFan]

Very impressive site! Thanks to Tim & Jim and all that contributed. I've got a number of T206's, but I'm still very much in the dark about details and this should help me as a go to place for info.

[Abravefan11]

Hi Tim and company- want to say this is a beautiful site, and congratulations to all the hard work that went into it. And thank you for including the article Judd Hamlin and I wrote way back in 1995. In those days we knew woefully little about the set. Today, the amount of additional information available is staggering; things collectors know casually were not imagined by us in those pre-internet days. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to add something to your site down the road.

Regards,
Barry

Barry - We were very pleased to receive permission to reproduce the VCBC articles. Even though much has been learned about the set since some of the articles were written, they still contain great information and are enjoyable to read. If you're ever interested I would love to talk to you about doing something for the site.

[mrvster]

Congrats Guys!!!

WELL worth the wait.....

thanks for the treatment.....i felt vip the whole time.....:D

Tim,
get my number from Jim and holla sometime.....great work guys:D

Peace

V

[E93]

The site looks great! Thank you for all the hard work you put into it. It definitely raises the hobby understanding of the set to a new level.
JimB

[cfc1909]

Art, Brian and myself have wanted and talked about creating this site for years.

With Tim's knowledge and talent T206 Resource is a reality.

Thanks to all who contributed, especially Rob D.

[aquarius31]

Superb job! It's very thorough and designed very well...thank you!

[teetwoohsix]

I completely love this new site !!! I want to thank Tim, Jim, and everyone else who contributed in making this site and all of the wonderful information you guys provided to us all. The name is very fitting, this is an awesome resource for beginers as well as an excellent point of reference for veteran collectors.

I am so stoked over this, and very appreciative of the project overall- thank you !!!

Sincerely, Clayton

[rebelsart]

I was happy to contribute and glad to see the website is well received. Many thanks to those who worked so hard to get this information together. Enjoy the site!
Art Martineau

[RickGallway]

No ebay rover links?
No t206 displays for sale?
No banners for a network of junk "livetocollect" websites?

I'm in!!

[Brian Weisner]

Hi Guys,

Please take your time and read through the site, as I think Jim and Tim have done an incredible job of explaining how the “T206 set” was printed and distributed. They discovered an easy way of explaining the set in the actual “print groups” which no one thought of before…. While many of us have tracked cards for decades, and identified several patterns and even specific subsets, no one has put the entire set together like Tim and Jim. I won’t go into all of the reasons to create the site, but I will say, that we all felt that the T206 Museum should not be the “go to site” for the T206 set….

Be well Brian

[sreader3]

Hi Tim,

I very much like the breakout checklists by back--that was much needed.

I noticed that you have described the blank back as "not distributed" but have made no similar notation regarding Brown Old Mill Southern. Have you confirmed a factory cut Brown OMS?

Scot

[Abravefan11]

Hi Scot,

Thanks for your question. I know we make mention of the brown Old Mills only being hand cut several places on the site, but let me know if there is somewhere we aren't clear. And to answer your question, no we have never seen a factory cut brown Old Mill.

The following are a couple of excerpts from the site:

Back Scarcity Page
^Old Mill (SL) – Brown & Blank Back
These two backs were not inserted into packs, and both are essentially printers scrap. Some might not consider these necessary for a complete back run, but because of their scarcity and ties to the set, they will remain highly prized by many collectors.

Back Advertisements Page
These cards are printers scrap, were not issued in packs and are all hand-cut.

Print Group 6 Page
These cards essentially were printers scrap and never factory cut or distributed in packages.

Again, please let me know if there is somewhere we weren't clear regarding the brown Old Mills and we'll add the necessary text.

[philliesphan]

Thank you for making this possible!

[Abravefan11]

I noticed that you have described the blank back as "not distributed" but have made no similar notation regarding Brown Old Mill Southern. Have you confirmed a factory cut Brown OMS?

Scot

Scot - I think I figured out the place on the site in question. On the "Backs" page all of the cards printed factory numbers, including the brown Old Mill, are referenced with the exception of the blank back which said "Not Distributed." I changed the blank back description to say "No Factory" so there isn't a conflict.

Let me know if this was it. Thanks for pointing it out.

[sreader3]

Hi Tim,
Yeah, "not distributed" was the source of my confusion. I like the change you made to "no factory". Again, kudos to you, Jim and the others on the site.
Scot

[sportscardpete]

Great site guys!

[Baseball Rarities]

Guys - great site. Thanks for all the hard work that yoiu put into it. What a great resource for the hobby.

[Jay Wolt]

A fantastic site, thanks to all who made it happen!

[DixieBaseball]

Tremendous site guys ! Thank you for your contributions !!

[insidethewrapper]

Great site ! Thanks for all the hard work on this.

I have one question: If I'm at an estate sale and they would have an unopened cigarette pack, how would I know if any baseball cards could be it in ?

Is this information on the site ? Any markings etc I would need to look for.

Thanks

[MVSNYC]

awesome site guys, congrats to all involved!

[Abravefan11]

I have one question: If I'm at an estate sale and they would have an unopened cigarette pack, how would I know if any baseball cards could be it in ?

Is this information on the site ? Any markings etc I would need to look for.

Thanks

We have not put any information regarding the packaging onto the site yet, but we will be in the near future.

The tax stamp on the pack will be the first thing you will look for. This information would tell you if the pack in question could include a baseball card. For more information on how to read the tax stamp Click Here (http://www.baseballandtobacco.com/date.htm)

Once you understand how to date the pack you will know if it falls within the time frame that T206's were inserted into that brand.

Keep in mind that ATC inserted other non sport cards during the time period T206's were produced, like birds and fish, into the same brands as baseball cards.

There are several boards members that have a great deal of knowledge on this subject.

[judsonhamlin]

Okay guys, great site - and i've barely worked through part of it. Like Barry, i might be interested in contributing. Congrats!

[T206.org]

Very well organized and executed, guys!!

[Jason]

Great article section I look forward to more in the future.Thanks for the hard work put in to all involved.

[ChiefBenderForever]

First off congratulations !! If the Ty Cobb back wasn't included in the back run I would've been very dissapointed but it was and is ! Will be an awesome work in progress that will never be complete, again congrats and thank you to all the people who worked and added contributions to this !!

[tedzan]

Tim

A couple of comments......

(1)....Regarding your SOVEREIGN 350-Only checklist, you indicate that Bresnahan (batting) and Downey (fielding) as "confirmed".

Not so !

My research shows that these two subjects are SOVEREIGN 350 "No-Prints".


(2)....I'm quite skeptical of your claim that Crawford (throwing) "was not printed with a SOVEREIGN 150 back". My experience in
completing a SOVEREIGN 402-card set (and since, going for a Master set) indicates that 12 (perhaps more) SOVEREIGN 150/350
subjects were Short-Printed with respect to their SOVEREIGN 150 backs.

For example, the majority of the Wiltse (portrait, no cap) cards are found with the SOVEREIGN 350 back. The SOVEREIGN 150 card
of this subject is rare enough that the SGC pop reports indicate that NONE have been graded. It took me about 5 years to acquire
this one......

<img src="http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt113/zanted86/awiltsesov150sov350.jpg" alt="[linked image]">
<img src="http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt113/zanted86/bwiltsesov150sov350.jpg" alt="[linked image]">


Furthermore, Brian Weisner has already identified a Crawford (throwing) with a SOVEREIGN 150 back in Bill Brown's super-set spreadsheet.

Check it out ?


Regards,

TED Z

[Leon]

As I told the owners of the site I would un-sticky this today, I have done so. I wish them all the best and hope to contribute more info in the future.

[Brian Weisner]

Hi Ted,
The entry on the Super Set is not correct... I own a 350 Sovereign Crawford:

http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q257/hogan6g/jan2010001-4.jpg
http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q257/hogan6g/jan2010002-7.jpg

Be well Brian

[tedzan]

I own a SOVEREIGN 350 Crawford, too.

I have been hunting for a 150 for 6 years now. When I recently found the Wiltse 150 (above scan) after 5 years,
it gave me hope that the Crawford 150 would eventually surface.

What does Art Martineau say on this subject ?


Merry Christmas to you, old friend.

TED Z

[rebelsart]

Hello Ted,
I began working on my T206 Detroit master set in the mid 1970's. Collecting was much slower in those years, but with the internet boom it became easier in the last 15+ years.
In over 30 years of looking I have never seen the T206 Crawford, throwing pose, with the Sovereign 150 back. While I will still search, the no-print lists make me believe this card will not surface with Sovereign 150.

Again, thanks to all who are enjoying the new website.
Art Martineau

[tedzan]

Thanks for the response. While I will continue to search for this Crawford 150, too.......I think you have
pretty well convinced me that it is a No-Print.

