T206 Wagner and Plank - They both didn't want their image on Tobacco cards

[mrvster]

Good evening Net 54ers!

I apologize that I have not posted in a while

I discuss T206 on a daily basis with some very experienced collectors.....

Today, we were discussing populations of the rarities of the set, when a long debated topic came up- did Plank block his image from the T206 set like Wagner did???

Why isn't Plank right up there in value like Wagner???

well, Plank is the sleeper.....as we are know the printing plate "didn't break"..

Plank did the same thing Wagner did.....


Let's put it to rest finally....

Plank 100% had a cease and desist of his image in the T206 set...

Plank is a sleeper right now....



lets start the facts...

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Because Wagner was significantly better as a player and regarded as one the best ever at his position and of all-time. As well he's not a pitcher.

[mrvster]

Both HOFER s .....same mystery ......... same story...... doesn't warrant the huge valuation gap... one better than the other not justifying the huge gap...

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by mrvster

Both HOFER s .....same mystery ......... same story...... doesn't warrant the huge valuation gap... one better than the other not justifying the huge gap...

Yes it does. That's literally every card and why they have value over one another. It matters who is depicted on the card.

[G1911]

If Plank sent a cease and desist, and his card was pulled as a result, it doesn't make sense to me it exists with both 150 and 350 backs.

I do think it is a good buy relative to the Wagner.

Some of the pulled ATC cards I just don't see a good explanation for that is rooted in the evidence. Maybe one day we'll uncover something, but some of the pulled cards are just guessing at this point.

[mrvster]

Yes.....350 will be explained by Sean....

I will let my friends explain...



HOFERs.....in this set T206, is Doyle a huge name???? look at that value???

Plank is the buy right now, total sleeper...

[HOF Auto Rookies]

Originally Posted by mrvster

Yes.....350 will be explained by Sean....

I will let my friends explain...



HOFERs.....in this set T206, is Doyle a huge name???? look at that value???

Plank is the buy right now, total sleeper...

I'm not saying it isn't a good buy or not. I have only replied to the value disparity. The Doyle value has nothing to do with the player, has to do with the error. Same with Magee.

I do agree though that Plank is an incredibly good buy with huge room to grow.

[mrvster]

YES!!!!

Doyle will prove that

[Smarti5051]

I suspect it is because for 40+ years I have been conditioned to understand Honus is the most significant card in the history of the hobby. I have heard the legend, and having a real one might even impress casual sports fans that have never collected cards. A T206 Plank could sit on Ebay for months with a $200 BIN if you blocked all of the Net54 members from accessing the listing. If you displayed it in your house, any conversation around the card would start with "are you related to him?"

Seriously though, there are lots of things about this hobby that make no sense. Why do "10s" command such a premium to "9s" even though the same card can literally get either grade depending on the day? Why does a dual rookie card of Magic Johnson and Larry Bird command less than a Zion Williamson rookie card? Why is Mickey Mantle so much more valuable than Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Lou Gehrig and Joe DiMaggio? The answer: Because the hobby gods say so!

[mrvster]

Yes.....I hear where you are coming from,

I think for years collectors thought "the printing plate broke" on the Plank which is ridiculous ...

if the correct story was publicized, Plank would be on Wagner's tail...which may happen as we get the story straight..

Doyle error proves that value and sky is the limit??

who knows who Doyle is???

time will tell on this, but my fellow collectors will solidify why there is no question Plank and Wagner did the same thing

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Smarti5051

A T206 Plank could sit on Ebay for months with a $200 BIN if you blocked all of the Net54 members from accessing the listing. If you displayed it in your house, any conversation around the card would start with "are you related to him?"

I should try that with this card.IMG_1733.jpg

[mrvster]

I Love it

[Sean]

Originally Posted by mrvster

Yes.....350 will be explained by Sean....

I will let my friends explain...



HOFERs.....in this set T206, is Doyle a huge name???? look at that value???

Plank is the buy right now, total sleeper...

I believe that Plank did deny ATC the use of his name and picture, just as Wagner did. It's possible that Plank was included in the 350 Series by mistake. The printers may have forgotten that they weren't supposed to use Plank. When someone realized the error the card was removed from production for a second time.

