REA reveals a 24 year mystery....the PIEDMONT Plank
 

When the famous "Gretzky" PSA8 T206 Wagner in its raw state was being shopped around at the Willow Grove
Philly Show, rumor had it that the Plank was on the same sheet as this Wagner. I well recall this rumor, since I
never bought into the old myth that the T206 Plank was short-printed because its "printing plates were broken".
My theory in the early '80s was that Plank & Wagner were printed on the same sheet and when American Litho.
had to discard the Wagner's....the Plank's were discarded along with the Wagner's. This seemed common sense
to me, since it was believed that the same number of T206 Plank's and Wagner's existed....approx. 50-75 cards
of each.

However, what puzzled many of us "dinosaurs" in the hobby was....where are the PIEDMONT Plank's ? If you re-
call, the PSA8 Wagner has a PIEDMONT 150 back. So, 24 years later, we now know that the old rumor was true.
Good old Charlie Conlon owned the PIEDMONT Plank that was believed to be on the same sheet as the Wagner.

And, what a beauty it is. I thought it would have sold for more than $95K. The fact that it is graded Authentic
is immaterial. This Plank card is absolutely the most unique T206 in the hobby, as there is NO other known full-
color Plank with a PIEDMONT back. All 50-100 Plank cards have the following three SWEET CAPORAL backs......


...........Factory 30............................Factory 25........................................Factory 30
<img src="http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt113/zanted86/bconlonpiedmontplank.jpg" alt="[linked image]">


Thank you Rob Lifson for a really great auction....if not one of the best.


Also....did one of our Net54 members win it ?



TED Z

Great post, Ted.

And a 'pulled' plate makes more sense than a broken plate. Thanks.

Ted
 

One of our members did win it but I am not at liberty to say who....

Piedmont Plank
 

I agree with Ted, I thought it would've gone higher in price than it did.

I find it interesting that if this was the Gretzky Wagner mate, why did this card get an authentic grade, but the Wagner got an "8?" They were cut from the same sheet, and graded by the same company. Just my 2 cents.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who was wondering the same thing.

great info Ted-wish I was the board member who won it

Ted,

So I'm clear, are you saying the scarcity of the Plank is because that card "reluctantly" had to be pulled when the Wagner was?

If so, respectfully that raises issues with me. You have in a previous thread made a persuasive argument that the absence/scarcity of various Philadelphia AL team members (Collins (only one pose-excluding the proof), Coombs, Mack, Plank) might be because of business conflicts/loyalties Connie Mack had between caramel and tobacco interests. That made a lot of sense to me. If in fact the only reason Plank was pulled was because of issues Wagner alone had, it makes no sense to me, given Planks significant promenance at the time, why another plate wouldn't be created with his image. After all, T206's were manufactured for two years. Seems to me that if Plank had no issues with his image being used, prudent business practice would literally compel his image be used to sell cigarettes. Philadephia is a major market.

I can see that if Wagner is whining about his image being used without compensation, and about the same time some of the Athletics players have raised the issue of the use of their image because of their caramel company loyalties or at the request of their owner, then it seems plausible that American Litho would pull the plate that had Wagner and Plank, thereby ridding themselves of two problems. So it still seems consistent to me.

Frank
Remind me what evidence we have that Honus Wagner was whining about his image being used without compensation.
Mark

(quick reply test)

My recollection is that Olbermann had an article somewhere about it, and had language from an old issue of TSN about it. My understanding is that Wagner wanted compensation, or more compensation, and American Litho decided to not pay more, halting production of his cards instead.

This is talks a bit about it, down in there a ways...

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/trea...utont005.shtml


This has a bit more.... Although this article is incorrect about there being 54 major leaguers and 76 Hall of Famers...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honus_Wagner

Hi Ted,

I'd be interested in getting your thots on which other players might have been on this Wagner / Plank plate (or was it actually a stone)?

Best Regards,
Craig

E107 Collector
 

Your point is....in the form of a question....is worth more than just your 2 cents. It is the "million $$$$$$$ question"....
that should be on every thinking-hobbyist's mind.

However, I will not go there ! ?


TED Z

Piedmont Plank
 

Ted, you said that this Plank is the only known full color example of a Piedmont Plank.

