NonSports Forum
Welcome to These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
ebay GSB

Go Back Forums > Net54baseball Main Forum - WWII & Older Baseball Cards > Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-07-2016, 02:25 PM
Pat R's Avatar
Pat R Pat R is offline
P@trick R.omolo
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,136

Originally Posted by sreader3 View Post
Pat -- Great work.

I buy the same-subject-on-multiple-sheets theory for the additional reason that some of the subjects appearing on Pat's reconstructed scratched sheet are significantly scarcer than others.

[And I would put Stovall (Portrait) and Hinchman (Cleveland) in the "easier" category].

Thank You Scot. While working on this I've developed a great appreciation for you and all of the others that have done extensive research on this set, it
can be a lot of information to keep track of.

The answers to some of the mystery's might be hidden in these sheets. For instance... Powers is the lone 150 only subject on this sheet
and we know he's also the only SC factory 649op subject from that group.
The rest of the 150 only subjects are together on a different plate scratch
sheet with the exception of Wagner, Magie and George Brown (Chic) no
scratches have been found on these three subjects yet.

The following are together on the same plate scratch sheet.

Ames (hands at chest)
Brown, M (cubs)
Burch (batting)
Donlin (fielding)
Doyle (throwing)
Evers (cubs)
Pelty (horizontal)
Reulbach (glove showing)

Schulte (front view) is also on this sheet and personally I still consider
this card a 150 only.
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2016, 02:49 PM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 4,760

The Mullin has a scratch from upper left to lower right. That's part of a different group from the ones Pat has put together so far. That other one I think also has a vertical scratch or two.

While the Scientific American article showed Hoe #5 presses at ALC when they electrified, there's no evidence I've seen indicating any particular press used for any particular job. That includes the existing progressive proof books for cigar box labels.
Like any large shop ALC most likely had a variety of presses that would be used depending on how many of something were to be printed.

The scratches can show certain things, but not others. They can show that two cards were likely side by side on the sheet. That there's two cards showing the same scratch limits that to a possibility of 2, but at the same time, if one shows the scratch and another shows the same scratch they can be positively ruled out as being from the same sheet. Combined with a front mark like the one Pat showed recently they can show cards as being from the same sheet. It's hardly arbitrary.

There are a few things that need more research.
ALC was close to Hoe in a business sense, Hoe made a lot of different sorts of presses around 1910. Including both the flatbed presses like the #5, rotary presses that used plates rather than stones, web fed presses that printed not sheets but rolls of paper or cardstock, and multi color presses. There is some evidence that some but probably not all T206s were printed on a two color press.

There's a lot of evidence that most of the series were printed at least three times, and that subjects were reworked between printings as well as between series. 150's were done at least three times, and were altered before the 350 series, which was printed at least twice with a reworking in between for many subjects.

And among all that is the possibility (Almost certainty) that there were multiple sheet layouts for each series AND each back. That's especially true for the 150's where there's a handful of outliers that don't match up with a simple layout of single sheets. (Crawford wasn't in the Sovereign set but was in all the others. I can't imagine he was printed but pulled)

The scratches - at least one of them was deep enough to carry over into P350. Whether it was deep enough to survive resurfacing or the 150 stone with the scratch was altered to produce a 350 stone without having all new transfers laid down is a puzzle for the future.

At least one P150 back shows a doubling, either a poorly erased earlier layout or a redone misplaced transfer (Criger - Any others?)

So the simple solution of a sheet always being the same size really doesn't work.

Steve B
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2016, 03:23 PM
Pat R's Avatar
Pat R Pat R is offline
P@trick R.omolo
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,136
Default Twelve Subjects Per Sheet


We will have to agree to disagree on this. I'm not saying all of the sheets were
this size but several of the plate scratch sheets are larger than 12 subjects
wide, this I'm sure of and I think the plate scratch evidence is solid proof of

As Steve said the Mullin is a right to left plate scratch and was on a different
sheet. The sheet In this thread consists of subjects with left to right plate scratches.
At last count there were over 250 different plate scratches and 5 or 6
different plate scratch sheets. (I'm on the fence if one of the sheets is actually
two separate sheets).

Here's the sheet with Mullin on it.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Sheet%20E - Copy - Copy.jpg (78.6 KB, 1108 views)
File Type: jpg Sheet%20E.jpg (80.8 KB, 1105 views)
Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2016, 09:45 PM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is offline
peasant/forum owner
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 25,103

Those match up nicely, job well done, Pat. It's always fun to learn of the processes behind the making of the cards.

And thanks for sharing all of the info guys...and for the good card discussion.
Leon Luckey
Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2016, 04:30 PM
Pat R's Avatar
Pat R Pat R is offline
P@trick R.omolo
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,136

Well I found out how good the template works.
When I originally made this template I only had Four scratches
for the middle line and they're pairs so they only cover two spots
on the sheet plus they're side by side so I couldn't continue the line
across the sheet with no other scratches to connect them to.

