Are the "T213-1" (1910 COUPON) cards really T206's ? ....I think so....What say you ?

[MichelaiTorres83]

There are miscut broadleaf cards, lenox cards, hindu cards etc all of which have card populations under 1000.

The identical factory and brands make it more a t213 if you ask me and really is solid justifaction for a new card T type classification with sub types 1 2 and 3 for subtle differences among cards from the same factory and brand.

Again, I feel the date is irrelevant some and everyone is overthinking it. Especially when I do not think anyone can point me to a rule or document that states a date is a mandatory part of determining what type and class a card should be designated.

[DixieBaseball]

Originally Posted by MichelaiTorres83

There are miscut broadleaf cards, lenox cards, hindu cards etc all of which have card populations under 1000.

The identical factory and brands make it more a t213 if you ask me and really is solid justifaction for a new card T type classification with sub types 1 2 and 3 for subtle differences among cards from the same factory and brand.

Again, I feel the date is irrelevant some and everyone is overthinking it. Especially when I do not think anyone can point me to a rule or document that states a date is a mandatory part of determining what type and class a card should be designated.

Burdick lumped the 16 ATC brands under the T206 designation for his ACC catalog. The date is of relevance. 1909-11.

Not sure about your factory theory... Also Coupon Type 3's also come with a Factory 8 overprint which was in North Carolina. (not New Orleans) Remember, these cards were shipped to all the factories from American Lithographic. Like I said, quality control is different with a lot of brands. The T210 Series 8 should have way more miscut, wrong back, issues than they do, and per my knowledge you can't count on 2 hands the amount of 2 name, or error cards in that series and Thousands of those cards exists. Each production and release could have brought different factors. T211 has either 1 or No error cards and there are hundreds... Some things just can't be explained...

[MichelaiTorres83]

Originally Posted by DixieBaseball

Burdick lumped the 16 ATC brands under the T206 designation for his ACC catalog. The date is of relevance. 1909-11.

Not sure about your factory theory... Also Coupon Type 3's also come with a Factory 8 overprint which was in North Carolina. (not New Orleans) Remember, these cards were shipped to all the factories from American Lithographic. Like I said, quality control is different with a lot of brands. The T210 Series 8 should have way more miscut, wrong back, issues than they do, and per my knowledge you can't count on 2 hands the amount of 2 name, or error cards in that series and Thousands of those cards exists. Each production and release could have brought different factors. T211 has either 1 or No error cards and there are hundreds... Some things just can't be explained...

Where does it say that date is a criteria?

[DixieBaseball]

MichelaiTorres83;1844471]Where does it say that date is a criteria?

What I am saying is Coupon was released most likely during the 1910-11 based off everything we know, and probably should be lumped in as the 17th ATC brand produced by American Lithographic, which would mean it is more closely related to those 16 brands that have been designated T206, and therefore should be part of the T206 set. It is far closer to the T206 group than the 1914 & 19 Coupon Type 2, 3, with glossy finish, blue lettering, and different minor league players featured in the set that are not featured in the T206 set. I think Burdick simply lumped Type 1's because of the name Coupon even though the Type 1's are way closer to the sixteen 1909-11 T206 Brands than even they are with the 1914 & 1919 Coupon Brands.


What we know :

1. It looks just like the other 16 ATC brands Burdick included in T206.
2. According to Lew Lipset's Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards, the entire Coupon group consist of 350 series.
3. Also, according to Lipset's EOBBC, the 20 Southern Leaguers featured in Coupon were issued with the 350 series subjects.
4. The Coupon has a Size variance, just like the other T206 brand, American Beauty. (Depth/Width)

Side Note :

*The T211 Red Sun set was released in New Orleans (early Spring due to dating of players in minor and majors) and the intended 2nd series was not released. Perhaps that was due to the ATC break up in May of 1911. If the T206 brands seized ball card production in 1911 from the ATC break up, then most likely the 2nd Series for T211 never got off the ground for the same reasons. This could be a likely reason for Coupons being in limited numbers if it is from the 350 series only, released at back end of 1910, early 1911. (In previous posts, I was wondering why Red Sun didn't release their 2nd series and also drawing a parallel with Coupon as 2 sets in New Orleans that didn't do very well in terms of cards released, and I suggested there was some event that disrupted that 2nd series of Red Suns, as well as more Coupons being released with packs/cartons of cigarettes. The only event I can find around that timeline is the ATC break up which was obviously a big deal as it disrupted the whole industry and T206 cards as we know them stopped in 1911. Apologies for the ramble...)