Thanks again. And I haven't forgotten that I still owe you a dinner regarding my "A-B-C-COUPON-D" bet.

Will you be at Baltimore this Summer ?


TED Z

[insidethewrapper]

Art: How many Detroit Tigers have you confirmed ? The site indicated 321 different Detroit cards confirmed and 71 possible but not yet confirmed. I was interested in that I'm trying to compile the ultimate Detroit checklist. thanks Mike

[rebelsart]

I have confirmed 330 T206 Detroit front/back combinations (including 10 blank backs). My confirmed list is only cards that I have personally seen.
Art

[ethicsprof]

A very helpful site with much erudition. Thank you.
Since taming the Monster a few years back, i've spent some time seeking original photos which serves as the bases for various cards---not limited to
T206 since I've become a ravenous type collector. I appreciate very much
your photo gallery but was hoping for a bit of a narrative of the photos offered---date,photographer,etc. Is this something you're planning to do or
is the task outside your purview or did I just miss it somehow given my ancient computer skills.
best,
barry

[Abravefan11]

Hi Barry - That's a great idea and something I'm sure we'll consider. Ultimately if there is any information about the set, including information about the photos, we would like to provide as much as possible for those that may be interested. At this early stage in gathering and loading the photos, we have only included the images themselves.

There are many collectors and researches that have a greater focus on one aspect of the set than most. As they continue to contribute their knowledge to the site we will be able to expand the amount of detail about each topic.

Thank you for the suggestion.

[rp12367]

I worked a double today and had a few hours of down time this evening. Spent quite awhile looking at the site. Really nice job, great info, easy to navigate. Congrats on a job (labor of love) well done. Ralph

[Jantz]

Hi Tim

Henry Yee sold this photo last week on Ebay. I agree with Barry, it would be nice if you could add the specs to the photos someday. Nice website!

Clark Griffith Carl Horner c.1903

Jantz

[FrankWakefield]

First and foremost, you guys have done well putting together that site. Many collectors, in years to come, will benefit from that. Thank you.

In looking in the "About Us" section, I see a list of Senior Contributors and another list of Contributors. I looked through there to see if Ted Zanidakis was listed. He's not. And I can envision that he didn't actually contribute to the site. But certainly the site has benefited from, and realistically has used material that should be attributed to Ted, to Scot Reader, to Barry Arnold, and to Lew Lipset, just to name a few. Those guys did some great work on ferreting out the nuances of the white border tobacco cards. And their efforts and work product that was so graciously shared with collectors deserves recognition. Maybe an additional section should be added to the "About Us" section that was styled Acknowledgements, or something like that.

Please consider that.

And thanks again.

[Abravefan11]

Frank - Thanks for your comments.

First let me say, the information on the site concerning the composition of the set, checklists and other research, is the work of the people listed on the About Us page.

The group of us working on the site have great respect for Richard Egan, Lew Lipset, Bill Hietman and many others that have advanced the hobbies knowledge of the T206 set. We have talked about adding a section on the website devoted to just this topic, but it just hasn't happened yet. There is a lot of content people would like to see on the site and we're working all the time to add new material to cover as much possible, but it's going to take time. We are listening and appreciate the feedback.

The "About Us" page is specific to T206Resource.com. When we began the project this page was created because we didn't want there to be any question who was putting out the information. As more content was added, and people began sharing their information and collections, we thought it would be a nice way to say thank you for their contributions to the site. In a few rare instances within the site itself we mention contributors by name, otherwise everyone receives the same acknowledgment whether they share a little or a lot. We believe that this shows the community nature of the site and how when collectors work together it can benefit us all.

We appreciate all of the hard work by those that have come before us, and look forward to the work ahead.

Again thank you Frank and everyone else for your comments.

[FrankWakefield]

Hey Tim.

I see you added Bill Heitman and Richard Egan to the names I mentioned. I agree with their inclusion in some Acknowledgements section. I overlooked them; as I did Jamie Hull and Bill Brown. There are others. And while these guys didn't "contribute" to T206resource, nonetheless their work created a body of information that was a major starting point for you guys. Golly, how many of us have wondered about how much money Scot Reader would have made if he'd sold that great tome of his, rather than throw it out there free. (Thanks, again, Scot!!) My thinking is that some 21st century collector will find that fine site, realize how great it is, and have no idea of those that went before.

Thanks.

Wish all of you safe Holidays.

Frank

[Abravefan11]

Frank,

Bill and Scot both, albeit small, have mentions within the text of the site already. Like I said before we will be chronicling more of the history of the sets researchers as time goes on but it's going to take time to get everything on the site.

We want to cover publications which will include many of the names already mentioned as well as Mark Peavy and others. Rather than just have a list of random names we want to discuss their contributions in some detail.

I know this may not be evident on the surface but none of the previous great work on the sets composition was the bases for ours. We didn't use anyone elses findings as a starting point. We went back to the beginning, cleaned the slate completely, and started with just the confirmed cards and the sets documentation and took a fresh look. This is what allowed us to see the set in a completely new way.

Frank, I appreciate your concern about the recognition of, and respect for, the pioneers of this great set and I assure you they will get their proper due on the site in time.

Have a safe and happy holiday as well.

Tim

[FrankWakefield]

You're right, it's not evident. For example, you have a Super Prints checklist. That term is Scot Reader's creation; evidently you must have started with your 'clean slate' and then arrived at the same term he coined after he had discovered them. T206 isn't a 'clean slate' term...

I just think that the longer that site goes without acknowledgements then the greater the time for some collector who doesn't know any different to find the site and think you guys created all of that from a clean slate. Even if some of the site organizers have gotten crossways with those folks in times past, they still deserve recognition. And the lack of acknowledgements detracts from the veracity and credibility of the site. Which is a shame, because you guys have put together a pretty good thing, there. I'm impressed with it. And as cantankerous as I am that is not something easily done. You guys aren't as ornery as me... so get to work on some Acknowledgements, posthaste, please Sir.

[tedzan]

PLAGIARISM..........
The act of "stealing" a person's hard work and intellectual property, without accrediting this person.

There are many more members of Net54 that you have advertently dismissed, who have contributed their time, effort and expertise over
the past 8 years (or more) on this forum. You can continue to deny that you have not gleaned information from them to form your new
site....but Tim, that "dog does not hunt"....anymore.

There is Scot Reader, Bill Brown, Barry Sloate, Barry Arnold, Frank Wakefield, Jamie Hull, Dan Koochin, Darren Duet, Drew Apoldite, Judson
Hamlin, Jeremy Jones (and more). All of whom, not only have posted meaningful & worthwhile information regarding T206's; but also, other
White-Bordered cards.

Special recognition goes to Scot Reader. For you to exclude Scot's "Inside T206" in the "ARTICLES" section of your site is a really egregious
omission that tells us a lot about where you are coming from.


Furthermore
You claim that your data is yours (and your group's)......however, in your SOVEREIGN 350 checklist you indicate that Downey (fielding) is a
confirmed SOVEREIGN 350 card. Well, when I posted my "FYI....SOVEREIGN" thread, I had inadvertently omitted this subject in my NO-PRINT
list (it has since been added to my NO-PRINT list).

Now tell me....anyone here on Net54....what is the probability of Tim independently replicating this same mistake ?

Virtually impossible......unless Tim (or one of his group) copied my information on these SOVEREIGN 350 cards ? ?


I am continuing to review your checklists. I have found some more errors. You asked for inputs. I have already reported 2 of these errors
to you in an earlier post in this thread. You chose not to respond and that says a lot for your attitude regarding some of us Net54er's.
Who, apparently, you feel that you are "competing" with since you joined this forum (not that many years ago)..


So, right here I am offering.....$100 each.....to any one who can produce these two SOVEREIGN 350 cards that you list as confirmed......

Bresnahan (batting)

Downey (fielding)


TED Z

[ethicsprof]

Please accept the following comments in the spirit of collegiality that is intended. As one who has spent his life in the academic world, I do think that it is a mistake to omit those who have been part of the history of research before your distinguished offerings. I recognize that effort has been made in this direction but needs further work. As you well know, I'm sure, there is a never a blank slate in pure scholarship---the highest accomplishments never arise in vacuo--- so that acknowledging those who have been important to the debate(even those with whom you may have disagreed or parted ways with for critical reasons) is a must. This should always be done as assiduously and comprehensively as possible to match the breadth and depth of what you're now offering as a scholarly contribution.
I used the word 'erudition' to describe your work in an earlier post because I
believe it is scholarly and academic. I do think the omission of key contributors in the history of research, as explicated above, should be revisited and further elucidated.
Again, I do appreciate your erudite gifts to the the field of T206 scholarship
and hope that my discussion is helpful.
all the best,
Barry

[wonkaticket]

PLAGIARISM?