I acquired this Williams scratch after I made the template and
this afternoon when I got home from work I went to add it to the template
and I couldn't get it to line up, after some head scratching and talking to myself
I realized that I had put the middle line one spot to far to the right.
The scratches I have are Criger/Harry Davis and Hahn/Wilhelm but I had put
the Criger/Davis scratch in the Hahn/Wilhelm slot and The Hahn/Wilhelm in
the Murphy/George Davis slot thus the reason I couldn't get the Williams to line up.

I didn't want to go through the process of making a whole new template
so I just cut out the two that were wrong and taped new ones in their place
and made a new longer line with the Williams addition.
I still have to put all the X's back for the confirmed scratches.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Williams 3.jpg (78.6 KB, 1024 views)
File Type: jpg Williams Back 3.jpg (80.9 KB, 1023 views)
File Type: jpg Williams [3] Back Crop -.jpg (65.1 KB, 1024 views)
File Type: jpg Sheet [A-B] - Copy - Copy.jpg (79.9 KB, 1023 views)
Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2016, 08:41 PM
I Only Smoke 4 the Cards's Avatar
I Only Smoke 4 the Cards I Only Smoke 4 the Cards is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,084

Very cool stuff!

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Tackling the Monster
T206 = 194/524
HOFs = 11/76
SLers = 30/48
Horizontals = 6/6

ALWAYS looking for T206 with back damage.
Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2016, 10:20 AM
Pat R's Avatar
Pat R Pat R is offline
P@trick R.omolo
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,136

This is the corrected template with the middle line where it should be and
all the X's marking the confirmed scratches. The Red ? marks are the three
missing SC 649 scratches. These three scratches should eventually be found
on subjects from this list.

Bresnahan (port)
Lajoie (throwing)
Marquard (hands at side)
Mathewson (white cap)
McQuillan (ball in hand)
Schlei (catching)
Schmidt (throwing)
Sheckard (no glove showing)
Wagner (bat on left shoulder)

If anyone has any SC 649 subjects from this list with a PD 150 back and would check
them for any of the missing scratches it would be much appreciated.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Sheet [A-B] X.jpg (79.3 KB, 947 views)
Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 01:15 PM
cfc1909's Avatar
cfc1909 cfc1909 is offline
Jim R
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,315


fantastic research. Very solid and fits with the the set numbers. Well done my friend.
Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2016, 10:32 AM
Pat R's Avatar
Pat R Pat R is offline
P@trick R.omolo
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,136

Made some more progress on this sheet, I found another piece of the upper
scratch. This Williams lines up with Conroy on the upper scratch. All three
different Williams scratches are now confirmed for this sheet and only
the middle Conroy scratch remains unconfirmed for this pair of neighbors.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Williams%20Back%20_4_.jpg (79.6 KB, 900 views)
File Type: jpg Williams%20_4_.jpg (78.3 KB, 898 views)
File Type: jpg Williams Back [4] - Crop.jpg (51.7 KB, 899 views)
File Type: jpg Conroy%20Back%20_4_.jpg (76.5 KB, 897 views)
File Type: jpg Sheet [A-B] X Williams.jpg (79.3 KB, 897 views)

Last edited by Pat R; 02-22-2016 at 10:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2016, 11:39 AM
parkerj33 parkerj33 is offline
Jim Parker
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: NY
Posts: 102

Maybe i am misunderstand most excellent research, but .... it troubles me that there is only a partial scratch that is perfectly parallel to row 1 (in row 2). couldn't there be a plausible layout such that the seven cards in row 2( position 2-8) from weimer/pastorius to ?/mcintyre could actually be extended in row 1 (positions 18-24)? it looks like that scratch would line up....

Edited: actually after photoshopping it, it looks like you need a gap between your column 17 and the next row two it would be row 2, col 1-8 added onto your 17 column row 1.

i state all this because it seems odd (but not impossible) that we would have a partial scratch in the middle of the sheet that is PERFECTLY parallel to the top scratch.

Edited2: One MORE thing to consider: if the sheet were 30 players across, the top scratch would perfectly extend from the lower left corner of a new row 1, col1 all the way through upper right corner of column 30. I don't know that we can say the scratch HAS to extend the whole width but it would be perfectly at the corners of row 1 if row 1 were 30 columns wide. I will try to photoshop it, but i am not adept. In other words, your 17 columns are actually columns 3 - 19, your row 2 (col 1-8) are actually columns 20-27, two unknown columns to left, and three to the right give you a scratch that goes perfectly across from top to bottom of 30 columns.

Last edited by parkerj33; 02-22-2016 at 11:59 AM.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Just wondering about printing techniques giving further insight to T206 page layout. iwantitiwinit Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 15 09-05-2014 07:27 AM
E92 or other E Card Set Layout Jaybird Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 5 06-17-2012 08:00 PM
1948 LEAF complete on an uncut sheet Archive Boxing / Wrestling Cards & Memorabilia Forum 15 08-24-2007 07:15 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:10 PM.

ebay GSB