Wasn't there another example with the entire right border missing about 10 years ago? I could be wrong, but I will search my older catalogs to verify.

Frank
In my opinion, there is no evidence that he wanted more money for the use of his image. Yes, he lent his image to a cigar. But most little kids were not smoking cigars or chewing tobacco back then. But like now some kids smoked cigarettes. As the Wagner family has always told it, he objected to kids buying cigarettes to get his picture. Look at what contemporaries like Tommy Leach say about Wagner's sincere love of children in the Glory of Their Times. I think the theory that Olberman is circulating is a little cynical.
Mark

I never mentioned tobacco... so you don't get to post that as if I did, then explain why it is wrong.

What I did say was that Wagner was whining about the money. And that's what it's always about.

Mark,

Kindly stop requesting facts and please settle for speculation. It'll be a lot easier that way. Trust me.

Of course of interest to me, as cited by a few posters above, is how the Wagner got graded a PSA 8. Since PSA correctly assigned an Authentic grade to the Plank, would they care to explain the grade for the Wagner. They are either both high grade or both Authentic; a split decision makes no sense.

And while this topic has been discussed ad nauseum in the past, having this Plank surface certainly sheds new light on the discussion.

Hi Guys,
Yes, this is the second Piedmont Plank.... Halper had one with a "white" background that was trimmed that has been sold a few times...

Be well Brian

Here's another link that is a bit about it.

Rob D you don't need to read the link.

http://infielddirt.sportscollectorsd...ase+Card+.aspx

Halper's Plank was missing a color pass, and was hand cut. It had the look of printer's scrap.

Piedmont Plank
 

Here is the auction description from the 1997 REA auction, Lot #91

Attachment 183

Bejulmag
 

I'm not quite sure of your question......
"So I'm clear, are you saying the scarcity of the Plank is because that card "reluctantly" had to be
pulled when the Wagner was?"

And, perhaps I wasn't clear when I said that the Plank cards were "discarded" along with the Wagner
cards.

When American Litho. printed the first batch of their PIEDMONT 150 T206's, they were on small sheets.
I read somewhere that their printing press had only a 19-inch (wide) track. They printed many 100's of
sheets which included the major BB stars of the 1908 season (Cubs, Giants, Tigers, including Plank and
Wagner). When they were told to scrap the Wagner cards, they took all the remaining uncut sheets and
discarded the entire sheets. I cannot picture them going to the trouble of scissor-cutting the Wagner's;
and, issuing the remaining cards on these sheets.

There are T206 Subjects in that 150 series that are tougher to find (of course not as tough as Plank or
Wagner). Guys like Burch, M. Brown, Donlin, Evers, Larry Doyle, Reulbach and Schulte that perhaps were
on those sheets.


Now for your 2nd point of reminding me of my more recent theory regarding the possible player rights con-
flict between American Caramel and American Litho. with respect to the Philadelphia A's players. It is still
a valid one....however, I'm mystified to explain how all those SWEET CAPORAL's were issued of Plank ? ?


TED Z

It's all about the Benjamins--doesn't have to make sense as long as someone is buying.

And who else do you suppose was on the sheet? There aren't any other T206s for which only 75-100 examples are known. (Demmitt & O'Hara? Don't know how many are out there, but in any case we know why they're so scarce.) So Honus gets ticked off at tobacco and his sheet, which also contains Plank, is pulled, and everybody but Plank is reprinted elsewhere? Just asking.

Bob

Ted;

Thanks. I was writing when you were posting.

Bob

Piedmont Wagner vs Piedmont Plank
 

Hey guys.....correct me if I'm wrong.....the PSA8 Wagner was the very first card graded by PSA.

The Authentic Plank was recently graded by PSA.