* More Info - In 1915 Category 4 Hurricane hit New Orleans... http://www.neworleansbar.org/uploads...20Irby_1-2.pdf

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by DixieBaseball

MichelaiTorres83;1844471]Where does it say that date is a criteria?

What I am saying is Coupon was released most likely during the 1910-11 based off everything we know, and probably should be lumped in as the 17th ATC brand produced by American Lithographic, which would mean it is more closely related to those 16 brands that have been designated T206, and therefore should be part of the T206 set. It is far closer to the T206 group than the 1914 & 19 Coupon Type 2, 3, with glossy finish, blue lettering, and different minor league players featured in the set that are not featured in the T206 set. I think Burdick simply lumped Type 1's because of the name Coupon even though the Type 1's are way closer to the sixteen 1909-11 T206 Brands than even they are with the 1914 & 1919 Coupon Brands.


What we know :

1. It looks just like the other 16 ATC brands Burdick included in T206.
2. According to Lew Lipset's Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards, the entire Coupon group consist of 350 series.3. Also, according to Lipset's EOBBC, the 20 Southern Leaguers featured in Coupon were issued with the 350 series subjects. 4. The Coupon has a Size variance, just like the other T206 brand, American Beauty. (Depth/Width)

Side Note :
*The T211 Red Sun set was released in New Orleans (early Spring due to dating of players in minor and majors) and the intended 2nd series was not released. Perhaps that was due to the ATC break up in May of 1911. If the T206 brands seized ball card production in 1911 from the ATC break up, then most likely the 2nd Series for T211 never got off the ground for the same reasons. This could be a likely reason for Coupons being in limited numbers if it is from the 350 series only, released at back end of 1910, early 1911. (In previous posts, I was wondering why Red Sun didn't release their 2nd series and also drawing a parallel with Coupon as 2 sets in New Orleans that didn't do very well in terms of cards released, and I suggested there was some event that disrupted that 2nd series of Red Suns, as well as more Coupons being released with packs/cartons of cigarettes. The only event I can find around that timeline is the ATC break up which was obviously a big deal as it disrupted the whole industry and T206 cards as we know them stopped in 1911. Apologies for the ramble...)

The Southern Leaguers are 150/350 subjects.

img653.jpg

[DixieBaseball]

Originally Posted by Pat R

The Southern Leaguers are 150/350 subjects.

Pat - Are you referring to just the 20 Southern Association players in the Coupon set as 150/350 series or are you referring to the 48 players that are referred to as "Southern Leaguer's" in the T206 set? The Texas League, South Atlantic League, and Virginia league are commonly lumped in that verbiage as "Southern Leaguers" when in fact they actually are not. The 20 players featured in the Coupon set are from the Southern Association.

Also, maybe you or Ted can clear up what Lew Lipset meant when he said "It is not surprising to find this entire Coupon Series to consist of 350 series subjects."

Pat - What do you make of the Texas, Virginia, and South Atlantic League "SL" players not being present in this set, and only the 20 Southern Association players present which I believe were 350 series only, correct !?

Edited to add, if the 150 subjects are present what does this prove? It's still in the 1909-11 time frame. Does it imply there could have been more of the 150 subjects? Are all 68 cards featured as 350 subjects ? Did Lipset miss this? What correlation or theory are you trying to prove?

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by DixieBaseball

Pat - Are you referring to just the 20 Southern Association players in the Coupon set as 150/350 series or are you referring to the 48 players that are referred to as "Southern Leaguer's" in the T206 set? The Texas League, South Atlantic League, and Virginia league are commonly lumped in that verbiage as "Southern Leaguers" when in fact they actually are not. The 20 players featured in the Coupon set are from the Southern Association.