Ted, no disrespect but you have taken information shared with you from folks including me and posted it here as your own or with no mention of sources short of a select few folks for years. I would be careful dropping the plagiarism bomb…people in glass houses you know.

I’m also not going to get into heated debate with you on this either. But if you look back I’m sure you can think of times when you have used someone’s nugget of info when typing out your threads without taking time to mention or call credit to that person for the piece of info re shared.

I think we all can a be a bit guilty of that after all it’s a hobby in which much of the knowledge is word of mouth vs. written.

As for prints and no-prints within Sovereign I’ll let you Tim & Jim hash that out.

John

P.S. To the rest of the guys Barry, Frank, Ted etc. these guys spent a lot of time on this so in the 11th hour begin busting chops on some names you feel they need to add is silly IMO. In the end it's their site they could have as easily listed no names like Chans site. I'm also not taking this stance because my name is listed Tim & Jim can drop my name I could care less still a good site. All I care about is collecting cards having fun and no scammers.

[danmckee]

So.. How's the weather? It is raining here in Baltimore.

[wonkaticket]

It's always sunny in Philadelphia Dan, thanks for asking. :)

[Mikehealer]

Merry Christmas everyone.

[danmckee]

Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas to you Mike! Is Healer really your last name or is that your profession? I may need your services. Dan.

[Jaybird]

It's a testament to the quality of the site that people are so anxious to get their names up there. C'mon guys, let's just let the site develop a little bit, add corrections/contributions when they can and just let it brew and steep.

A few weeks ago this site didn't exist. Now everyone is fighting over what should and shouldn't be on there. Nothing on the internet is gospel. I think any person surfing the internet realizes that the work of a website is based on the experiences and information of the authors. THERE IS ALWAYS A POINT OF VIEW.

I disagree with the fact that everyone is a rube, and when presented with misinformation or fact, doesn't know which is right and which is wrong. People make up their own minds and aren't so easily swayed by a website. To assume that everyone takes every morsel from a website to be gospel and not the work of humans is really putting yourself on a much higher plane than everyone else.

This is a general statement but one just meant to say, let's enjoy the hobby, let the authors of this website develop at their own pace and filter and sift the information as they wish. It is theirs to do as they wish.

If you want to start a T206ResourceHaters.com, I'm sure the name is available (for a fee).

[Sterling Sports Auctions]

PLAGIARISM?

P.S. To the rest of the guys Barry, Frank, Ted etc. these guys spent a lot of time on this so in the 11th hour begin busting chops on some names you feel they need to add is silly IMO. In the end it's their site they could have as easily listed no names like Chans site. I'm also not taking this stance because my name is listed Tim & Jim can drop my name I could care less still a good site. All I care about is collecting cards having fun and no scammers.

I really have to second this point. This site was put together by these people and can choose the content and contributors they feel are warranted. This is a great resource and it didn't take long to get attacked here. Enjoy the site for what it is. you can always start your own and put your own contributors.

That being said, great site guys & Happy Holidays to all,

Lee

[sportscardpete]

Kind of sad how much crap they are getting for creating the site.

Great job guys, again. Love all the articles as well, especially the Olbermann/Doyle story.

[Mikehealer]

Happy Holidays and Merry Christmas to you Mike! Is Healer really your last name or is that your profession? I may need your services. Dan.

Sorry Dan, it's just my name. Maybe a good bartender will do the trick.
Take care, Mike

[sox1903wschamp]

Thank you. Nice Site.

[Ericc22]

Just want you to know I really appreciate this site - what a great resource. Thanks for putting it up and thanks to all for creating it. Looking forward to seeing the site develop.

[DaveW]

Wow! What a great site. It must have been a lot of work to put together.
Just one suggestion:
- Only some of the pictures (in the proofs gallery) have the T206Resources.com
overprint on them. Why is that? Shouldn't they all have that to protect the
images from being stolen (and appearing on EBay someday)? I was able
to copy an image from one of the galleries to my computer easily. I think that
there are other ways to protect the images also.

[insidethewrapper]

Great site. Like the authors of the site said, this is a work in progress and will be updated and updated for years. It 's great and I think everyone wants the most accurate information available and I think this site will deliver.

The site has just been born, let's let it grow up. It takes time and errors will be made.

[Gradedcardman]

WOW !! I get under the weather for a couple of days and BOOOOOM !!! As a long standing collector of this incredible set I want to thank everyone involved from the early years of collecting to today. All of you have added alot of information over the years and I thank you all. I am sure we will continue to find out more about this set as time goes on thanks to the continuous efforts of us all. I hope one day to be able to contribute to the collecting of this set to my fellow hobbyists.

Happy Holidays !!

[RickGallway]

PLAGIARISM..........
The act of "stealing" a person's hard work and intellectual property, without accrediting this person.

Envy (also called invidiousness) is best defined as a resentful emotion that "occurs when a person lacks another's (perceived) superior quality, achievement, or possession and either desires it or wishes that the other lacked it."

Spray some Windex on your wounds and get over it Ted!

[FrankWakefield]

I praised the site... it's good. it's useful. I thanked them. I didn't sling crap at it, I'm not envious, and I do care about the weather in Baltimore.

But notwithstanding the 'clean slate' claim, there should be acknowledgements to Mr. Egan and his list, Mr. Hietman and his Monster, Mr. Lipset and volume 3 of his Encyclopedia, Scot Reader and his Inside T206, the massive collecting, collating, and information sharing of Ted Z, and others, Mr. Arnold, Mr. Sloate, there are more... The guys that put that site together have feuded with some of those that deserve recognition. The makers of that fine site should acknowledge what went before, and failing to do that they detract from their own site.

I don't need mention there. But I have come to regret selling some cards to some of the folks associated with the site. And I still say it's a good site. Thanks again, guys, for putting that together. And if me thinking that has some of you thinking I'm silly, that's fine with me. Maybe silly me should cut and paste the entire Net54 Vintage Pre-War baseball card site, cut out your various names, and create a book about old ball cards. No need to attribute anything to anyone, evidently.

[Runscott]

I praised the site... it's good. it's useful. I thanked them. I didn't sling crap at it, I'm not envious, and I do care about the weather in Baltimore.

But notwithstanding the 'clean slate' claim, there should be acknowledgements to Mr. Egan and his list, Mr. Hietman and his Monster, Mr. Lipset and volume 3 of his Encyclopedia, Scot Reader and his Inside T206, the massive collecting, collating, and information sharing of Ted Z, and others, Mr. Arnold, Mr. Sloate, there are more... The guys that put that site together have feuded with some of those that deserve recognition. The makers of that fine site should acknowledge what went before, and failing to do that they detract from their own site.

I don't need mention there. But I have come to regret selling some cards to some of the folks associated with the site. And I still say it's a good site. Thanks again, guys, for putting that together.

Well-said, Frank.

(edited to remove my comments which added nothing to the conversation that hasn't already been said).

[tedzan]

There is no "envy" regarding this new T206 site on my part. If you'd bother to read thru some of these posts you would catch my initial response to
this site at post #55 ........

" Quite a cool site, well done....and, very user-friendly. "


It appears that you are a newbie on Net54; therefore, you most likely are unaware of the year-long "bashing" towards me on this forum by Tim & Jim.
Telling everyone that my prior research regarding T206 cards is fraught with errors. When this same research has been lauded by most on this forum
for the past 7 years.

ENVY....that's a nasty 4-letter word that best describes Tim & Jim to a tee.

So, now I discover that this new site has errors in its checklists and I dare to bring this to their attention.

Well look Rick, have you ever heard the expressions......

Turn-about is fair play

Or perhaps......

What goes around, comes around


Next time, before you post what you did, try to be more informed. Instead of jumping to unfounded conclusions.

And,for now, I will ignore your subtle ethninc slur in that last line of yours.


TED Z

[batsballsbases]

First let me state Nice Job guys on the site. As a non collector of t206s it was great to see something like that put together. I loved to look at all the info that was placed there and the site will continue to evolve as more information becomes available. But really guys this is why many of us have stopped posting . The stink some of you make about who should get credit,who should be mentioned,whos horn needs to be blown! Jees cant you just give credit where credit is due!. Then we start with Plagiarism! Some of you are grown men that act like 5 year olds. Like it was stated by someone else in one of the posts if you want credit (or think you need ego boosting ) start your own site. Then you can put your name on it in big red capital letters.

[Runscott]

Edited to remove my comments, which were useless. My apologies - I was bored.

[batsballsbases]

And you know what scott I could really care less . Here have a rolly eye for your trouble:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[atx840]

PLAGIARISM..........
So, right here I am offering.....$100 each.....to any one who can produce these two SOVEREIGN 350 cards that you list as confirmed......
TED Z

Do fake scans count? I kid, I kid. Happy Holidays everyone!

Here is a xmas tree made out of backs.

http://i.imgur.com/Yp4Lw.jpg

[wonkaticket]

Great tree card image!