:)....Could it be, that PSA's grading practices are becoming stricter, after all these years ?....:)

Ted,

First, to identify myself, benjulmag is your buddy Corey. I'm still adjusting to this new forum which doesn't have a separate place to post your name (Leon, are you listening?:))

Second, I hear what you're saying and, as is always the case with your points, there is much merit to them. I'm just still having issues with Piedmont Wagners and Piedmont Planks. To my knowledge, none are known with original factory cuts. I recognize I'm in the extreme minority with what I'm about to say, but I for one cannot entirely discount what Bill Heitman said on this board some time ago--that in the early 1950's professional printers who had access to original t206 plates made repro cards, including Wagner. Was Heitman hallucinating when he said that? Perhaps. But what if he wasn't? It seems to me that IF someone were to do that, and did so with the intent not to deceive, he/she would intentionally use a different back than the cards were known to be issued in. I for one when I look at the Conlon Piedmont Plank just sold by REA, or the Gretzky Wagner, can't help but notice that they look different (sharper/more colorful) than the Sweet Caporal Planks/Wagners. Yes, that could be because different factories had different printing methodolgies. But maybe it goes beyond that.

But putting that aside, what Barry says is dead on correct. IMO the OVERWHELMING sentiment is that neither the Gretzky Wagner nor the Conlon Plank was issued in a cigarette pack, but were instead cut from a sheet. REGARDLESS what might or might not have been done to the Wagner after that point, the fact that they were cut from a sheet means that both should be graded the SAME way, either both 8's or both A's. I simply don't see how that point can be reasonably disputed. The fact that one is an 8 (and therefore has a purported market value substantially more than the next highest example) while the other is an A (with a market value substantially less than the highest known example) makes no sense and is as good an example as any of how form rules over substance. To go further, does anybody really think that if the Gretzky Wagner was submitted today to PSA (in the same manner as REA recently submitted to them the Conlon Plank), the card would come back anything other than an "A"? Yet because the submission was done years ago at the time of PSA's founding, somehow that 8 has become etched in stone, regardless of the blatant inconsistencies/contradictions that creates.

One of the items in my collection is a final-production-run E93 sheet. The Cobb is in the middle of sheet and (to the naked eye at least) is perfect front and back. Yet if I were to have that card professionally cut with perfect centering/dimensions, it would grade an "A". How can that be while at the same time the most valuable/publicized card in our hobby grades an 8?

Corey
 

There's a lot of us here that share your....shall I say....skepticism regarding these two cards.

You cited Heitman and one of his "strange" comments. Anyhow, do you recall a time when he chimed
in and told us his first hand knowledge of the PSA grading of the Wagner ?

I tried to find Bill's comments, using the SEARCH feature here; however, this feature does not appear
to function as well as it did in the old Net54.


TED Z

Corey,

Go to your profile page and fill out whatever information you're willing to share. One of the options is "Real Name." If you fill in that field, it will appear in all your posts (as it does with Frank Wakefield, above, under his blue, highlighted name.)

Go to user CP, then edit my details, then real name.

May or may have not been said but to be clear there are (2) other Piedmont 150 Planks.

Both came from the Halper Collection and both are handcut like the current one in REA.

Glad to hear a fellow Board Member won! I hung in as long as I could...

Here are the other Planks...

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...206splanks.jpg

Also I'm not one for hobby legend, but I do find it interesting that there seem to be many more 350 subject Planks that come up vs. 150 subject Planks.

And the visual diff. between that of a 150 and 350 is night and day. 350's always look really bad compared to 150's a real printing change per say. Who knows maybe that is a clue to a printing issue of some sort.....

I thought the REA lot description for the Plank was a masterful display of tiptoeing around all of these issues.

I don't have it open in front of me, but it vaguely mentioned the early days of grading in which there wasn't as much focus on alterations and whether hand cut from a sheet was the same as trimmed. It also talked generically about printer's sheets.

I thought they went gracefully and perfectly right up to the line of saying "Look. These were both cut from the same sheet and should both be graded Auth by current standards." without actually saying it. They just went on poetically about the days of yore in cards and grading and sheets and Wagners and Planks.

Great job by someone writing that description.

J

Truth is PSA has had two shots (at least) at the Gretzky Wagner. As Ted mentioned it is the first card they graded and has a serial number of 00000001. But it must have been resubmitted later for re-labeling, because it was tagged as "McNall/Gretzky".

I know that for a re-holdering/re-labeling PSA doesn't necessarily do a re-grading, but you would think, with the card in question, they might look at it again.

Hi Ted,

I'm having trouble finding the email I have with your phone #.

Please email me w/ your #.

Thanks.