Since there are more 350 Series Planks than 150 Series, there should be significantly more Planks than Wagners.....at least twice as many. That still leaves them being ultra-scarce in relation to the demand for the Planks.

[Rhotchkiss]

I will post later on the topic, but (1) I love that card Sean!, and (2) here is version my son did about 5 years ago

[G1911]

It is entirely possible that Plank refused to allow the use of his image, they printed his card even without his signature (like the Ball and Hyland letters), Plank issued a cease and desist, American Lithography pulled his card, American Lithography then issued his card in the 350 series again, Plank sent another cease and desist or American Lithography pulled it without a second cease and desist.

I have not seen any evidence that any of these single events actually happened though, much less this chain. It is a possibility, one among many, unless there is some significant primary source evidence I am not aware of.

I don't think the plate theory is more likely than that American Lithography twice printed a card for Plank even though they didn't have his rights, and had a cease and desist order.

Some pulled American Lithography cards have some evidence (Wagner, the time period article on it being pulled), very strong circumstantial that supports a theory though it can hardly be said to be a fact (T227 Rodgers & Brown, their deaths), and others where there doesn't seem to be reasonable grounds to assert a theory is correct (T206 Plank, T220 Donovan & Corbett, etc.).

[mrvster]

outstanding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

G1- Ryan will explain

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by HOF Auto Rookies

Because Wagner was significantly better as a player and regarded as one the best ever at his position and of all-time. As well he's not a pitcher.

Plus 1. The Plank is a seriously cool card and not exactly inexpensive but I wouldn’t expect the gap to close.

[Rhotchkiss]

I strongly believe that the scarcity of T206 Wagner and Plank cards has to do with both men's opposition to being affiliated with tobacco. Besides the fact that its the most widely mentioned and earliest proffered explanation, Wagner and Plank's absence in almost every other tobacco issue is, I think, determinative. Neither player is in the T205 set, which is large and has most other contemporary HOFers. There are no Wagners or Planks in the T201, T202, T207, T213 or T3 sets. In fact, besides T206, the only tobacco set that Wagner is in is the T216 set, and I feel like those cards were pirated for that 1911-16 set from the earlier caramel (E) cards that use the same pose. The same is true for Plank, yet for some reason he also has a T204 card (Wagner does not) and is in the T208 set, which is strictly a Philly team set

Yet, while both players are part of an extremely few T issues, they are both widely found in the caramel/candy issues - E101, E102, E92, E105, E106, E107, etc; they are in confectionary issues, such as D303 and and D304 (in case of Wagner); they are in publication issues, such as W600, M101, etc; they are on all sorts of non-T post cards, such as Rose Co and Novelty Cutlery. Clearly, neither Wagner nor Plank had aversions to being used on a wide variety on non-T product-pieces. Thus, the scarcity of Wagner/Plank tobacco pieces, coupled their wide use on all products other than tobacco, seems to indicate that both were anti-tobacco.

I dont think it was a "money" thing because, as mentioned, both players are all over E, D, W, M and all sorts of other cards/issues. There were many tobacco companies, not all ATC, and I think it would be unrealistic to think all the tobacco companies, including huge ones, were cheap. Yet Crofts, out of Philly, general baking out of Rochester, and Nadja (out of STL I think), paid the necessary money that ATC and other profitable T companies did/could not. The money theory has too many logical holes.

I dont know enough about printing plates to opine there, other than I think the anti-tobacco argument makes the most sense. BTW, I believe Plank was a bit of a goodie goodie, adding to the likelihood he would be anti-tobacco and would not want kids chasing tobacco packs for his card. Regarding Wagner, note his 1949 Leaf card, where an older Wagner is in the act of sticking a huge wad of tobacco into his pie hole; interesting and perhaps ironic they used that image.

Plank was a great player, but Wagner was 10x the player and 100x the icon. Plus, there are more T206 Planks than Wagners (and Planks has 150 and 350 series, both facts mitigating against the fact that they were both pulled off the print bc only one contested), and the T206 Wagner is THE card of all collectibles. Plank is certainly an amazing and perhaps underrated card, but its utter chump change compared to the T206 Wagner (indeed, every other pre war card out there except a very few is chump change compared to the T206 Wagner).