[tiger8mush]

haha, awesome Chris!

[FrankWakefield]

NICE TREE, Chris. It brought me a smile. Thanks.

[Runscott]

And you know what scott I could really care less . Here have a rolly eye for your trouble:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Me either - I have removed my comments. Good luck learning about T206's - you have the only resource you need, regardless of where the information came from.

[fmcjfc]

Great start to your site. I'm glad to see the world is 1 step closer to a virtual monster. Any thoughts of attaching scans to the checklist(s)? It would be fun to watch the superset develop from both a completeness and quality standpoint as new and/or "better" examples poured in from the T206 community.

[Jantz]

Photo taken by Louis Van Oeyen (from "A Portrait of Baseball Photography")

Sold by MastroNet Auctions in 2004


Jantz

[atx840]

Neat large poster, frame has Sovereign Cigarettes on it.

http://i.imgur.com/w5HLG.jpg

[Runscott]

Photo taken by Louis Van Oeyen (from "A Portrait of Baseball Photography")

Sold by MastroNet Auctions in 2004


Jantz

Thanks Jantz - that's one I don't have yet on my site.

[tonyo]

Do fake scans count? I kid, I kid. Happy Holidays everyone!

Here is a xmas tree made out of backs.

http://i.imgur.com/Yp4Lw.jpg

Chris,

I was just scrolling through this thread.....skimming, not reading, contemplating the psychology involved in the "fued" when I scrolled across your tree and BAM a big smile .......................

LOVE IT and thanks!

a good segue for me......logging off and moving on to Christmas Eve festivities............

Happy Holidays everyone!

[teetwoohsix]

It's a testament to the quality of the site that people are so anxious to get their names up there. C'mon guys, let's just let the site develop a little bit, add corrections/contributions when they can and just let it brew and steep.

A few weeks ago this site didn't exist. Now everyone is fighting over what should and shouldn't be on there. Nothing on the internet is gospel. I think any person surfing the internet realizes that the work of a website is based on the experiences and information of the authors. THERE IS ALWAYS A POINT OF VIEW.

I disagree with the fact that everyone is a rube, and when presented with misinformation or fact, doesn't know which is right and which is wrong. People make up their own minds and aren't so easily swayed by a website. To assume that everyone takes every morsel from a website to be gospel and not the work of humans is really putting yourself on a much higher plane than everyone else.

This is a general statement but one just meant to say, let's enjoy the hobby, let the authors of this website develop at their own pace and filter and sift the information as they wish. It is theirs to do as they wish.

If you want to start a T206ResourceHaters.com, I'm sure the name is available (for a fee).

+1 Well said.

[teetwoohsix]

You're right, it's not evident. For example, you have a Super Prints checklist. That term is Scot Reader's creation; evidently you must have started with your 'clean slate' and then arrived at the same term he coined after he had discovered them. T206 isn't a 'clean slate' term...

I just think that the longer that site goes without acknowledgements then the greater the time for some collector who doesn't know any different to find the site and think you guys created all of that from a clean slate. Even if some of the site organizers have gotten crossways with those folks in times past, they still deserve recognition. And the lack of acknowledgements detracts from the veracity and credibility of the site. Which is a shame, because you guys have put together a pretty good thing, there. I'm impressed with it. And as cantankerous as I am that is not something easily done. You guys aren't as ornery as me... so get to work on some Acknowledgements, posthaste, please Sir.

Hi Frank-

No disrespect, but they fully acknowledged Scot coining the term "super-print" before they even made the site available to the public.

Sincerely, Clayton

[FrankWakefield]

And then they started with a clean slate and came up with it all on their own for their site.


I know some of the contributors on their About Us page. Not all, some. The way things are at the moment, if I were on there I'd ask that my name be removed until an acknowledgement page is added. Because I know enough of what has happened, that a few folks have been omitted because of feuding, and other folks deservedly should be listed.

What they've put up there is a really good resource. But after looking at the About Us page it is obvious to me what they're doing. Maybe they should shut down the About Us page completely until they put up accurate acknowledgements, too.

As it now is, in looking at the contributors, I know that there are some folks listed who did very little compared to some folks who've been left off. All I did was call them on it. Clean slate...

[Sterling Sports Auctions]

Just out of curiosity, should the other site be acknowldged because they had T206 info but seemed to only use it for profit and skamming fellow collectors? Info was there but there is no cry to acknowledge them.

Yes, I am one that got acknowledged for my minor contribution but really don't think that there was/is anyone that had more research or knowledge on the Cycle 460 backs. That was my contribution, I gave it willing and they chose to add my name to the contributor, I was happy to share it the info whether acknowledged or not.

If you look back at other T206 research threads you will find information obtained thru information that was previously known and not acknowledged or if it was it was because they were prodded to as you will see by edits in the threads. Why was there no uproar over this?

The owners put up the site and saw fit who they felt contributed to there site and final product. To me this site is a great place to find consolidated info on the T206 set and I know it will be used frequently by myself.

Lee

[Runscott]

.................

[Runscott]

.................

[Abravefan11]

Scott - The Flick image was sent to me by a contributor who stated in the email that he had shared the same image with you as well several years ago. The image was not taken from your site and edited. I would never do that without your permission.

[Runscott]

.................

[Abravefan11]

Scott - I told the person that submitted the image that I didn't want the card included and they edited it and sent it back to me. Whether right or wrong it was presented to me as being an image that they shared with you, and not your image they had taken and sent to me.

If it was their image to share with the both of us than I don't see an issue with us both having a copy on our sites. If it was your image that they sent to me, I will take it down immediately.

[Runscott]

.................

[Abravefan11]

Scott - I'd be happy to chat with you off the forum via PM, email or a phone call. I'm easy to get int touch with and easy to get a long with.

We did contact you prior to the site going live because we felt like you may want to be a part of what was happening. I'm sorry you feel like the timing wasn't perfect, but we did make the effort to reach out to you, and tell you if you were interested we would love to work with you.

[Runscott]

.................

[Abravefan11]

Scott- I'm sorry you see the site as being something conceived with such ill intentions. Our goal was to build a place where collectors of the T206 set can go and have as much information as possible available to them about the set for them to enjoy. If collector's want to participate we welcome that. If they prefer to work on their own site, post their information here, or share what they have or know somewhere else, that's great and we wish them all the best. The more information the hobby has available the better for us all.

[Runscott]

.................

[barrysloate]

Scott- why did you delete all your posts?

[T206.org]

The more information the hobby has available the better for us all.

Amen, Tim. :)

[FrankWakefield]

Runscott didn't delete all of his posts, Tim. 17, 90, 93, and 103 are still there. And I think you know why he did it. Leon will contact him about it, ban him from the site for a while, possibly, so he might not be able to answer your question.

No doubt you guys have been busy during the holidays. Hopefully, you're done just talking about adding a section about the folks "that have advanced the hobbies (sic) knowledge of the T206 set", and you're now ready to actually add a section to your site as you mentioned previously. Please post here once you've done that. That would clue me in to realizing that it is time again for me to visit your fine site. Thanks.

[Leon]

Runscott didn't delete all of his posts, Tim. 17, 90, 93, and 103 are still there. And I think you know why he did it. Leon will contact him about it, ban him from the site for a while, possibly, so he might not be able to answer your question.

No doubt you guys have been busy during the holidays. Hopefully, you're done just talking about adding a section about the folks "that have advanced the hobbies (sic) knowledge of the T206 set", and you're now ready to actually add a section to your site as you mentioned previously. Please post here once you've done that. That would clue me in to realizing that it is time again for me to visit your fine site. Thanks.

While I am obviously mindful of the board, as one forum member said some time ago "every situation is different." IF someone deletes 5-6 of their posts out of a thread I think that is their prerogative. If they start deleting all of their posts they have ever posted on the board (and it is a very large amount in lots of threads), then it starts messing the board up in a big way. I am not so good with that. Scott (hi Scott) deleted a handful of his 750+ posts, only in one thread. I don't see that as too much cause for an alarm. From knowing many aspects of this situation I can safely say I am just glad I am not in the middle of the brouhaha. (love that word) :) Now back to collecting.....

[carrigansghost]

Back to collecting..............My New Year's resolution. Thanks Leon.

Rawn

[Angyale]

If anyone needs to know where the Elmer Flick image that is on Scott Forrest's website came from, please email me at eangyal@roadrunner.com and i will fill in the missing details. There seems to be some missing credits on that website as well. Thanks,

Eric Angyal

[Edwolf1963]

I'm late to the party here but wanted to send my congratulations and thanks to those who put this site together. I read thru with great interest this morning and loved it! Thank you again for your time and efforts in putting this together!