Scot

according to the Daily News
 

"And in a 2005 interview, Bill Hughes, a member of the grading service team that issued the card's high grade - Professional Sports Authenticator gave it a PSA 8 on a scale of 1-10 - admitted he knew the card had been cut from a sheet when he graded it.

"The card is so outstanding, it would have been sacrilegious to call that card trimmed and completely devalue it," Hughes explained."

cut
 

with all due respect to Mr. Hughes, as much as i love T206s, i must say that
avoiding telling the truth about this card so as to avoid being sacrilegious
is specious at best. furthermore, telling the truth would never devalue the card, much in the same vein TRex spoke of the 150 Pied. Plank. Its inestimable value, even priceless value, is known in the hearts of collectors
for its rarity and aesthetics.

great discussions.

best,

barry

I am always surprised when the question of why the Wagner is rare comes up. It has been well known for years, via documentation in a period Sporting News interview with Wagner, that the reason he was withdrawn was because he did not want to support kids buying cigarettes to get baseball pictures.
JimB

Barry
 

"with all due respect to Mr. Hughes, as much as i love T206s, i must say that
avoiding telling the truth about this card so as to avoid being sacrilegious
is specious at best. furthermore, telling the truth would never devalue the card, much in the same vein TRex spoke of the 150 Pied. Plank. Its inestimable value, even priceless value, is known in the hearts of collectors
for its rarity and aesthetics. "

The Gretzky Wagner last changed hands for a reported $2.8 million. I'm having a hard time believing that if the grade was changed to an "A" it would transact for anything close to that.

BTW, in the same manner that I got a quick lesson how to display my name, can somebody tell me how to use the quote feature so as to show a quote set off in its own box with the person who said it identified?

For point of reference, the Conlon Plank that was just sold visually looks to be about a 7 (subjective of course). But based on the selling price, it went in the range of about a 4.5 or 5.0. Clearly, the Authentic grade greatly affected the selling price.

In my opinion, if the card is sheet cut, trimmed, or sheet cut AND trimmed (one version of the story goes this way), and it initially was rejected by PSA and eventually slabbed Authentic when they started doing that, there is not a chance it would have sold anywhere near where it sold. And I very much doubt it would have its current iconic status.

Corey, even if you had the plates how would you match the ink? Especially on the backs, where it would be easier to see a single color not matching what had been printed 40 years prior. What of the card stock? I believe the reprint theory is just hearsay and old hobby legend.

Now, combining the Olbermann first chase card theory and Ted's pulled sheet theory, that is another story and I would like to hear more on that if it's possible.

Jim -- PSA has reholdered the Wagner a number of times. I know that there is a picture of Brian S. with the card reholdered with his name on the pedigree. I believe he ultimately said that it didn't look right that way and had it changed back to the Gretzky label.

m

Piedmont Plank
 

Guys, please see my attached picture on page 3 regarding another Piedmont Plank that REA had in their 1997 auction. It has brilliant color, but is missing the right border. It is different than the Halper examples that have been discussed. It has the same type of "odd" cut on the bottom left border that just sold in REA's auction 2 days ago.

The chase card idea is very interesting. I believe that ATC may have done some chase cards. The T220 boxing set is found with white or silver borders. Only 1/2 of the set is known in silver. Of those, one card (Mike Donovan) has only 1 known example. My hunch is that this was a chase card and that if an ad medium ever appears we may find some sort of contest. Also, isn't there a missing T227 card (the set advertises 25 but I've been told that no one can seem to checklist more than 24)?

There are a lot more Plank with SC350 Subject f30 backs than SC150 Subject f30 back but I have NEVER seen a Plank SC150 with f25 back.

Ted, are you sure Plank with SC150 f25 exist?

PIEDMONT Plank
 

E107

Thanks for posting this Piedmont Plank (I enlarged your scan. Hope that's fine with you). I knew that there were more
Piedmont Planks; but, I was unaware of this one. I doubt if this Plank was ever in a Piedmont pack. So far, we haven't
yet seen a Factory cut Piedmont Plank that could have been in a Piedmont Cigarette pack.

It would be nice to know how many Piedmont 150 Wagner's exist ? We could then make a correlation as to how many
Piedmont Plank's might be out there ? ?



