Regarding T206 brown LENOX cards......check-out this theory

[tedzan]

To date, 23 brown LENOX cards are confirmed. If my theory proves true, we can predict that 13 (or 14) more T206 cards will eventually be discovered with brown LENOX backs.
Six subjects of the 23 brown LENOX cards are from the 460-only series, and 17 subjects are from the 350/460 series......
Group B




350/460 series subjects confirmed with brown LENOX backs

Bradley (bat)
Burch (fielding)
Cobb (bat off shoulder)
Conroy (bat)
Jordan (bat)
Lajoie (bat)
Lake (no ball)
Leach (cap)
Leifield (bat)
Manning (pitching)
McQuillan (bat)
Overall (yellow sky)
Pfeister (throwing)
F. Smith (Chicago & Boston)
Wagner (bat on right shoulder)
Willetts
Willis (bat)


The timeline of the printing of these Group B subjects with AMERICAN BEAUTY 460, LENOX, PIEDMONT 460 Factory #42, and UZIT back was Jan-Feb 1911. This exact timeline
coincides with the printing of the T80 (Military Men) cards, which were printed with CAIRO MONOPOL, LENOX, OLD MILL, TOLSTOI. and UZIT backs.

T80 cards




So, here is my hypothesis....the printer at American Lithographic inadvertently forgot to switch from the brown ink after press runs of T80 CAIRO MONOPOL cards to black ink
prior to starting a press run of T206 LENOX cards. Furthermore, my guess is he caught his mistake quickly, which would explain why very few brown LENOX examples exist.
Instead of dis-carding these brown LENOX cards, these mistakes were shipped along with the black LENOX cards to Factory #30. And, were inserted into LENOX packs.




Regarding the 6 subjects from the 460-only series with brown LENOX backs......they appear to be from the same group of 9 subjects which were printed with PIEDMONT 460
Factory #42 backs.

460-only series subjects confirmed with brown LENOX backs

Chase (trophy)
Latham
Marquard (pitching)
Merkle (throwing)
Schlei (portrait)
Wiltse (portrait-cap)

I expect these 3 subjects will be found with brown LENOX backs......

Schlei (batting)
Schaefer (Washington)
Seymour (portrait)


Would love to hear from some of you on this forum with your responses to this theory ?


TED Z
.

[Jobu]

Very interesting Ted. Cairo Monopol, like Brown Lenox, are also rare as hens' teeth, right? What if the printer filled such a small Cairo Monopol order that he had ink left and decided to print a few Lenox backs with it instead of letting it go to waste? That way we wouldn't have to chalk it up to being a mistake.

[Rhotchkiss]

Ted, I am a bit confused, is the Tinker bat off a confirmed brown lenox or a suspect brown lenox? Thanks

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Jobu

Very interesting Ted. Cairo Monopol, like Brown Lenox, are also rare as hens' teeth, right? What if the printer filled such a small Cairo Monopol order that he had ink left and decided to print a few Lenox backs with it instead of letting it go to waste? That way we wouldn't have to chalk it up to being a mistake.

Hi Bryan

Yes, the CAIRO MONOPOL T80's are rare. However, there are many more of these T80's than there are T206 brown LENOX cards.

In my opinion, the brown LENOX cards are simply ink-printing mistakes.


TED Z
.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Ted, I am a bit confused, is the Tinker bat off a confirmed brown lenox or a suspect brown lenox? Thanks

This Tinker has not yet been found with a brown LENOX back.

He is one of the subjects on display my Group B array; therefore, it's possible that this Tinker may eventually be found with a brown LENOX back.


TED Z
.

[frohme]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hi Bryan

Yes, the CAIRO MONOPOL T80's are rare. However, there are many more of these T80's than there are T206 brown LENOX cards.

In my opinion, the brown LENOX cards are simply ink-printing mistakes.


TED Z
.

I agree, Ted (not that my opinion holds any water) I'd suspect the T207 Brown-ink backs are of similar nature, though clearly not related to the case in this thread...

[Sean]

Originally Posted by tedzan

In my opinion, the brown LENOX cards are simply ink-printing mistakes.



.

I agree with this, but I want to add something. The Brown Lenox is very different from the Brown Old Mill. The OMs are a light brown color. Since Southern Leaguers were all printed with either Piedmont, Hindu, or Old Mill backs, it is easy to imagine a printer forgetting to switch the ink after printing sheets of Hindus. He uses the same light brown ink for the OMs, but quickly realizes his mistake. The sheet of Brown OMs is scrapped, but some printer takes them home , cuts them by hand, and gives them to his kids. Thus all Brown OMs are hand cut and light in color.

The Brown Lenox are different. They are a much darker brown. Remember that Brown Lenox that I brought to the National two years ago? When I showed it to people, many of them thought that it was black until I told them to look closer. What I think happened was a printer somehow used the same brown ink that was used for the player and team caption at the bottom of the cards. It probably only happened on one sheet, based on the small number that have turned up.