Also, maybe you or Ted can clear up what Lew Lipset meant when he said "It is not surprising to find this entire Coupon Series to consist of 350 series subjects."

Pat - What do you make of the Texas, Virginia, and South Atlantic League "SL" players not being present in this set, and only the 20 Southern Association players present which I believe were 350 series only, correct !?
Edited to add, if the 150 subjects are present what does this prove? It's still in the 1909-11 time frame. Does it imply there could have been more of the 150 subjects? Are all 68 cards featured as 350 subjects ? Did Lipset miss this? What correlation or theory are you trying to prove?

Jeremy, the 20 subjects were printed with Hindu and possibly Old Mill during the 150
series printing so they are 150/350 subjects.

img650.jpg

[Pat R]

Thank you for your response Jeremy. I don't think either one of us is
going to change the other persons opinion on this. As I have stated previously
based on extended research of different aspects of the printing of the
T206 set the T213-1's don't match up with any of the 350 series
backs that were printed with subjects used in the T213-1's.
If we find evidence that they were printed during the 350 only
phase (and I have been searching one way or the other) they would be a rule breaker for sure.

I don't think I answered your question about when I felt the T213-1's
were printed. Honestly I don't know it could have been soon after the
350 only printing concluded up until right before the printing of T213-2's
but in my opinion they reused the leftover plates/artwork and
possibly someone selected the subjects they wanted to use for the
T213-1's from the group of plates that were no longer being used.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by DixieBaseball

I will lean on Ted, Scot, you, and others on the following questions...

What about the other "Southern Leaguers" from the T206 set? Any patterns with the remaining "SL" players even though they are not actually SL players but called that in the T206 set... (Texas League, South Atlantic League, Virginia League are all absent from the Coupon set, correct !?) The Coupon set has 20 True Southern League players in it. Those 8 Teams represented are period to 1909.
This would suggest they were produced & released around that time frame, most likely 1910, but most certainly not later than 1911.

Why is the Coupon set missing T206 Southern leaguers from The South Atlantic, Virginia, and Texas leagues ? Perhaps, it's as easy as where they were released. New Orleans. New Orleans was in the Southern Association obvioulsy and the 20 SL players represent 8 teams in the SA.

Jeremy

We may never find an actual date when the 1910 COUPON cards were issued. However, we really don't need to. We have sufficient evidence gleaned from years of our research,
which logically suggests that this set of 68 cards were printed and issued within the T206 timeline.

Starting with this fact that American Lithographic (ALC) in 1909 printed 34 different Southern Leaguers (SL)...….16 of which represent the Southern Association. Circa late 1909
or early 1910, ALC expanded the SL sub-set to 48 subjects, 20 of which represent the Southern Association (SA). The four additional SA subjects are Bill Hart, "Hub" Hart, Lentz
and Rockenfeld. This is significant, as it clearly sets a Spring/Summer 1910 timeline for this T206 press run.

Furthermore, a timeline "window" is set by the fact that Carlos Smith (Shreveport) is not included as SA guy, since the Shreveport Pirates were transferred from SA to the Texas
League (1908 - 1910). And, ALC correctly identified Carlos Smith as one of the six Texas Leaguers which were included in the group of 48 subjects in the SL sub-set.

Finally, for those who think that ALC printed the "T213-1" cards in 1911 (or beyond). ALC started their gold-bordered sets (T80, T205, etc.) in the Spring of 1911. We have ALC
documented evidence regarding the T80 cards which were inserted in cigarettes packs with 350/460 and 460-only series T206 cards in the Spring of 1911......

T80 cards




Jeremy
It has become wearisome trying to convince members of this forum that the "T213-1" cards are indeed 1910 COUPON's which were printed and issued within the T206 timeline.

Take care good buddy.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Jeremy

We may never find an actual date when the 1910 COUPON cards were issued. However, we really don't need to. We have sufficient evidence gleaned from years of our research,
which logically suggests that this set of 68 cards were printed and issued within the T206 timeline.