<img src="http://www.net54baseball.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=183&d=1241394669 alt="[linked image]">



TED Z

Bond73
 

T206 Plank's with a Sweet Cap 150 Factory 25 back have been confirmed. In fact, a Net54 member has one.


TED Z

REA Reveals a 24 Year Mystery
 

Intersting concept and it certainly makes sense. Additional "food for thought".....has anyone entertained the possibility that BOTH Plank and Wagner had their cards removed from circulation considering that there are NO T201, T202 and T205 Planks???? While there are T204 Ramly Plank's, there are not a significant number of them in circulation and the Ramly was, likewise, issued in 1909. Could Plank have also "pulled the plug" on his Ramly issue as well??? No one can really know for sure but is seems a huge coincidence that Plank is absent on all other MAJOR tobacco issues (other than the 1909 Ramly)! Two other thoughts....

1) I am also wondering if the "removed T206 sheet" applies, has anyone considered the rarity of the other T206 cards on that particular sheet?

2) If Plank, indeed, refused to have his image use to advertise "post" 1909 tobacco cards.....what does that say about the desirability of the T204 Plank?

Best Regards,
Joe T.

On the lower, right hand side of every post is a "Quote" icon. Click it and it puts the entire post in your reply. You can edit out the parts you don't want. Just leave the leading and trailing bracketed info.

Joe t
 

I addressed the scarcity of the T206 Plank in the old Net54 forum....thread titled:

" My T206 Plank theory....and, what's your guess ? "

Where I make a good case for the American Caramel Co. (ACC) forcing the American Lithographic Co. to stop issuing their T206 Plank.

ACC produced their E91 and E90 sets in 1908; therefore, having first rights to their hometown (Philadelphia A's) players and especially
the two "Eddie's" (Collins and Plank).

You can try the SEARCH function here to dig up this thread that dates back to early 2007.


TED Z

I believe Plank, Wagner, or any other card, for that matter, could have easily been pulled from production without having any effect to the other subjects who were also printed from that same sheet.

We know from the commonly seen miscut T206s that have part of a name at the top of the card that the overwhelmingly common sheet configuration was to have the same subject running repeatedly in a vertical column. So, as a simple example, a typical sheet may have looked something like this:

http://www.jimonym.com/S1.jpg

It’s kind of a Printing 101 question, but how did a sheet come to have, in this example, eight perfect copies of the same subject in a column? They certainly were not hand-drawn on the printing plate eight times. If that were the case, we’d see minute differences in the appearance of clouds and trees and facial features between examples of the same subject. The answer is that the image must have been drawn once on a separate small plate and then transferred to the printing plate multiple times. This was in fact very commonly done in commercial lithography 100 years ago. If anyone’s interested, I’ll try to dig out my litho books tonight and give a deeper description of the process.

If this was indeed the process used for producing T206 sheets, then plates could be reconfigured with ease. If Wagner (call him example B in the image above) complained about his likeness being used, American Litho could have simply scrapped the printing plate and made a new one with players A, C, D, E, F, and a replacement for Hans. Since the original artwork was on a separate smaller plate, any card could be added to a new production plate at any time. The process would be very quick and flexible, as it absolutely had to be if you’re printing millions of T206 cards.

Jamie

Ted - have you ever given any thought as to whether your "same sheet" theory is reversed... and that Wagner is short printed due to Plank being pulled, as opposed to Plank being short printed due to Wagner being pulled?

Let me explain. You theorize that that there may have been an ATC & caramel "war." Well, what if Plank had to be pulled by the ATC because of this "war" over A's players. Wagner and Plank were on the same sheet. As a direct result of Plank being pulled, Wagner also had to be pulled.

I too have never seen a SC150 Factory #25 card....

Was this card in SCP a few years back?

Here is a question, apologies if I missed earlier discussion on this point but if there was an uncut sheet with the (Gretzky) Wagner and Plank, why are there not other cards of them in pristine sheet cut form?

