Nicholls SC150 649 OP CONTROVERSY

[cfc1909]

For some time now there has been some contention regarding the existence of a Simon Nicholls (Hands On Knees) with a Sweet Caporal 150 No.649 OP back.

The card originally popped up on Scot readers research list and was most likely a typo or a bad eBay scan where a Nicholls card was shown with a wrong back scan and Scot logged it in as verified which was understandable. Later Ted Z. claimed to have completed the set in a "Mission Accomplished" thread:



http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=91120


Since then Ted has been asked repeatedly to show the card to which he finally said he sold it. When a request was put in a thread on the board asking for proof of this front/back combo Ted posted a scan which was later determined to be the front of a Nicholls and the back was Delahanty. I personally viewed Ted's 649s at the Philly show to determine this. When I confronted Ted on this, his answer was he mixed this scans up.


The Sweet Caporal 649 OP set is 34 cards and most all cards surface quite often. There a few a little tougher but not due to being short printed as all 34 were printed in equal quantities and are not scarce. Some are tougher than others, but for reasons not related to this particular backs printing. Tim C. (Abravefan11) began putting this set together not too long ago and within 4 months at least one example of all 34 cards came to market. He has acquired 31 of the 34 and the other 3 are available for sale right now. So if you can complete the set in 6 months I wouldn’t consider any example rare or even scarce.

Even really obscure backs such as BL460, BL350, Uzit, Lenox and Hindu etc. we know of and see multiple player’s more than one example. Yet Simon Nicholls Sweet Cap 649 we’ve only heard of one example which was in Ted’s hands and then gone to a mystery collector just like the recent AB460’s…doesn’t add up. Wonka owns 2 of the three known Danny Murphy BL460’s. I would safely take a bet that any BL460 is way tougher than any Sweet Cap 649, and that SWC649 would surface much more than any BL460 I think most here would agree.

So as of today we don't have any proof that a Simon Nicholls 649 exists, yet it remains on the confirmed list on this site that many people trust to be accurate. And until Ted can really show this card, produce the buyer of this card or someone can show a graded example, I would not count this as a confirmed card.

Ted can’t take it off the list because he claims to have owned it, but if it doesn’t exist it shouldn’t be on the list regardless of what that means for Ted’s reputation.




"This card with the SWEET CAPORAL 150 Factory 649 (overprint) back is on my list since it has been seen. Scot Reader's T206 survey
of over 14,000 cards indicates that this card exists. I have said it exists; however, certain skeptics here choose not to believe me.

My experience collecting this particular SWEET CAP sub-set is that the HOFer's (George Davis, Griffith, Johnson, Lajoie, Marquard, and
Matty are quite available.

Guys like Alpermann, Bates, Goode, Tom Jones, Killian, Liebrandt, Powers, Ritchey, Sheckard, and Wilhelm are also seen quite often.

And, then there are certain subjects like Lake, McIntyre, Nicholls, Schmidt, Spencer, and Heine Wagner that are very tough to find.

I do not understand why this is so. I have compared my notes with others that collect this T206 sub-set and their experience is very
similar to mine."


TED Z


I would like to know who the others are that own a Nicholls 649 and share the same experience as you.

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by tedzan

This card with the SWEET CAPORAL 150 Factory 649 (overprint) back is on my list since it has been seen. Scot Reader's T206 survey of over 14,000 cards indicates that this card exists. I have said it exists; however, certain skeptics here choose not to believe me.

Nobody is arguing that one (1) Nicholls 649 was noted on Scot’s survey. But as Jim said there’s only 1 confirmed out of 14,000 entries and could have been a bad scan or mistake in the entry.

I personally have contacted Ted with several entries on the lists that were impossible front/back combinations and all of them were eventually removed. Those cards were entered as being seen indicating that they existed just like the Nicholls but were determined to not be correct and removed.

The difference in this situation and those cards that were removed is that Ted didn’t claim to own any of those.

Ultimately what anyone owns or claims to own doesn’t matter, the most important thing is putting out the most accurate and honest information we can for those that rely on it. This set is too complex and too difficult to have collectors chasing known bad information.