Starting with this fact that American Lithographic (ALC) in 1909 printed 34 different Southern Leaguers (SL)...….16 of which represent the Southern Association. Circa late 1909
or early 1910, ALC expanded the SL sub-set to 48 subjects, 20 of which represent the Southern Association (SA). The four additional SA subjects are Bill Hart, "Hub" Hart, Lentz
and Rockenfeld. This is significant, as it clearly sets a Spring/Summer 1910 timeline for this T206 press run.

Furthermore, a timeline "window" is set by the fact that Carlos Smith (Shreveport) is not included as SA guy, since the Shreveport Pirates were transferred from SA to the Texas
League (1908 - 1910). And, ALC correctly identified Carlos Smith as one of the six Texas Leaguers which were included in the group of 48 subjects in the SL sub-set.
Finally, for those who think that ALC printed the "T213-1" cards in 1911 (or beyond). ALC started their gold-bordered sets (T80, T205, etc.) in the Spring of 1911. We have ALC
documented evidence regarding the T80 cards which were inserted in cigarettes packs with 350/460 and 460-only series T206 cards in the Spring of 1911......




Jeremy
It has become wearisome trying to convince members of this forum that the "T213-1" cards are indeed 1910 COUPON's which were printed and issued within the T206 timeline.

Take care good buddy.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Ted, The same thing would apply if they reused the old plates as it would
for several of the things you've brought attention to.

[tedzan]

Pat

Back in my High School days (during the Paleolithic Age ), I worked part-time in a Print Shop. I'm quite familiar with printing practices. And, I can tell you that printers
don't use.... "reused the old plates".
Major printing firms have multiple plates of each image so that they can replace used ones. As is obvious, as the plates wear the quality of the printed image deteriorates.

ALC printed the T213-2, T213-3, T214, T215-2 cards with a whole new set of printing plates.

The "T213-1" sub-set was printed concurrently with the exact same printing plates used to produce their respective T206 cards


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Jeremy

Starting with this fact that American Lithographic (ALC) in 1909 printed 34 different Southern Leaguers (SL)...….16 of which represent the Southern Association.
Circa late 1909 or early 1910, ALC expanded the SL sub-set to 48 subjects, 20 of which represent the Southern Association (SA). The four additional
SA subjects are Bill Hart, "Hub" Hart, Lentz and Rockenfeld.

This is significant, as it clearly sets a Spring/Summer 1910 timeline for this T206 press run.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Hey guys,

First of all, Lew Lipset is absolutely correct...…

" According to Lew Lipset's Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards, the entire 1910 Coupon group consist of 350 series.
Also, according to Lipset's EOBBC, the 20 Southern Leaguers featured in Coupon were issued with the 350 series subjects. "

2nd....The 20 subjects in this set from the Southern Association were NOT all printed in 1909 with HINDU backs !
Only 16 of the 20 were. See the excerpt from my post # 156 reprised above.

This fact confirms Lipset's second statement quoted above.

Please, let's consider the actual facts in the printing of these cards, instead of going off on misleading statements.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Pat R]

I stand corrected I didn't check all 20 subjects but the fact is there are
150/350 southern league subjects in the coupon set.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I stand corrected I didn't check all 20 subjects but the fact is there are
150/350 southern league subjects in the coupon set.

Pat

Please don't misconstrue, I'm not trying to be negative....but, incorrect facts in this debate can only drive us "crazy" in our attempts to resolve this puzzle.

Yes, we all know there are 34 - Southern Leaguer's (SL) which were printed in 1909 when ALC produced the 150/350 series cards.

But, the bigger picture to consider in this argument is that ALC expanded the SL sub-set to 48 subjects when they started printing the 350 series cards.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[DixieBaseball]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hey guys,

First of all, Lew Lipset is absolutely correct...…

" According to Lew Lipset's Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards, the entire 1910 Coupon group consist of 350 series.
Also, according to Lipset's EOBBC, the 20 Southern Leaguers featured in Coupon were issued with the 350 series subjects. "

2nd....The 20 subjects in this set from the Southern Association were NOT all printed in 1909 with HINDU backs !
Only 16 of the 20 were. See the excerpt from my post # 156 reprised above.