Here are some T examples of Wagner and Plank -- very rare to have either on a tobacco card

[Pat R]

We are all just speculating until/if we find solid proof but I think that Plank being pulled might have had something to do with several different legal battles and new Tobacco Laws at the time of the T206 printings.

I have to head out but I will try and get some of the information together when I get back. Greg and I were in a discussion about all of this a few months ago that I wanted to look into more but haven't got around to it maybe he will chime in here about it.

Some of what was involved is right around the time when the T206's were printed there was a new law (mentioned in the Neal Ball letter among other documents) about having permission to use a players image. One exception was if the image was prior to 1904? (I have to check on the year) and Planks E107 which is the same image as his T206 falls in that category.

The majority of what we found was in court proceedings right at the time of the T206 printings and there is a ton of information to sift through including
different laws for each state/city and Philadelphia was one of the cities that was pushing for stricter laws. One of the court cases involved a legal battle between ATC and the Peoples Tobacco (T216).

[Carter08]

One argument I don’t love is the argument that Honus couldn’t have objected to tobacco because his leaf card shows him chewing. I get the argument from a superficial standpoint but it doesn’t hold for a bunch reasons - guy could be fine with tobacco for himself but not kids, he could have changed his mind after about 30 years, might be fine with chew but not cigarettes, etc.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Carter08

One argument I don’t love is the argument that Honus couldn’t have objected to tobacco because his leaf card shows him chewing. I get the argument from a superficial standpoint but it doesn’t hold for a bunch reasons - guy could be fine with tobacco for himself but not kids, he could have changed his mind after about 30 years, might be fine with chew but not cigarettes, etc.

I am one of those that falls on this side, I fully believe it's a myth. The real story likely has more to do with a tad of payola' for him to allow it vs. some noble venture.

I think that holds water like a screen door.

Most people tend to ignore the reference of history and use only a magnifying glass of current knowledge. During the T206 production, doctors would have been often touting the health benefits of smoking and the chance of your doctor walking into your exam room with a lit cigarette was likely very good. This continued well through the 30's, 40's , and 50's. To say that these 2 took some elite stance while ignoring of other tobacco releases seems questionable.

To be honest though, the truth means little. The story is ingrained and will never change, whether it is truthful or not. The facts for either are lost to time. Cobb will never regain his public reputation, we will never know the extent of Shoeless Joe's involvement, and we will never know the truth on this.

[Carter08]

Originally Posted by JustinD

I am one of those that falls on this side, I fully believe it's a myth. The real story likely has more to do with a tad of payola' for him to allow it vs. some noble venture.

I think that holds water like a screen door.

I don’t disagree. As long as you’re not relying solely on the leaf card argument.

[mrreality68]

Ryan great collection

And I agree with your in-depth summary

I believe in this case the biggest part of the value discrepancy is the “ legend” and Icon of Wagner over Plank.

Both players are great but Wagner had the Mystique about him

[MVSNYC]

Johnny, great thread. I don't have anything else to add, but I think Sean & Ryan posted some great points.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Pat R

We are all just speculating until/if we find solid proof but I think that Plank being pulled might have had something to do with several different legal battles and new Tobacco Laws at the time of the T206 printings.

I have to head out but I will try and get some of the information together when I get back. Greg and I were in a discussion about all of this a few months ago that I wanted to look into more but haven't got around to it maybe he will chime in here about it.

Some of what was involved is right around the time when the T206's were printed there was a new law (mentioned in the Neal Ball letter among other documents) about having permission to use a players image. One exception was if the image was prior to 1904? (I have to check on the year) and Planks E107 which is the same image as his T206 falls in that category.

The majority of what we found was in court proceedings right at the time of the T206 printings and there is a ton of information to sift through including
different laws for each state/city and Philadelphia was one of the cities that was pushing for stricter laws. One of the court cases involved a legal battle between ATC and the Peoples Tobacco (T216).