I find it hard to believe that I’m the only one disappointed by this.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

Nobody is arguing that one (1) Nicholls 649 was noted on Scot’s survey. But as Jim said there’s only 1 confirmed out of 14,000 entries and could
have been a bad scan or mistake in the entry.

That same 14,000 card survey has the following data on these SWEET CAP 150 (factory 649) cards......

1 ...... Ewing
1 ...... Gilbert
1 ...... McIntyre
1 ...... Nicholls
1 ...... O'Leary
0 ...... Schlei
0 ...... Spencer
1 ...... Wagner

While guys like G. Davis, Johnson, Marquard, Matty, and Powers have 5-6 samples each.


P.S. Jim is attempting to rationalize his skepticism. But, he has no proof that this Nicholls entry is NOT valid.
Jim....of all people....knows that there exists a high probability of unique T206 front/back combos......e.g. 150 series Schulte with a PIEDMONT 350
back (as only one has been accounted for).

TED Z

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by tedzan

That same 14,000 card survey has the following data on these SWEET CAP 150 (factory 649) cards......

1 ...... Ewing
1 ...... Gilbert
1 ...... McIntyre
1 ...... Nicholls
1 ...... O'Leary
0 ...... Schlei
0 ...... Spencer
1 ...... Wagner



TED Z

I own all of those cards with a 649 back on that list with the exception of Nicholls. I have seen all of the 34 come to market within a 4 month period and all but one multiple times.

Those exist and I can prove it with scans. I have looked for the Nicholls long before I started collecting the subset and I have never seen one. No one else has ever seen one. You haven't produced any proof of one.

Do you see why I'm skeptical?

New front/back combinations still happen from time to time, but this is a common back where every other example shows up with regularity. They were printed the same in the same quantities. Nicholls would show up if it existed.

[Abravefan11]

Also you continue when pushed into a corner to point to Scot and his work when his list is a survey and he never claimed to own the card.

You're the only person that has claimed to own this card. Stop shirking that responsibility.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Interesting question of burden of proof. Is the burden to show it does exist, or to show that it does not exist?

[wonkaticket]

I too own most of those cards or have owned them as I gave one Wagner away recently.



Funny though never seen a Nichols or owned one...only person I know who has ever claimed to own one is Ted.

Maybe ted has never owned it and this whole story along with others is just another elaborate test by Ted to see if we are worthy to talk T206’s.

Funny in just a handful of collectors I was able to confirm the Wagner above which is a tougher Sweet Cap 649…but not one person has seen a Nicholls besides the entry on Scot’s list and this phantom card of Teds.

Cheers,

John

P.S. If anyone can produce a real not re-backed, fake scan etc. Nicholls Sweet Cap 649 OP I’ll pay you cash to see it. If it’s in decent shape I’d say I’ll trade you a VG Green Cobb for the card but my extras are P150 so their OC to the top as 95% of them all are unless they are Hindu.

[wonkaticket]

And there it is…Huh I guess the Nicholls is now with the same mystery collector who now owns the AB460's?

The saddest thing of all this story time with Uncle Ted is why? He has a nice collection why make up stories....it not only is damaging to the hobby but to himself and his creditability.

A lot of folks on here really follow Ted and his info to take advantage of them or send them in a wrong direction is just silly and really questionable.

I and others have watched quietly over the year the stories grow and grow and while many of us privately laughed at Ted’s expense and chalked it up as fishing tales if you will.

I’ve also personally watched Ted talk to veteran collectors and new collectors with distain and enough is enough. Even worse I’ve seen Ted send other collectors down paths to nowhere which is a shame.

Call me mean if you want. But if you guys enjoy being sent on wild goose chases for tale tales then have at it not for me.

It’s clear the real and only mission accomplished here is that Ted has proven to be quite the story teller.

Cheers,

John

P.S. There is no conspiracy Ted before you go there again…yawn. It’s simple we all talk it’s a small hobby. Ted when you lie to me and others in print and via the phone and talk to people like they are 2 years old…big surprise people get to talking which if you’re not telling stories and have nothing to hide is no big deal…but in your case….hmmm.