Since nobody seemed to notice my mention that Wagner explicitly stated that he did not want his picture included with cigarettes as the reason for his inclusion in the set, here is a copy of the Sporting News article from October 24, 1912 entitled, "Wagner a Wonder: One Player in the Game Who Is Not Mad About Money". Wagner explained his absence from the ATC set by writing that he, "did not care to have his picture in a package of cigarettes." Apparently he was offered more money than anybody else in the league, but he stuck to his convictions.

This information has been circulating in the hobby for years. Can we put the issue regarding Wagner to rest now?
JimB

http://explorepahistory.com/~expa/cm...b9s7-a_514.pdf

I've seen that article a few times...these convictions always made me scratch my head anyone else? :confused:

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...tem_3462_1.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn.../0048_1_lg.jpg

Perhaps he had a contract with another tobacco company at the time with the smokes above...what ever inspired his convictions we will most likely never know. I for one don't buy the it's for the good of the children story....clearly Wagner didn't mind those young kids enjoying a good cigar. :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ize/38642a.jpg

Maybe he only had an issue with the T206s because kids were widely collecting those; unlike your Reccius piece. I don't think he was opposed to cigarettes - just kids smoking them.

I guess he thought kids didn't smoke cigars?

The Reccius item was way before T206 just posted as another example.

However the cigars with the Wagner image and bands...is around the same time.

Seems odd don't buy it...seems like a nice spin. Times were simple then but not so that people didn't spin things to cover bigger issues. If you have an issue with kids smoking and your fear is kids will do what their idol does...why endorse smokes of any type???

Sort of like having an issue with adult films and only staring in ones filmed in B&W but boycotting the color ones...

Even years later Wagner's convictions seem to be troubled at best..unless we are to assume he's enjoying beef jerky..mmmm

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...mall/4849l.jpg

They do have little fingers and hands...:)

I think we often see that in society - certain things are fine for adults and not for children. I don't think it's hypocritical to endorse a product for adults, but not want children to partake.

I don't think it was an issue of not doing what your idol does, but rather, not wanting them to buy cigarettes to get his T206 card.

Matt agree, but remember the times. Most kids could drink and smoke in those days no problems very few laws like today.

I have a good friend who owns one of Americas oldest printing houses. They have been around since 1885. One of my fav pics in his office is of the factory workers in which there are about 20 kids 10 of which have cigars and or cigarettes in their hands some of these kids can't be over 11yrs old. The shot is dated 1904...right here in PA.

Kids smoked it wasn't that uncommon so Wagners cigars they would have seen as well. And if you're a young boy in PA and you see a Wagner branded cigar....

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ize/02283r.jpg http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ize/03487r.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ize/03486r.jpg http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ize/03714r.jpg

In fact the newsboy who may have handed out the article above most likely was smoking....

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ize/03618r.jpg

I always felt the story that Wagner didn't want kids to use tobacco was just a piece of urban legend.

If it didn't have to do with money or his opposition to kids smoking is there another theory?

There are plenty of other theories; it is just than none have any evidence to support them. To me, a quote with Wagner's own explanation makes it a closed case.
JimB

Those photos are very interesting. Those kids all look like tough street kids. It reminds me of street kids in India and Nepal. You often see them smoking too, but you will never find middle class kids who attend school, etc. smoking. I can imagine a similar scenario here in the early part of the last century.

What I am saying is that I would not take those photos as evidence that smoking was widespread among kids. I find Wagner's own explanation of not wanting to contribute to the promotion of childhood smoking to be quite believable.
JimB

Jim agree was mostly lower class, but then again most folks who really followed baseball were more working class....

Funny if he had a problem with kids smoking he didn't have one with child labor or them making his cigars...:)

Pictures of those working class or lower class kids making cigars in early 20th cigar factorys in the US.

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ize/04513r.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ize/04506r.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ize/04517r.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ize/04514r.jpg

The Wagner legend may be true but there are just too many of the above examples for me. To me it seems more like a nice spin and article with a tad of fluff...not unlike the puff pieces we see today around our stars.

John- those are sensational photos. It was a sign of manhood for young kids to start smoking, but it was certainly more prevalent among the working class.

