Hi Jim,

The sheet is just a template I drew using some of the existing scratches. The
reason the middle line is only a partial line is because I don't have any scratches on the right hand side to extend that line yet. For example: in the
top line the potential scratches in that line are missing between Williams/Lake to Shaw/powers, The existing scratches are marked with X's
the ones without an X should be found on Subject(s) named in the same vertical
row at the bottom of the sheet. Using this recent Williams as an example
it was in the top row with no X because it was previously unconfirmed and
it now fits that slot and has a scratch that matches the template.

I don't think any off middle scratches are an extension of the upper
scratch but I can't rule out the possibility yet. The middle scratch is on
a slightly steeper plane than the upper scratch and if it was an extension of
the upper scratch you would have the same subject in two different places
horizontally on a sheet.

Re: Piedmont scratch layout
 

Hello Patrick,
Just wanted to say this is fantastic! Great detective work. Just amazing.
Art M.

Thanks Art.

While all the other sheets have a vertical scratch to establish where
the horizontal scratches are located unfortunately the A-B sheet
doesn't but there is a very light partial vertical scratch on a couple
of Conroy's and a Murphy. Since it doesn't go through any of the
horizontal scratches these cards must have been above or
below all of the horizontal scratches.

Note: The vertical scratches on Conroy & murphy on the sheet with
the red line is only for the Murphy/Conroy connection, they aren't actually
through any horizontal scratches.

The point that I'm making here is that trying to formulate an arrangement of a hypothetical T206 sheet based on printng scratches
can be quite arbitrary.






TED Z
.[/QUOTE]

Ted,

I hardly think it's arbitrary when there are many instances of the same subjects having more than one scratch that puts them together on a sheet
in some cases as many as three or four. There is also a Seymour/Cicotte
combo that has a mark on the front that connects them in addition to the
the two different plate scratches on the backs.

I found a few more pieces to this puzzle. A Lake and Williams that are
both from the same position from one of the lighter scratches.

I also found a Stahl that turned out to be a match with McIntyre. This was one of the five remaining unconfirmed 2nd subjects. There are four remaining
unconfirmed subjects, there should be a SC 649 subject that matches Conroy (horizontal row 6) Hinchman (row 10) and Gibson (row 15) and there should
be a non 649 subject that matches O'Leary (row 17).

Nice job Pat! Looks like the puzzle is coming together.

While we're on the subject. I posted before about seeing scratches on a few Polar Bear backs. Recently I've found a few more players that have the scratch in the same location as well.

I'm going to set that project off to the side for you to work on when you get this Piedmont sheet finished. ;)

Hope all is well and thanks for posting this new information.

Jantz

I came across this Powell with a fine line running through the bottom.
Attachment 231168

It doesn't look like most of the other plate scratches and may have been caused by something different but there is another Powell and Hinchman
that have similar marks.
Attachment 231171Attachment 231174

I would guess that this mark was only on a few sheets. Powell and
Hinchman have another plate scratch that puts them along side each
other on this sheet and the line on this new Powell lines up with these two.
Attachment 231180

Hey Jantz,

Per our discussion at the national I'm not sure how much could be pieced together with the PB scratches but at the very least it's possible to put
together some subjects that weren't on the same sheets together but were
in the same position on different sheets with the scratches and print flaws.

Here's a Bell and Merkle with the same flaw and I think there should be
another subject with the same flaw as the PB flaws seem to occur on three
different subjects but I haven't found a third one with this flaw yet.

Patrick

not all that important perhaps
 

but I have a couple proof sheets for non-sport "T" cards issued contemporaneously to the T206's. The sheets are for sets of fifty cards - there are 3 sheets each with 12 cards and one sheet with 14 cards - an extra two cards with no double-prints and the extra space taken by a color-bar. While the lithographer would think it prudent to utilize all available space - just possible that not all sheets were uniform. Just saying.

Seeing those would be wonderful. If it's any of the ALC cards as most were then, it's the perfect example of how things can become complex.

I know ALCs progressive proof books are out there for many of the cigar box labels, since I saw one I've wondered if the progressive proofs for any of the baseball or non-sport cards survived.

Steve B