Going off memory of our little research project:

We found legal cases in Wisconsin and Philadelphia in late 1908/early 1909 against the tobacco combination regarding the use of coupons and cards. Pat found some advertisements put into Philadelphia area newspapers in 1909 stating that the ATC and Polar Bear's (interesting that this brand and this brand only is highlighted) 'tags and coupons' were still being accepted at certain locations (implying there was reason consumers would think they were not good anymore). Much of the context is rather vague sometimes but the Philadelphia territory is highlighted in a number of documents as being distinct from other areas by the ATC, presumably in connection with stricter regulation in the Philadelphia area.


Cigarette cards and coupons were made illegal in 1897 with a law forbidding essentially anything but the tobacco itself to be inside the box. The tobacco companies legal challenge lost. In July of 1902 an amendment was passed that rephrased it to ban coupons and 'indecent or immoral' pictures (perhaps a reason the T cards have few sets of actresses like the N cards, and the ones they did make are less sexual by the standards of that time than many of the N cards), but apparently there was some confusion whether this was specifically replacing the old legislation or supplementing it. In 1907, after a report from the Congressional Ways and Means Committee, it was amended again to specifically allow coupons and cards, as long as it did not materially increase the size of the package. The government being the government of course sought to profit by allowing the tobacco companies to advertise in their cigarette packs. They instituted a two cent tax in this clause on coupon redemptions. This seemed to me to pretty much explain why the spate of T cards came when it did. They weren't legal during most of the 'gap' between the Mayo set and the 1909 card explosion, and they were generally used instead of coupons because at this time there was a pain-in-the-rear tax and actually redeeming coupons, but no such tax on pictures instead of redemption prizes.

We found a ton of other stuff, much of which was posted in the Boxing board even though it applies across sports and non-sports, but I think this was the relevant parts that haven't been posted before.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Most people tend to ignore the reference of history and use only a magnifying glass of current knowledge. During the T206 production, doctors would have been often touting the health benefits of smoking and the chance of your doctor walking into your exam room with a lit cigarette was likely very good. This continued well through the 30's, 40's , and 50's. To say that these 2 took some elite stance while ignoring of other tobacco releases seems questionable.

At the time of T206 production, there was a very vocal anti-tobacco segment of the public. Journals of the time are filled with anti-tobacco articles, largely focused on it's negative health impacts (both true and imagined) and the view that it was somehow morally damaging. It is nigh impossible to gauge how unusual this view was among the public, but it was very common in the press and papers, and amongst health and exercise centric publications, and seems to have played a not insignificant role in the government targeting of the ATC at the local, state and federal levels. It wouldn't have been an elite stance, or ahead of its time, for an athlete to either be against tobacco and it's use or to not want to take any part in the public dialogue about it either way. At least one other ATC short printed athlete subject wrote public articles about distaste for tobacco and it's negative health impact.

[Lobo Aullando]

Wasn't there also a change in the laws regarding tobacco product premiums? I recall reading that there were restrictions on those for a couple decades, and I've been wondering if that had any effect. (Folks should wait for more info before memory-banking this.)

And Plank was from Gettysburg, so there's some thought that even Unionists had some pretty hard feelings after the War.

Originally Posted by Pat R

We are all just speculating until/if we find solid proof but I think that Plank being pulled might have had something to do with several different legal battles and new Tobacco Laws at the time of the T206 printings.

I have to head out but I will try and get some of the information together when I get back. Greg and I were in a discussion about all of this a few months ago that I wanted to look into more but haven't got around to it maybe he will chime in here about it.

Some of what was involved is right around the time when the T206's were printed there was a new law (mentioned in the Neal Ball letter among other documents) about having permission to use a players image. One exception was if the image was prior to 1904? (I have to check on the year) and Planks E107 which is the same image as his T206 falls in that category.

The majority of what we found was in court proceedings right at the time of the T206 printings and there is a ton of information to sift through including
different laws for each state/city and Philadelphia was one of the cities that was pushing for stricter laws. One of the court cases involved a legal battle between ATC and the Peoples Tobacco (T216).

[Lobo Aullando]

Man, I didn't even have to wait.

Thanks!