Even back then cigarettes were not only milder than cigars but also cheaper. Kids tended to lay off the stogies, as theydo today. Leaving that aside, it seems to me that there is a huge difference between Wagner putting his name on a cigar label and allowing his card to appear in a cigarette pack. A hundred years ago, only a very eccentric few would have collected cigar bands, so there is little danger that kids are going to buy boxes of cigars to build a collection of Wagner cigar bands or whatever. But those darn cigaratte cards comprise a set of 520 baseball stars. Believe me, collecting those darn cigarette cards can be addicting---and I believe old Honus when he says that he didn't want to contribute to that addiction and to the purchase of cigarettes that would have fed that addiction.

Yes, a 3rd option for Wagner's T206 "dis-card"....
 

Just as my theory on Plank (American Caramel Co. vs American Litho.), recall that the E91, E90-1 & E90-2 sets depicted Wagner
before T206 did. The founder of ACC, Daniel Lafean was a no-nonsense, enterprising guy who was also an avid BB fan. Do recall
that prior to purchasing ACC from Hershey in 1900, Lafean was the Director of Gettysburg College....Eddie Plank's alma mater.

Add to this mix, Lafean's close relationship with Connie Mack, it doesn't take much imagination to realize that ACC was not going
to give up their exclusive Rights to two of the major BB stars of that era....Plank and Wagner.
I'll add to this theory that the T206 1st series Eddie Collins (with bat) card was never issued due to ACC's control of the Rights
to their A's players.

I still cannot prove this theory of mine; however, this circumstantial evidence is very convincing. Furthermore, It is inferred that
it was Connie Mack's suggestion to Lafean to include BB card premiums with his candy products in early 1908.

To summarize my case here....Wagner was for kids consuming Caramels....he is in virtually in every Candy set from 1903-16 :)


T-Rex TED

In many senses, these photos support the idea that Wagner would be concerned about kids smoking. It was happening.
JimB

Maybe another thread topic
 

So the question I have as a t205 collector, is do you think the t206 set would be as popular today if Wagner and Plank weren't short prints and were readily available, like a Cobb or a Young are today?

And the one that really gets me drooling is what would the t205 set be like WITH a Wagner and a Plank? I bet more people would collect the gold ones then.

Photos
 

By the way, those photos are just awesome to see. So crisp and clear.

Only working class kids smoked....I don't think so ?
 

Not so, guys..you may consider this anecdotal; but, one of the more famous T-card collectors in the hobby,
Richard Russell (a well-known Senator from Georgia), smoked at age 13 (in 1910) when he started collecting
T206's and T210's.
For those of you who do not know of him, his 500-card T206 collection is on display at the Univ. of Georgia.
His set is the only one known to include the Joe Doyle error card and the Ty Cobb back card. Also, on display
are several 100's of T210's (I don't know if his T210's include Joe Jax or Stengel).

Russell's biography tells us that he grew up in an upper class environment (his father was a Judge and they
owned a farm). It continues when Russell was enrolled in a private Military school at age 14, cigarette smo-
king was the norm there among his fellow students.


TED Z

Barry you were around in 1909 were you smoking yet? :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...size/1304r.jpg

If so how many packs did it take to put together your first set or did the cards not come in your choice brand? :rolleyes:

Ted,
Not that one exception disproves anything, but how do you know that Sen. Russell smoked when he was 13?
JimB

Jim b
 

I have Senator Russell's biography. His early smoking habits are covered in the chapter on his formative years.
He was an avid baseball fan and acquired his vast collection directly from Piedmont cigarette packs and Old Mill
packs in 1910-11.

In recent years I bought quite a few of his duplicates that his great-grand daughter was selling.

TED Z

The three PIEDMONT Plank's are all "proof" cards
 

Scot Reader and I were discussing this Piedmont Plank earlier today. Scot noticed that the top border has
a proof mark. We went back and looked at the other two (full-color) PIEDMONT Plank's. Sure enough they,
too, have hints of a proof mark on their top border.....typical of T206's printed by American Litho. in 1909.

So, with this limited sampling of 3 cards, we have concluded that the PIEDMONT Plank's were most likely
never issued.
Furthermore, these proof marks contradict any myth that these PIEDMONT Plank's (or Wagner's) were re-
printed in the 1950's (or otherwise).

We welcome any thoughts you have regarding this observation ?


SCOT READER and TED Z

Thanks Ted. I did not know he had a biography.
Best,
JimB