[wonkaticket]

Runscott didn't delete all of his posts, Tim. 17, 90, 93, and 103 are still there. And I think you know why he did it. Leon will contact him about it, ban him from the site for a while, possibly, so he might not be able to answer your question.

No doubt you guys have been busy during the holidays. Hopefully, you're done just talking about adding a section about the folks "that have advanced the hobbies (sic) knowledge of the T206 set", and you're now ready to actually add a section to your site as you mentioned previously. Please post here once you've done that. That would clue me in to realizing that it is time again for me to visit your fine site. Thanks.

That would clue me in to visit your site....oh brother give me a break.

Yes guys please please hurry and do what Frank asks so he can visit your site, without Frank being able to visit and be happy with what you have done we are in a holding pattern. :rolleyes: After all having Frank Wakefields kudos means everything in this hobby in case you didn't know that.

If you don't do what he says there's a very good chance he continues to cry and moan and kick his feet and hold his breath in cyberspace all by himself.....wait now that I think about it who cares.

Frank stop crying about what others have done or the way they did it and do something yourself already. How about make your own site or sit on your hands already.

John

[teetwoohsix]

I've already said it but want to say it again- thank you all for putting this wonderful site together. This truly is a work of art, I am blown away.

To have all of this information at your fingertips, all condensed into this site is amazing !!! I appreciate it, and feel the owners and everyone who contributed directly to this project should be commended.

This accomplishment, and gift to all of us collectors, shouldn't be overshadowed by who is or isn't on an "about us" page. It is really disappointing to see anything negative come about in a thread , that in my opinion, is a reason to be celebrating ( at least for those of us who collect T206's ). So, I just wanted to express my gratitude and appreciation- THANK YOU !!!!!!

Sincerely, Clayton

[carrigansghost]

Starting to miss the Brucii.

Rawn

[RickGallway]

This thread needs more... Cowbell Windex!

[FrankWakefield]

Golly, John. Did my persistence touch a nerve? Sorry.

The 'resource' site has used the work of others, notwithstanding their clean slate position. The 'resource' folks have slighted a few folks that they've feuded with. It isn't necessary for the 'resource' folks to make peace, but it is only fair and forthright for an acknowledgement to be made. Especially after claiming that it's all their own stuff... In a roundabout way Tim indicated acknowledgements had been discussed, and might be forthcoming. That is what I'm after.

But then, John, maybe I didn't touch a nerve after all. Instead, maybe you just attack my persistence as a way to discredit the message itself. The message is valid, can't assail that, so roll out the whine and crybaby stuff. Well done.

And the Windex reference is a bit offensive and insensitive. We can do better than that.

[mrvster]

Hey guys....here comes the scales again:D

please bear with me....and read ....



I just want to start off by saying, the site is great for all and our hobby alike....we all need a joint effort and contribute to the knowledge of t206 and unlock some of the many, many , many mysteries as we all know, which many of you have already...this is obvious to all the professional collectors here....stop any bad information and corruption that tarnish our hobby and turn new collectors "off"....we all make mistakes...lets learn from them..

I am really don't know where to start, but i am thankful and blessed to be able to pick up a few cards in t206, which pretty much is an obsession as some of you know me, this set is all i collect......i am humble to some of our veterans here and would like to thank all of you have contributed to my knowledge of the set...directly and indirectly...


i have made some great friends over the years, and have enjoyed my collecting these beauties like you wouldn't beleive.....i kept to myself for many years and just quietly looked for my cards.....like i said, over the years, and ebay handles actually be able to identify some of the guys you bid against for years , and actually could put a voice or a a face to some of these guys....or i shall say gentleman(it's the jersey in me):o

Leon has set up a great forum where we can all get together, and that's net 54 which john drekker(btw-keep up with the writing john, your articles are pure nostalgia;))...got me hooked on in 1999 i beleive and i am lurking on this thing constantly.....:)


The collectors who i consider close my "dudes" that i care more than cardboard about include(and i am leaving out alot)....John Drekker, Jim Rivera, Jantz Mike Healer, Jamie Blundel, Hank Levy, Dan Allread, Mac Wubben, Brian Weisner, Art M. , John M(wonks), Erick Summers, Turner Engle, Dan Mckee, Scott F., Trae R., Chris Browne, Clayton Jessup charlie, honestly i am leaving out so many ......:o


...i collect, rarely sell, and am not looking to make money off anybody, and i am sure everyone here can verify this, so i am giving as much of a non-bias opinion as truly possible.....although some of my "dudes" are owners/major contributors to the site....

Barry Sloate, Frank Wakefield, Ted Z., Barry Arnold, scot reader and so many more veterans i only chat on the board with deserve so much as they have contributed much beyond measure...



Listen....


Scott Forrest...is one of the , i consider, the man on t206.....he is one of the guys who got me hooked on the freaks many years ago along with Art M.(ask them:))....and i passed up several freaks he gave me an opp to buy and i didn't and am still trying to get them!(downey overprint, dorner double stamp) just 2 name two......


I was excited to see scott come back, so SCOTT .......you know you are the man....i feel sadened by what i was reading......scott you have done so much, i'm sure all of this is a huge misunderstanding.....



Tim i don't chat with at all, but Jim is my boy, if he says Tim intentions are there, and what i have read of tim he has been dead on(except my chance sov 460 has fact magenta all over it!!!gotta see it)i support the site 100 %....and i know everyone who deserves credit will be given it.....in some way, because we are part of t206 advancement and the hobby...


the site is still brand new.....i am sure we will all have a page at some point, or showcased collections....the major early and latter works will im sure be well spelled out at some point.......these guys imo are only there for one passion............T206.............i have already as, im sure many, our suggestions....and do not claim to have re-invented the wheel

LET IT BE KNOWN- i want no credit because i have contributed nothing directly to the collective info, i am just a freak:o




The monster causes many to become greedy.....when large bucks and ego comes into play....sometimes we get hurt and THAT SUX!


VETERANS, NEWBIES, And Haters/lovers....


T206 interest is only gaining momentum every year and i don't see interest dwindling......egos aside.....i know Tim and Jim will always do the right thing, and looks like they have already....lets still be able to debate, but stop and malicous attacks on each other....it's going to be a new year.....let's ALL advance the set/hobby and i'm sure one day we will all be credited for the true dissections of this set...these guys were just excited to get it out there, i can see why....let's all give them a chance to include all that im sure will be added at some point....Scott....we love your freak information/images....they are what got me hooked....i love the first back stamp i bought off you Killian pitching.....so, you know i respect and you are will always be given props....



PHEW:D


THANKS FOR LISTENING...



Respectfully,



John vanderbeck

[wonkaticket]

Frank yawn, you would have to matter to me to touch a nerve. No worries no nerve touched over here. Please keep on chatting love seeing a grown man cry and moan like a little kid who hasn't got his way who knows perhaps the site owners will breakdown and take the much needed guidance and direction of the Great Frank Wakefield. :D

Once again perhaps you can spend all this energy of yours and make your own site the way you see fit just an idea vs. telling everyone else how to run their site over and over and over.

John

[teetwoohsix]

Great post John V. :D

It was also great to see Jantz & Mike Healer added to the "about us" page- congrats guys !!!

Sincerely, Clayton

[Runscott]

Frank stop crying about what others have done or the way they did it and do something yourself already. How about make your own site or sit on your hands already.

John

John, you are missing the point - we AGREE with you that it is a great site.

Frank has been very clear in making his point, and like me, had to repeat his points in various forms in hopes that you guys would read and understand. You have not.

Frank has done a LOT of things himself, as have many of the rest of us . Those ideas and that research is for the most part now residing on T206Resource.com, and in the future everything T206 will certainly be funneled through that site, for the new owners of everything T206 to do with as they wish. I guess that's good...if you are them. The rest of us will see our contacts begin to dry up, as I already have - T206 origin photos already now go to Tim. That's fine - I'm Joe's Feed Supplies to Tim's Wal-Mart, which is the way things go. I completely understand. As far as the rest of 'their' site information goes - it is FINE to publish the work of others, but only if you acknowledge this. Gazillions of people have successfully pulled off the acknowledgement problem. If you want an example, look at my 'T206 Errors' article and the bylines, or at the acknowledgements on my 'T206 Origins' page. It is simple....if you want to do it. And hey, most of you consider me an a-hole - well, if an a-hole can do it, a saint like Tim can certainly pull it off.

Those of you who have published nothing, created no websites, contributed very little to T206 research (not you, John, but the others who are dropping the 'envy' bomb) - yeah, I get how you have no complaints about the work of others being gathered by these guys. Why would you? Sit back and enjoy.

We will continue to enjoy this hobby, despite the unnecessary drama (some of which I am guilty of contributing to). This will blow over and in a few weeks I will give Jim a call, and probably Art, and see what their thoughts are - pleasant discussions expected, as always. I'm really kind of stunned that they are involved in this project with Tim - they could have certainly done it without him.