Originally Posted by G1911

Cigarette cards and coupons were made illegal in 1897 with a law forbidding essentially anything but the tobacco itself to be inside the box. ...

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by G1911

At the time of T206 production, there was a very vocal anti-tobacco segment of the public. Journals of the time are filled with anti-tobacco articles, largely focused on it's negative health impacts (both true and imagined) and the view that it was somehow morally damaging. It is nigh impossible to gauge how unusual this view was among the public, but it was very common in the press and papers, and amongst health and exercise centric publications, and seems to have played a not insignificant role in the government targeting of the ATC at the local, state and federal levels. It wouldn't have been an elite stance, or ahead of its time, for an athlete to either be against tobacco and it's use or to not want to take any part in the public dialogue about it either way. At least one other ATC short printed athlete subject wrote public articles about distaste for tobacco and it's negative health impact.

Again, going off an impossible to prove thought due to time and that I was not in existence prior to the very early Seventies (lol). However, I would place media and journals much more on the "morally damaging" stance and say much like prohibition it was far less accepted by the public and a signification of wealth and status wished to be imitated.

I would change my wording to "morally" or "Christian" elite stance.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Again, going off an impossible to prove thought due to time and that I was not in existence prior to the very early Seventies (lol). However, I would place media and journals much more on the "morally damaging" stance and say much like prohibition it was far less accepted by the public and a signification of wealth and status wished to be imitated.

I would change my wording to "morally" or "Christian" elite stance.

It was prevalent in athletic, sport and exercise journals of the time - the exact group of people that Wagner and Plank were members of. Numerous athletes wrote editorials and statements about the dangers of tobacco use (one of the ATC’s short-printed boxing subjects among them). It would hardly be out of tune with the times for Wagner and or Plank to be anti tobacco as much of the sporting world was for reasons of health and morals (the athletic focused health and wellness journals tend to include the former in their anti-tobacco articles and op-eds). It would not be assigning the base ballers to a class that they were not a part of, many people in the athletic world at this time were against tobacco. It was not an idea restricted to Christian preachers and elitists.

There is no evidence that has been produced that Plank was anti tobacco or wanted his card pulled, or wanted his card pulled for an anti tobacco reason. There is the article from the time stating this happened with Wagner, which may ir may not be really true but is at least primary source evidence. While I do not buy, on evidentiary grounds, that this theory can reasonably be said to be true or even probably true, it also cannot be dismissed as being modern in its logic or out of step with the realities of 1909.

[tedzan]

Eddie Plank......

.

Eddie Plank was vehemently averse to any form of tobacco use. How do I know this ?

Here is a quote from Connie Mack to a sports journalist, who asked Connie.... "What is Plank's secret of his pitching success ?"

Connie replied.... "The secret of Plank's pitching success is no secret at all. It is a good strong arm, a powerful constitution to back it, and neither drinks, SMOKES,
chews tobacco, nor swears". **

Furthermore, I met Connie Mack III at a gathering of the Philadelphia A's Historical Society in Hatboro, PA. We had a nice conversation which included stories of Eddie Plank.

I have researched legal documents in the Philadelphia Library, but could not find any thing pertaining to any kind of possible legal action by Plank vs. ATC. However, a lawyer
friend, who informed me that back in the beginning of the 20th Century, the usual action was simply to file a "Cease and Desist" order in person (followed by a Handshake).

** Note....from Connie Mack's Biography (The Early Years), by Norman Macht.

Regarding John Wagner, we know he smoked cigars and chewed tobacco....I'll leave it at that.

TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[mrreality68]

Great Looking Card Ted.

Many of us Wish we had one.

Some day

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by JustinD

I am one of those that falls on this side, I fully believe it's a myth. The real story likely has more to do with a tad of payola' for him to allow it vs. some noble venture.

I think that holds water like a screen door.

Most people tend to ignore the reference of history and use only a magnifying glass of current knowledge. During the T206 production, doctors would have been often touting the health benefits of smoking and the chance of your doctor walking into your exam room with a lit cigarette was likely very good. This continued well through the 30's, 40's , and 50's. To say that these 2 took some elite stance while ignoring of other tobacco releases seems questionable.

