I Believe This Could Be A Complete Horizontal Layout For This T206 Sheet

[PhillipAbbott79]

I believe that I have a card which may debunk some of this, or at least adds some level of confusion to what you are trying to unravel.

It has scratches that cross each other or don't go in the direction of the ones that are in the image.

I can't remember the player. I would need to look.

Also, how can you be sure that a given card belongs in the position you have it in when the line on the card cuts through another card in the same spot?

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by PhillipAbbott79

I believe that I have a card which may debunk some of this, or at least adds some level of confusion to what you are trying to unravel.

It has scratches that cross each other or don't go in the direction of the ones that are in the image.

I can't remember the player. I would need to look.

Also, how can you be sure that a given card belongs in the position you have it in when the line on the card cuts through another card in the same spot?

Without seeing the card I can't be sure but you might be talking about one
from another plate scratch sheet. There are four that have scratches that
cross each other from different directions on three different sheets.

There is a Seymour on this sheet
Semour%201a_1.jpg
Sheet%20F-B%20Highlighted.jpg

A Doyle and Stone on this sheet
Doyle%202_1.jpgStone%202_1.jpg
Sheet%20C-D%20Highlighted%20-%20Copy%20-%20Copy.jpg

And a Cobb on this sheet
Cobb%20_bat_%202.jpg
Sheet%20F%20-A%20Highlighted.jpg

I'm not sure if this is what you're referring to with your other question but the back of the sheet in this
thread was used for two different fronts so there are two subjects with the same scratch for each position.

[PhillipAbbott79]

Yes. I am referring ones that you have shown.

I still see room for some of them to be transposed with other positions, but admittedly haven't studied everything THAT hard to take an opposing view.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by PhillipAbbott79

Yes. I am referring ones that you have shown.

I still see room for some of them to be transposed with other positions, but admittedly haven't studied everything THAT hard to take an opposing view.

There are similar scratches in different positions but they don't work if you try to rearrange them. Some of the closest matches are Weimer/Pastorius with Powell/Goode and Criger/Davis,H. with Hinchman/Sheckard. I Have most of these cards in hand and I've experimented with them in different positions before I established this layout.
attachment.jpg
Weimer-Pastorius-Criger-Davis.jpgWeimer-Pastorius-Hinchman-Sheckard.jpg
Powell-Goode-Hinchman-Sheckard.jpgPowell-Goode-Criger-Davis.jpg

There is also a miscut SC150 Sheckard that shows part of Wilbur Goode.
Sheckard-Goode SC150.jpg

[Pat R]

I just picked up a new previously unconfirmed Weimer scratch that fits
the pattern of one of the three rows of scratches on this sheet.
The scratches from this row are difficult to spot because this scratch
is consistently much lighter than the other two.
img257.jpg
img259.jpg
Sheet [A-B] X Large updated.jpg

[Leon]

Nice work here, Pat.

Originally Posted by Pat R

I just picked up a new previously unconfirmed Weimer scratch that fits
the pattern of one of the three rows of scratches on this sheet.
The scratches from this row are difficult to spot because this scratch
is consistently much lighter than the other two.
Attachment 273511
Attachment 273512
Attachment 273513

[PhillipAbbott79]

Some of the cards in your image don't have any marks on them. How are you determining that those players go in those spots? Assuming miss cut cards and double names?

Also, your analysis would mean that they printed 2 piedmont 150 sheets of 4 rows of 17 and 1 sheet with a 9th row of 20.

What is the theory on the remaining cards? 17 plus the 3 wonders(Magie, Plank and Wagner)?