And Tim, before you build another straw man for use in dancing around my comments, please note that I won't even do you the courtesy of reading them. You wore me out with your tap shoe routine last night.

[mrvster]

Clayton....got ur email!!

Guys like you make this a great hobby:D

[Runscott]

Scott Forrest...is one of the , i consider, the man on t206.....he is one of the guys who got me hooked on the freaks many years ago along with Art M.(ask them:))....and i passed up several freaks he gave me an opp to buy and i didn't and am still trying to get them!(downey overprint, dorner double stamp) just 2 name two......


I was excited to see scott come back, so SCOTT .......you know you are the man....i feel sadened by what i was reading......scott you have done so much, i'm sure all of this is a huge misunderstanding.....

.........

John vanderbeck

John, I very much appreciate your kind words.

Do not worry about this - you illustrated very nicely just how many passionate T206 collectors are interacting with one another on this board, and how different our collecting habits are. My expertise is very limited compared to Tim, Art, Brian, John, Ted, Jim, yourself, Barry, and almost everyone else you mentioned, but thanks anyway.

When I rejoined the collecting world, I swore I would not get involved in this stuff, but I felt the need to support Frank, as the words he was saying were clear, true, and many people who I have never even heard of were jumping his butt like hyenas on a wounded zebra. This kind of made me sick. If that crap had not been posted here, I would never have said a word about Tim's less-than-admirable information-usurpation habit.

The newbies jumping to suckle on the T206Resource sow was not a surprise, but I seriously hope that those who have been attacking Frank, etc., end up with hind tit.

I am not privvy to the John (Wonka)/Frank feud, but I like both of them and I hope it gets resolved.

No, John - it was not a misunderstanding. This was a well-executed information coup. But you know what? It's just cardboard. Really old, cool cardboard, but no babies are dying.

[FrankWakefield]

Nice, John V. Thanks for that, and safe holidays to you.

John M, once you hammer in the point about me being a cry baby, and that you yawn and care not about what I think or say... then let's get to the point about origin of material and acknowledgements. That's the point. What about that? And then, once you explain about how the 'resource' site needn't acknowledge anything, after that, then you can recount the times I've called you names and stuff like you've just done to me. By doing that, how does that make your position reasonable?

[wonkaticket]

Never called you names Frank just said I care not about your thoughts. I think you sound like a guy with sour grapes here and I disagree with your constant moaning. We get it you think they need to add names you have said that we get it. Why do you need to say this over and over?

John

[mrvster]

Scott and Frank, and safe and happy holidays to you !!.....your welcome......:)

I agree with Scott, John and Frank hope you guys settle.....John call me;)


Scott,

you really got me going with that error article you wrote on the errors.....and i can't thank you enough!!;) most of my error collection you are responsible for giving me inspiration.

You are an intergral part of t206, period. BAR NONE!! your name doesn't even need to be in print to have collectors know the invaluable insight you have given over the years...i am grateful....and hope this all gets settled....i really do...like i said, jim r is my boy and i know he always does the right thing...if i couldn't count on that dude, id quit collecting these:D



when i saw you posting again, i was really stoked!!btw....i love your avatar! i want that card;) but, chris loves it aLso, i have really come to like chris browne..so he has first dibs, but can i next??:p


OUR VETERANS WILL NOT BE FORGOTTEN, JUST CREDITED WHERE DUE!!! I'M SURE:)



Scott,

please continue on your t206 error research if you can...;)


would be nice to read your website!! we won't forget about the mom and pops, that's what built our great country...



Peace


Johnny V

[slidekellyslide]

I discovered the image for Roy Ellam's T206 card about 5 years ago.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=82987&highlight=connellsville

I no longer own this postcard and can't recall who I sold it to, but just wanted to let you know that this image is out there.

[carrigansghost]

I like the website, they list the Carrigan as a possibility in a CB back and I'm good with that,(still a $100 reward for one to purchase in any condition). Any resources for collectors is great and can only be looked apon as another tool for us to use.

Rawn

[ethicsprof]

Johnny V., I must say, your posts typically bring a most appreciative smile to my face, and it has happened once again. I am grateful for your balancing of the issues and fairness to all those involved. I am also very grateful for the gadfly nature of Frank W., Scott F., and Ted Z. who are advocates for what I also believe is a fair request as I said in my earlier post, viz. a proper accounting of those involved in the history of research. Thank you,gentlemen. You give me much hope in the future of Net 54 vintage scholarship in the new year.
all the best,
Barry

[mrvster]

Barry,
:D
Kudos, and once again spoken like a true scholar and gentleman:D.....that's why we need to look to the veterans and their insight, wisdom, and experience with this set.....every day we learn something new, and i always read what you have to say on anything t206.....we are all apart of it,especially you, and you bring a smile to my face when i can read that!!;) i'm a libra, and happen to love all you guys....:D

Jim and Tim will do the right thing i'm sure...like i said, i can speak for jim and i'm sure tim is a class act also!!


Peace

[atx840]

Johnny V, you rock!

[ethicsprof]

You are most kind!!
Many,many thanks.
and Happy New Year to You!!
and ,of course, PEACE

best,
barry

[mrvster]

Chris and Barry...


I put you two on my t206 "master" collectors.....;)

Both of you rock.:D

Peace my bros

[atx840]

649 proofs, seems like a larger percentage of those shown/known are from this subset.

http://i.imgur.com/XR4tD.jpg

[tiger8mush]

A question about t206resource.com. I see how to see all players possible for a specific back, but is it possible to select a player (Chase pink, for example) and see on one page which backs are confirmed? Perhaps it was mentioned or right in front of my face but I can't seem to find it on the site. If its not available, no problem just wondering. Thanks!
Rob
:)

[slidekellyslide]

A question about t206resource.com. I see how to see all players possible for a specific back, but is it possible to select a player (Chase pink, for example) and see on one page which backs are confirmed? Perhaps it was mentioned or right in front of my face but I can't seem to find it on the site. If its not available, no problem just wondering. Thanks!
Rob
:)

As someone who would not try and put a set together, but would really like to collect all the back variations for one player this would be exactly what I am looking for as well. Great question Rob!

[glchen]

I think that would be interesting to see also. For example, if I wanted to see all possible backs for Red Cobb, and also all possible backs for all four variations of Cobbs (probably more difficult).

One other thing I noticed was that for the Sweet Cap 150 No 649, the HOFers aren't marked.

[Abravefan11]

As someone who would not try and put a set together, but would really like to collect all the back variations for one player this would be exactly what I am looking for as well. Great question Rob!

That is being worked on right now and will be available. Until then the least labor intensive method is:

1) Determine the print group a subject is in. (Example: Johnny Bates, Group 1)

2) Go to that page on the Index (Group 1 (http://t206resource.com/Print%20Group%201.html)) and at the top all the possible backs for that print group are listed.

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-F9rfDju5-38/TvoWOrjXvyI/AAAAAAAAFhQ/USpWNjg5BwQ/s841/Print%252520Group%2525201%252520%252528150-350%252529%252520-%252520Mozilla%252520Firefox%25252012272011%252520 20145%252520PM.jpg

3) Go through the brand checklist for that subjects possible backs and determine what has been confirmed, is possible or is believed to be a no-print.

I hope this helps. It will be much simpler in the future.

[tiger8mush]

thanks Tim!

BTW, i should get some acknowledgements or accolades or a trophy or something for submitting an improvement request right? If I don't see my name listed, there will be hell to pay!
:)

[Runscott]

thanks Tim!

BTW, i should get some acknowledgements or accolades or a trophy or something for submitting an improvement request right? If I don't see my name listed, there will be hell to pay!
:)


Here's your trophy:

http://anacraftyone.whencreativityknocks.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/WCKCJTroll.jpg

[tiger8mush]

eek, I'm a troll!

[Runscott]

eek, I'm a troll!

I don't know, are you?

a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4]

[tiger8mush]

I don't know, are you?

a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4]

you gave me a troll trophy, so I assume thats what you were insuating. If you meant differently by it then I'll stand corrected!

[TexasLeaguer]

If anyone needs to know where the Elmer Flick image that is on Scott Forrest's website came from, please email me at eangyal@roadrunner.com and i will fill in the missing details. There seems to be some missing credits on that website as well. Thanks,

Eric Angyal

Scott I'm surprised you haven't responded to this post at all, especially considering your strong position on attribution earlier in this thread.

-R0SS C. BEEVER$

[Runscott]

Scott I'm surprised you haven't responded to this post at all, especially considering your strong position on attribution earlier in this thread.

I missed that post, but I will recommend that you stay out of stuff where you are clueless.

Eric must have sent me the photo originally. If you look at my page, you'll see credits everywhere. Quite obvious that I have not intentionally left anyone out.