To be honest though, the truth means little. The story is ingrained and will never change, whether it is truthful or not. The facts for either are lost to time. Cobb will never regain his public reputation, we will never know the extent of Shoeless Joe's involvement, and we will never know the truth on this.

Not that newspaper clips are 100% proof but there are several from the early 1900's that quote Wagner as saying he didn't want his picture used in cigarettes because of the kids. I haven't found anything on Plank refusing to have his picture used.

Wagner refuses to allow picture.jpg

Wagner.jpg

Wagner ad Part 1.jpg
Wagner ad Part 2.jpg

[JustinD]

Perhaps everyone is just thinking I am positive that I am right, lol. Not in the least.

I just have personal thoughts as I think that as time goes on history adds a romantic flavor to many things.

I only have a hard time with this as it is so specific to the T206 release, as there are so many other tobacco releases with both. Perhaps neither chose to pursue any legal actions toward the other releases and the American Litho Co. or ATC were the only companies polite enough to seek permission...I just don't know the why. While it could indeed be just as reasonable to take it all as fact, and I have no qualms with that in the least. There are just so many gaps in the T206 stories whether these two had disagreements with tobacco or not.

Personally I think financial reasons are a more logical explanation for the specific T206 issue than mere moral stance even if they did have a full moral stance on the subject.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Perhaps everyone is just thinking I am positive that I am right, lol. Not in the least.

I just have personal thoughts as I think that as time goes on history adds a romantic flavor to many things.

I only have a hard time with this as it is so specific to the T206 release, as there are so many other tobacco releases with both. Perhaps neither chose to pursue any legal actions toward the other releases and the American Litho Co. or ATC were the only companies polite enough to seek permission...I just don't know the why. While it could indeed be just as reasonable to take it all as fact, and I have no qualms with that in the least. There are just so many gaps in the T206 stories whether these two had disagreements with tobacco or not.

Personally I think financial reasons are a more logical explanation for the specific T206 issue than mere moral stance even if they did have a full moral stance on the subject.

Justin, the reason it's specific to the T206 release is there was a new law passed right before they were starting the printing of the T206's. It is referred to in the Neal Ball letter and I have seen court documents that mention needing permission with an exception for images that the lithograph companies had prior to I think 1904, I'm trying to locate the document I saw that in but I haven't found it yet.

Here's the reference to the new law in the Neal Ball letter.
Neal Ball Letter - Copy.jpg

[JustinD]

Thanks Pat, that is a new piece for me!

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Perhaps everyone is just thinking I am positive that I am right, lol. Not in the least.

I just have personal thoughts as I think that as time goes on history adds a romantic flavor to many things.

I only have a hard time with this as it is so specific to the T206 release, as there are so many other tobacco releases with both. Perhaps neither chose to pursue any legal actions toward the other releases and the American Litho Co. or ATC were the only companies polite enough to seek permission...I just don't know the why. While it could indeed be just as reasonable to take it all as fact, and I have no qualms with that in the least. There are just so many gaps in the T206 stories whether these two had disagreements with tobacco or not.

Personally I think financial reasons are a more logical explanation for the specific T206 issue than mere moral stance even if they did have a full moral stance on the subject.

Justin, there are virtually NO tobacco releases with either. The only other tobacco issue with Wagner is t216 (and those were pirated from the E cards) and t216, t204 and t208 (a team specific issue) are the only T cards with Plank. I agree it was a long time ago anc there are all sorts of theories, but the anti-tobacco stance by BOTH Plank and Wagner appears the most likely (by far) reason they were pulled from
T206

[x2drich2000]

Ryan, while I agree with your premise, as an FYI, both Wagner and Plank are also in the T5 Pinkerton set.

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Ryan, while I agree with your premise, as an FYI, both Wagner and Plank are also in the T5 Pinkerton set.

Ok, so T5. But no T3, or t205, t202, T207, t213, T214, T215 etc. And they are in basically every E, D, W, and M series. Strong odds are anti-tobacco

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Ok, so T5. But no T3, or t205, t202, T207, t213, T214, T215 etc. And they are in basically every E, D, W, and M series. Strong odds are anti-tobacco

But yes T216...who knows if he even knew about a little Louisiana issue.