This fact confirms Lipset's second statement quoted above.

Please, let's consider the actual facts in the printing of these cards, instead of going off on misleading statements.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Thanks Ted for posting that info... That does confirm what I have been saying and thought that was the case. The fact that Burdick named the first coupon cards Type 1 and designated it T213 is not in question by me. What I am saying is all evidence leans towards the Coupon being another American Litho-ATC brand and the 350 series subjects suggest it was a brand from 1909-11 time frame, then I think we could all agree that Coupon is another brand just like the 16 brands Burdick designated T206. My point is, it's pretty obvious that Coupon brand is much more alike the rest of the T206 cards than it is the other two Coupon brands from 1914 & 1919. Also, don't forget that Burdick didn't even have a final count on the Type 1 Coupons (68) so he really wasn't as familiar with them as other ATC brands.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hey guys,

First of all, Lew Lipset is absolutely correct...…

" According to Lew Lipset's Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards, the entire 1910 Coupon group consist of 350 series.
Also, according to Lipset's EOBBC, the 20 Southern Leaguers featured in Coupon were issued with the 350 series subjects. "

[B]2nd....The 20 subjects in this set from the Southern Association were NOT all printed in 1909 with HINDU backs !
Only 16 of the 20 were. See the excerpt from my post # 156 reprised above.[/B]

This fact confirms Lipset's second statement quoted above.

Please, let's consider the actual facts in the printing of these cards, instead of going off on misleading statements.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Actually Ted since you're concerned about accuracy Lipset didn't specify Hindu and although he didn't know it at the time we now have proof
that except for the six Texas League players all of the SL players were printed in 1909 during the 150 series including all 20 of the coupon
SL subjects and despite not knowing this fact Lipset still considered them a "unique issue".

img890.jpg

img891.jpg

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Pat R

…..and although he didn't know it at the time we now have proof that except for the six Texas League players all of the SL players were printed in 1909 during the 150 series including all 20 of the coupon SL subjects.....

Pat...….. "including all 20 of the coupon SL subjects"…….. WRONG !

So, where are the BROWN HINDU cards of these four Southern Association players.... Bill Hart, "Hub" Hart, Lentz, Rockenfeld ! ?

These four Southern Association subjects were NOT PRINTED or issued in the initial launch of the Southern League group of 34 cards in 1909.

I don't understand why you continue to ignore this fact. These 4 guys were not available until all 48 of the Southern Leaguers were issued circa early 1910 (with OLD MILL backs,
or with PIEDMONT 350 backs).


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[RCMcKenzie]

someone selected the subjects they wanted to use for the
T213-1's from the group of plates that were no longer being used.

This is what I was driving at when I asked about the Shreveport, LA. player. Why are they selecting Billy Campbell unless they had to as part of a group?

[SetBuilder]

Using Ted's logic, then Gypsy Queens should be N172's.

[t206fix]

Originally Posted by MichelaiTorres83

Again, I feel the date is irrelevant some and everyone is overthinking it. Especially when I do not think anyone can point me to a rule or document that states a date is a mandatory part of determining what type and class a card should be designated.

I think this argument will go on and on until we define what a t206 really is. Wikipedia notes:
The tobacco card set known as T206 was issued from 1909 to 1911 in cigarette and loose tobacco packs through 16 different brands owned by the American Tobacco Company. It is a landmark set in the history of baseball card collecting, due to its size and rarity, and the quality of its color lithographs.

Is there a different definition? Are we arguing what Burdick thought a t206 was, and if so, case closed, he said "no".

When I was 12, I bought boxes of Cookie Crunch trying to complete this stupid set... Do we say that to have a complete 1984 topps set, you need to have this set because it was produced in 1984 by Topps? No, because we have a definition of what the 1984 topps set is comprised of...


So what makes a t206? If we answer that, we can stop arguing, or maybe, we just like arguing.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by t206fix

I think this argument will go on and on until we define what a t206 really is. Wikipedia notes:
The tobacco card set known as T206 was issued from 1909 to 1911 in cigarette and loose tobacco packs through 16 different brands owned by the American Tobacco Company. It is a landmark set in the history of baseball card collecting, due to its size and rarity, and the quality of its color lithographs.