But, yeah I get it - you want to get the flame going. Flame on buddy.

[Leon]

Scott I'm surprised you haven't responded to this post at all, especially considering your strong position on attribution earlier in this thread.

I have dog in this fight but you probably need to put your full name out here per the rules....thanks

[Runscott]

If anyone needs to know where the Elmer Flick image that is on Scott Forrest's website came from, please email me at eangyal@roadrunner.com and i will fill in the missing details. There seems to be some missing credits on that website as well. Thanks,

Eric Angyal

Please, Eric, just post all the secret details. I'm sure it's movie-worthy.

Anyone else?

I mean, while we're at it - let's just have an all-out virtual rumble.

What other credits am I missing, other than yours?

Once again, I've gotten a former friend all butt-hurt because I voiced my opinion of Saint Tim. Yeah, I know - I have 'website envy'. :rolleyes:

[carrigansghost]

My scans are available for any use that aids collectors and no mention of thx needed.

Rawn

[Runscott]

Now it all makes sense. Just found that Eric Angyale is one of the first names in T206Resource's credit page. No wonder he decided that we have suddenly become enemies and he now needs to join the 'you've got website envy' youngsters.

Okay, Eric - this is the best I can do. I'll leave it this way until you feel that you have been appropriately credited for your vast efforts.

http://t206themonster.com/T206Origins.html

[Angyale]

An Alphabetical list.

Eric

[Runscott]

An Alphabetical list.

Eric

Good job, Eric! I bet you can count in order also.

[Runscott]

SCOTT FORREST


Do you children need anything else?

[Leon]

SCOTT FORREST


Do you children need anything else?

I hate to fan the fire here but could you put that in your signature line? :o

[TexasLeaguer]

Okay, Eric - this is the best I can do. I'll leave it this way until you feel that you have been appropriately credited for your vast efforts.

http://t206themonster.com/T206Origins.html

That was pretty funny Scott. I looked all over the page for awhile in confusion, then I saw it up top and laughed pretty hard. I updated my profile and here's my email as well, rcbeevers@hotmail.com, if anyone wants to message me.

[Runscott]

That was pretty funny Scott. I looked all over the page for awhile in confusion, then I saw it up top and laughed pretty hard. I updated my profile and here's my email as well, rcbeevers@hotmail.com, if anyone wants to message me.

Ross, I am really sorry for attacking you. Seriously, this entire 'us vs them' thing regarding the new site is bullshit, but I don't expect it to go away, just due to the nature of why the site was created to begin with. There apparently was always some alignment behind either Ted or Tim, but now it's more defined, involves more people, and is uglier.

I'm out of this fray now. I only jumped in to support a friend, and mentioned my own site as a supporting example - I was slow to say anything, because I knew the disciples of the 'big 4' would be all over my @ss immediately, and that the multitude of newbies would be joining in order to get their bite of fish. The word I'm hearing now is that the T206 gods thought my site was poorly done and needed to be recreated in their own image. Okay, I will not use their names in vain.

I also freely admit that I know DINK compared to the creators. My interest in the T206 set has always involved the very esoteric aspects - not the numbers and statistics. But I'm glad others are, as it has given us amazing insight into the set that we wouldn't otherwise have.

[Runscott]

I hate to fan the fire here but could you put that in your signature line? :o

Haha - that's not flaming the fire. I'm not mad, I'm ready to throw up. I was very excited to re-join the hobby, and I'm a factor of ten below that at the moment. I might switch to collecting OJ's, just to get in with a better class of people (no offense toward anyone who's thinking about buying any of my cards :( - I am sure that you are all the best of the bunch :) )

[Leon]

Scott- I didn't realize that WAS your name in your sig line when I made the last post. I wasn't thinking and was only looking at the top of the post, near your avatar. Carry on :)

[Runscott]

Scott- I didn't realize that WAS your name in your sig line when I made the last post. I wasn't thinking and was only looking at the top of the post, near your avatar. Carry on :)

You're not going crazy - it wasn't there - I just added it :D

[Angyale]

Anyways, its not like too many people will be viewing it, especially with the new site up and running.

Eric

[Runscott]

Anyways, its not like too many people will be viewing it, especially with the new site up and running.

Eric

I'm counting on your name being a big draw, but I'll monetize it just in case.

[three25hits]

I like applesauce

[Matt]

Congrats to the crew for both the great site and the research effort involved. Keep it up!

[Runscott]

After a long phone call with one of the owners of the site, I want to make one last comment and then I'm done.

Tim apparently came up with the idea of posting original images along with cards, without ever having even seen my site, and with no idea that it existed. So I apologize for using my web-page as an example in defending Frank's statements as to Tim's failure to give credit to others. Eric apparently lost the original image that he sent me and felt fine in sending the collage from my website, and that is fine. Tim was unaware that the combined photo/T206 image came from someone else's website, and clipped off the card immediately. So, sorry about that Tim. As promised, I am sending a c.d. to one of the owners, with all original images that I can find, but I do not have most of the originals from my website - I had a hard-disc crash 6 years ago and lost everything that was not stored on the server or on discs. These were among the casualties, but I still have 30-40 others that haven't been 'collaged' yet.

As far as the stats and stuff on the new site, if I discovered for the first time that dogs bite, it might surprise you, but you can't fault me with presenting that information along with other qualities of dogs that were previously unknown to anyone (new dog discoveries), and you can't expect me to try to go find the first person ever bitten by a dog, so that I can give them credit.

(I, too, like applesauce. My gf's father makes it from trees in his backyard, and sends me a container each Christmas.)

[caramelcard]

I haven't had a lot of time to look at the site yet, but I did check out a couple of the pages and I'm astounded thus far with it's organization and clarity. I've accumulated a lot of T206 cards, but not as much information on some aspects of the set and I'm sure this site will be the next go-to spot for me.

I also didn't read all of this thread, but I'd like to point out that Tim has been one of the most respectful board members since he's started posting here. Not to mention, his posts are informative to say the least.

Good job guys.

Rob

[Runscott]

I also didn't read all of this thread, but I'd like to point out that Tim has been one of the most respectful board members since he's started posting here. Not to mention, his posts are informative to say the least.

Good job guys.

Rob

Yeah, I only know Tim from his discussions on the board the last few months, and have based my opinions entirely on that. I'm sure there are some older posts where he was totally respectful, as you say.

[wonkaticket]

"second largest self-righteous clown on the board (has no idea who the first is)"

Simple answer me, and I will never let you take my title Scott! :)

Tim, is ok but like McKee quite the drunkard. :D

Cheers,

John

[Runscott]

"second largest self-righteous clown on the board (has no idea who the first is)"

Simple answer me, and I will never let you take my title Scott! :)

Tim, is ok but like McKee quite the drunkard. :D

Cheers,

John

I was basically saying that it should be me. Thanks for spoiling it.

We should form a circus of indignation. Wrinkling Brothers.

[wonkaticket]

"We should form a circus of indignation. Wrinkling Brothers."

Love it! LOL :)

[wonkaticket]

Guys this is what cracks me up about this whole credit thing. If something is shared sometimes it's used elsewhere with no mention of who found it out.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=145505

Perfect examples are the two cards here that Trae is selling in the BST. He links to two blogs of Bob Lemke's where the articles gush about how Trae has found these errors

"Now, through the efforts of T206 devotee Trae Regan, four more T206 errors will be added to that "set" in a forthcoming edition of the catalog. These are not earthshaking discoveries; they have been known among serious T206 collectors for a long time, but they have never been previously cataloged. We'll share two of those with you today. Both have been confirmed in several examples, signaling they are "collectible" to those who want to search them out"

http://boblemke.blogspot.com/2011/05...-listings.html
http://boblemke.blogspot.com/2011/05...th-errors.html

When in fact I found the Marquard and posted it in 2008 here, I also clued Trae into the "Partial" G card of Lefty and the Randall card has been talked about for years amoungst collectors.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=90179&highlight=Reverse+comma

It is what it is if you share info with the public sometimes it will be used with no mention of the orginal source by mistake or on purpose. The only way to be sure you never have your info used in this way is to not share which is lame...in the end none of us are going to get rich with T206 tidbits.

But if you want to tar and feather Trae for plagiarism here ya go.

Cheers,

John

[Gradedcardman]

John,

Great point !! I hope to continue working on the set for many years to come If I happen across something interesting I will post it as fast as I can to share information. The knowledge of the members of this board is why I continue to read daily and learn. I certainly don't think that I could make any " discovery " worthy of copyrighting before sharing and quite honestly wouldn't care to.

Anyway, again I love the site and enjoy the content greatly !!

[wonkaticket]

Adam, same way I feel. Hope you had good holidays.

BTW I have stuff for your son I got your message when I was overseas I'll drop you an email so you can get him some of his stuff.