[G1911]

The law referencing the use of a persons photo was, as I recall, a New York State law. It wouldn't have been relevant to T216 but of course very relevant to T206.

I've never been able to find reference in primary source material to Plank being anti-tobacco or vehemently averse to tobacco use. I don't drink, but I'm not anti-alcohol. It's very possible he was, the chain of events posited here may be true, but I've never been able to find any evidence of any of it's points for Plank.

If Wagner was not anti-tobacco, he had a good PR agent. He may have done it over money, but he at least made a pretense of being anti-tobacco.

[JustinD]

I think Pat’s intro, for myself at least, of the Neal Ball letter has helped me better understand the beginning or roots of the T206 issue on this.

I am leaning toward the Plank withdrawal for anti tobacco stance but still feeling Wagner can be best explained by either compensation or possibly just being incredibly uppity. Wags loved his tobacco and the hall has record of this. He was an avid user of both cigars and chew. The backing of the T206 argument is that he thought cigarettes were “low class” and that cigars and chewing tobacco were somehow better.

The Hall has this specific quote attributed to Wagner on his use from 1916 - “Tobacco may shorten a man’s life and interfere with his baseball career but I guess it hasn’t shortened mine a great deal. I have noticed that where a player starts to quit hitting, it will shorten his career a good deal quicker than tobacco.”

[mrvster]

Great stuff and Thanks Mike(you would've posted this thread)! I just got it going for you! Pat, Ted, Ryan, Sean, all the rest great to hear from y'all!

INSANE INPUT!



I wanted to win that Neal Ball inclusion letter myself, along with one of the "ledger pages" if everyone remembers those


Plank issued a "cease and desist" , never had an inclusion letter signed, like Plank.....probabilities are way too high.....all signs point to "YES"

Printer jumped the gun on the 350 and were pulled almost immediately....

really cool stuff....

another plate would have been created for the next series(even if the portrait plate broke)


I was day dreaming today, of someday a Proof of both showed up one day, of anticipation of a signed inclusion letter and a proof of both going into the 460 series batting and pitching??

[mrvster]

Great stuff and Thanks Mike(you would've posted this thread)! I just got it going for you! Pat, Ted, Ryan, Sean, all the rest great to hear from y'all!

INSANE INPUT!



I wanted to win that Neal Ball inclusion letter myself, along with one of the "ledger pages" if everyone remembers those


Plank issued a "cease and desist" , never had an inclusion letter signed, like Plank.....probabilities are way too high.....all signs point to "YES"

Printer jumped the gun on the 350 and were pulled almost immediately....

really cool stuff....

another plate would have been created for the next series(even if the portrait plate broke)


I was day dreaming today, of someday a Proof of both showed up one day, of anticipation of a signed inclusion letter and a proof of both going into the 460 series batting and pitching??

[Pat R]

Plank may have been anti-tobacco but he wasn't as outspoken about it as Wagner. It's easy to find clips of Wagner's stance but I've yet to find anything on Plank.

September 26 1909
Cigarette Pictures Santa_Cruz_Evening_News_Wed__Sep_29__1909_.jpg

[mrvster]

keep it coming

[insidethewrapper]

Wagner died in 1955. It is funny that no one ever asked him about it to get the story straight !

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by insidethewrapper

Wagner died in 1955. It is funny that no one ever asked him about it to get the story straight !

Mike, you don't think the numerous newspaper clips of him saying he didn't want his pictures to influence kids to buy/use cigarettes is enough evidence?

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Mike, you don't think the numerous newspaper clips of him saying he didn't want his pictures to influence kids to buy/use cigarettes is enough evidence?

I think the great confusion really is in phrasing. Everyone states Wagner was anti-tobacco when he most certainly was not. He was anti-cigarette only, which is semantics but a really confusing stance. It was a completely uneducated opinion which certainly showed his age.

[JustinD]

There are plenty of these to trash any anti-tobacco sentiment. However, you won't find a cigarette as his science was a tad ridiculous.