Is there a different definition? Are we arguing what Burdick thought a t206 was, and if so, case closed, he said "no".

When I was 12, I bought boxes of Cookie Crunch trying to complete this stupid set... Do we say that to have a complete 1984 topps set, you need to have this set because it was produced in 1984 by Topps? No, because we have a definition of what the 1984 topps set is comprised of...


So what makes a t206? If we answer that, we can stop arguing, or maybe, we just like arguing.

Good point Tony.

[SetBuilder]

What is a T206?

• A card that was printed by ALC between the years 1909-11? or,
• A card that was issued inside packages of ATC branded tobacco products between the years 1909-11? or,
• both?

ALC is just a printer, and probably had a few clients, so it can't just be that they were printed by ALC because they could have been issued by another tobacco company. T206 cards must have the same issuer, and in this case it was ATC.

If the Coupon cards were printed by ALC, and issued/distributed by ATC inside tobacco products, between the years 1909 and 1911, then they should be T206.

Is there a definitive answer to any of those three questions at this point?

[MichelaiTorres83]

Originally Posted by t206fix

I think this argument will go on and on until we define what a t206 really is. Wikipedia notes:
The tobacco card set known as T206 was issued from 1909 to 1911 in cigarette and loose tobacco packs through 16 different brands owned by the American Tobacco Company. It is a landmark set in the history of baseball card collecting, due to its size and rarity, and the quality of its color lithographs.

Is there a different definition? Are we arguing what Burdick thought a t206 was, and if so, case closed, he said "no".

When I was 12, I bought boxes of Cookie Crunch trying to complete this stupid set... Do we say that to have a complete 1984 topps set, you need to have this set because it was produced in 1984 by Topps? No, because we have a definition of what the 1984 topps set is comprised of...


So what makes a t206? If we answer that, we can stop arguing, or maybe, we just like arguing.

Yea. I think that is the point. Where is the criteria used to determine a t206 card from the source that did it, not what a random person copied from a Tough Stuff magazine and posted to Wikipedia.

I am not sure how else you determine if someone made a “mistake”. If he says this is my criteria, this is my analysis and its proven incorrect, that is a mistake.

There are 2 ways of reading that.

Wikipedia says that date for when they were issued, but it does not say it is a criteria used to determine a t206. Maybe the criteria for a t206 does not require a date and the date range given is simply supplimental information about the cards.

Is there anything documenting what the criteria was for either a T206 or T213 from Burdick himself? I really do not know and this is a serious question. If so can you post it?

[Leon]

Since you asked here is the definitive answer (to me), once again, why T213s aren't T206s. It is from the 1960 American Card Catalog. It isn't rocket science. I would say if Burdick didn't know of the differences, and didn't actually compare them to T206, there could be a case for the -1s to be different. He knew exactly what he was doing when he made them their own series with the others from it. I am not sure how anyone can dispute that fact when it has been written for 59 yrs.

Originally Posted by MichelaiTorres83

Yea. I think that is the point. Where is the criteria used to determine a t206 card from the source that did it, not what a random person copied from a Tough Stuff magazine and posted to Wikipedia.

I am not sure how else you determine if someone made a “mistake”. If he says this is my criteria, this is my analysis and its proven incorrect, that is a mistake.

There are 2 ways of reading that.

Wikipedia says that date for when they were issued, but it does not say it is a criteria used to determine a t206. Maybe the criteria for a t206 does not require a date and the date range given is simply supplimental information about the cards.

Is there anything documenting what the criteria was for either a T206 or T213 from Burdick himself? I really do not know and this is a serious question. If so can you post it?

[MichelaiTorres83]

I have not seen that before. Thanks for posting it.

Your post sounds as though we do not agree, so to clarify, we do agree.

Your image supports that the designation is more about the brand than a date for t206 even if yhe date range on t213s may have been a mistake.

It also shows that a date range for t206 is non existing in the designation like I suspected.