Cheers,

John

[TexasLeaguer]

It is what it is if you share info with the public sometimes it will be used with no mention of the orginal source by mistake or on purpose.

By mistake is one thing, but when you don't mention the original source on purpose it is a dick move. Giving credit where credit is due is just a sign of decency and respect, in all areas of life, not just cards.


edited to add: I'm not referring to any one person or group specifically, just making a generalization that hopefully everyone can agree with. Thanks.

[Runscott]

By mistake is one thing, but when you don't mention the original source on purpose it is a dick move. Giving credit where credit is due is just a sign of decency and respect, in all areas of life, not just cards.


edited to add: I'm not referring to any one person or group specifically, just making a generalization that hopefully everyone can agree with. Thanks.

Not only do I agree with you, I posted this same idea previously. You could at least give me credit. What a dick move.

(I hope everyone has a good sense of humor by now :))

[Runscott]

Guys this is what cracks me up about this whole credit thing. If something is shared sometimes it's used elsewhere with no mention of who found it out.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=145505

Perfect examples are the two cards here that Trae is selling in the BST. He links to two blogs of Bob Lemke's where the articles gush about how Trae has found these errors

"Now, through the efforts of T206 devotee Trae Regan, four more T206 errors will be added to that "set" in a forthcoming edition of the catalog. These are not earthshaking discoveries; they have been known among serious T206 collectors for a long time, but they have never been previously cataloged. We'll share two of those with you today. Both have been confirmed in several examples, signaling they are "collectible" to those who want to search them out"

http://boblemke.blogspot.com/2011/05...-listings.html
http://boblemke.blogspot.com/2011/05...th-errors.html

When in fact I found the Marquard and posted it in 2008 here, I also clued Trae into the "Partial" G card of Lefty and the Randall card has been talked about for years amoungst collectors.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=90179&highlight=Reverse+comma

It is what it is if you share info with the public sometimes it will be used with no mention of the orginal source by mistake or on purpose. The only way to be sure you never have your info used in this way is to not share which is lame...in the end none of us are going to get rich with T206 tidbits.

But if you want to tar and feather Trae for plagiarism here ya go.

Cheers,

John

John, please start a new thread about these errors. I sent Trae a PM with my thoughts, but didn't want to discuss publicly since he has sales going. But I would love to talk about these cards. Thanks.

[T206.org]

John, the articles don't gush about me finding these errors. They both say the same thing, that they'll be cataloged through my efforts. All that means is that I took the time to bring them to Bob's attention (with multiple follow ups), to have them cataloged.

It clearly states "they have been known among serious T206 collectors for a long time, but they have never been previously cataloged". That's you, among others.

--

Hi Scott, just saw your email. These "errors" have already been debated many times over in existing threads.

[Runscott]

John, the articles don't gush about me finding these errors. They both say the same thing, that they'll be cataloged through my efforts. All that means is that I took the time to bring them to Bob's attention (with multiple follow ups), to have them cataloged.

It clearly states "they have been known among serious T206 collectors for a long time, but they have never been previously cataloged". That's you, among others.

--

Hi Scott, just saw your email. These "errors" have already been debated many times over in existing threads.

Okay, since I missed the discussions then, I understand, and they will never again be mentioned.

[T206.org]

No-no, I was just thinking you could dig them up using the search and continue any existing discussions. John even linked one in his post. I do appreciate your consideration to my sales post though!

[Runscott]

No-no, I was just thinking you could dig them up using the search and continue any existing discussions. John even linked one in his post. I do appreciate your consideration to my sales post though!

Thanks, and congrats on selling them. The prices were fair, just for the fact that they were anomalies.

[wonkaticket]

John, the articles don't gush about me finding these errors. They both say the same thing, that they'll be cataloged through my efforts. All that means is that I took the time to bring them to Bob's attention (with multiple follow ups), to have them cataloged.

It clearly states "they have been known among serious T206 collectors for a long time, but they have never been previously cataloged". That's you, among others.

--

Hi Scott, just saw your email. These "errors" have already been debated many times over in existing threads.

Trae, I don’t really care either way that's my whole point here. I know you’re just taking info you found via others and trying to push it forward....to have it added to add to value to your sales of these cards.

The main reason me and other "advanced" T206 collectors aren't chasing Bob on these is there are dozens if not 40-50 of these little things like Randall, Marquard, Lefty in this set. If we added them all we would have a really long checklist with goofy errors a lot of which are nothing more than printing var. that's all.

John

[Jaybird]

I agree. I'm not going to say there is a variation on every pose but there sure are a lot of them. There's a big difference between these variations and legitimate changes that were made to the plates (on purpose) resulting in a wholly different card. Many of the proofs show these changes that were made (i.e., Leon's Matty). You can see many differences (not so subtle) which are readily apparent. Partial G, partial S, and all these that happen during the course of printing are somewhat interesting but more of an insight into the printing process itself rather than the intentions of the printers or the company that made the cards.

I've found a couple over the course of collecting just by putting some of the same cards side by side. Here's one I found. I didn't ascribe any value to it but if others do, so be it.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=135461

[Runscott]

I agree. I'm not going to say there is a variation on every pose but there sure are a lot of them. There's a big difference between these variations and legitimate changes that were made to the plates (on purpose) resulting in a wholly different card. Many of the proofs show these changes that were made (i.e., Leon's Matty). You can see many differences (not so subtle) which are readily apparent. Partial G, partial S, and all these that happen during the course of printing are somewhat interesting but more of an insight into the printing process itself rather than the intentions of the printers or the company that made the cards.

I've found a couple over the course of collecting just by putting some of the same cards side by side. Here's one I found. I didn't ascribe any value to it but if others do, so be it.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=135461

I see the cards you mention as being of three types: 1) errors (such as 'Magie'), 2) intentional variations (possibly the Matty black cap), and 3) poor execution of a design ('nodgrass', the partial 'G' discussed here, the 'red blob' McGraw portrait, the 'comma' Marquard, the partial 'Natl' McGraw that I showed several years ago, Sharpe/Shappe - as John points out, the list is endless and if you are going to include these, you might as well throw in 'Weimer ghost on back' (since there are more than one), and any other odd card that made it into production).

As you would expect, there was a lot of poor execution.

[Jaybird]

You lay it out nicely, Scott. #1: Errors, which were corrected resulting in two different cards, the error card and the corrected card (i.e., Magie). and then #3 Poor Execution.

However, I don't know if I understand the #2: Intentional Variation one. On your Matty Black Cap, are you saying they intentionally were making a different looking card? I'm not sure I agree. I think the quality control was just not quite up to the task or they went about the procedures in a different way to create the card. It's hard for me to believe the printer was looking and trying to make the green background 1/16 of an inch shorter than another card.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying.

[Runscott]

You lay it out nicely, Scott. #1: Errors, which were corrected resulting in two different cards, the error card and the corrected card (i.e., Magie). and then #3 Poor Execution.

However, I don't know if I understand the #2: Intentional Variation one. On your Matty Black Cap, are you saying they intentionally were making a different looking card? I'm not sure I agree. I think the quality control was just not quite up to the task or they went about the procedures in a different way to create the card. It's hard for me to believe the printer was looking and trying to make the green background 1/16 of an inch shorter than another card.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying.

That's why I said "possibly". I'm not sure it was intentional either; in fact, I'm leaning against it. But we have seen some very minor changes to cards, so it's clear that creative urges were sometimes implemented (Bender 'with/without' trees, chase white/black cap, etc.). The Matty ink color differences might have been unintentional, similar to orange vs red background (I assume that was unintentional) in portraits, or there might be other examples we haven't studied closely enough, where ink differences actually were intentional. I don't know for certain, but I'm not ruling it out.

If it turns out that I'm right about ANYTHING new, I think Eric Angyal deserves the credit - it's important to him, and he was always a decent hobbyist friend.

If it turns out that I'm wrong about something, feel free to rake me over the coals...as usually occurs on this forum :)

[T206.org]

Cheers, John. Understood.

[Jaybird]

That's why I said "possibly". I'm not sure it was intentional either; in fact, I'm leaning against it. But we have seen some very minor changes to cards, so it's clear that creative urges were sometimes implemented (Bender 'with/without' trees, chase white/black cap, etc.). The Matty ink color differences might have been unintentional, similar to orange vs red background (I assume that was unintentional) in portraits, or there might be other examples we haven't studied closely enough, where ink differences actually were intentional. I don't know for certain, but I'm not ruling it out.


Makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. I need it sometimes (often).

[T206.org]

Thanks, and congrats on selling them. The prices were fair, just for the fact that they were anomalies.

Thanks, Scott! In the end, I came down a little over 20% and sold them as a pair.

[Gradedcardman]

I'm happy to have them both. My collection is back heavy but some interesting fronts are fun too. Thanks Trae.

[T206.org]

Thank you too, Adam.