I don't think that the error was caught, since the Brown Lenox are factory cut. Or perhaps the mistake was noticed, but they distributed the cards anyway, figuring that no one would notice. In any case, they seem to have been given out in packs like the regular Black Lenox. But I definitely agree that they were produced in error.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Sean

The Brown Lenox are different. They are a much darker brown.

Hi Sean

Your observation is right-on.

And, this is exactly the connection I see with the dark brown ink used to print the Cairo Monopol backs.
I have seen enough of these T80 backs to draw the conclusion I arrived at, as stated in my theory.






Sean
How's about posting your brown LENOX back in order to compare it with the Cairo Monopol back.


TED Z
.

[Sean]

Here it is Ted, but the image isn't very sharp:


scan0030.jpg

[Sean]

Here's a group scan. This one is more clear:


scan0018.jpg

[z28jd]

Print press operator: Hey boss, we are out of black ink.
Boss: Use brown ink.
Howe McCormick (from outside the building looking in): Make them any color you want, I'm gonna stamp every one of those backs!
Young Ted Z: You tell 'em, Howe!

[David R]

Originally Posted by Sean

I agree with this, but I want to add something. The Brown Lenox is very different from the Brown Old Mill. The OMs are a light brown color. Since Southern Leaguers were all printed with either Piedmont, Hindu, or Old Mill backs, it is easy to imagine a printer forgetting to switch the ink after printing sheets of Hindus. He uses the same light brown ink for the OMs, but quickly realizes his mistake. The sheet of Brown OMs is scrapped, but some printer takes them home , cuts them by hand, and gives them to his kids. Thus all Brown OMs are hand cut and light in color.

The Brown Lenox are different. They are a much darker brown. Remember that Brown Lenox that I brought to the National two years ago? When I showed it to people, many of them thought that it was black until I told them to look closer. What I think happened was a printer somehow used the same brown ink that was used for the player and team caption at the bottom of the cards. It probably only happened on one sheet, based on the small number that have turned up.

I don't think that the error was caught, since the Brown Lenox are factory cut. Or perhaps the mistake was noticed, but they distributed the cards anyway, figuring that no one would notice. In any case, they seem to have been given out in packs like the regular Black Lenox. But I definitely agree that they were produced in error.

I was thinking the same thing - that maybe it was just one sheet of brown Lenox t206s that were a printing error. Do we know of the confirmed cards, whether there are two or more confirmed copies of any card?

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by David R

I was thinking the same thing - that maybe it was just one sheet of brown Lenox t206s that were a printing error. Do we know of the confirmed cards, whether there are two or more confirmed copies of any card?

David

As far as I understand, there is only one example of each brown LENOX card.


TED Z
.

[Gradedcardman]

Their are (2) confirmed copies of at least 1 card. Schlei Portrait.

[Sean]

Chris Browne told me that there was a second copy of a card being offered for sale at the 2015 National. I don't recall the player. It might have been Schlei. Maybe Chris will join in...

[Pat R]

There are a few of the same player/pose with more than one example.
I don't think there is a way to tell with the SGC pop reports but there
are two of Jordan batting and Frank Smith (Chic & Bos) in the PSA
pop reports.

and here are two different Chase Trophy's
Chase (trophy) Brown Lenox.jpg
Chase (trophy) Brown Lenox 2.jpg

[RedsFan1941]

there are at least 2 brown lajoies with bat

[steve B]

I don't think they can be set down as a printing error.

The time to change the stone on a flatbed press is fairly long, and typically the press would be cleaned after each job. Leftover ink removed, inking rollers and offset blanket cleaned. That way the next job can be setup.

The ink left on the inking rollers would most likely have partly dried and been flaking off for the first few sheets, leaving debris to mess up many of the following sheets.
Bad practice overall.

Now the idea of leftover ink being used to finish a small press run, that might be done.

Steve B

[philliesphan]

I thought there were also two McQuillan Brown Lenox cards known.

Goodwin auctioned one in 2012 (PSA 1) and another in 2013 (SGC A)

[Gradedcardman]

Originally Posted by Sean

Chris Browne told me that there was a second copy of a card being offered for sale at the 2015 National. I don't recall the player. It might have been Schlei. Maybe Chris will join in...

Sean, Good memory, that was the Chase Trophy.

[mrvster]

thinking that we need to compare that cairo with brown lenox side by side, hard to do with scans, but in person would work.......both are great theories....

I think the cairo has something to do with it.....since there exists scraps with over and ghosted cards with concurrent printing of other issues/ads simultaneously.....example- t-80 or the men of history, bitters lash, ect

[Jobu]

My man! I like how you think

Among us can we find two people who will bring a Cairo Monopol and a Brown Lenox to the National? Perhaps we can even find a scanner and scan them side by side.

Originally Posted by steve B

I don't think they can be set down as a printing error.

The time to change the stone on a flatbed press is fairly long, and typically the press would be cleaned after each job. Leftover ink removed, inking rollers and offset blanket cleaned. That way the next job can be setup.

The ink left on the inking rollers would most likely have partly dried and been flaking off for the first few sheets, leaving debris to mess up many of the following sheets.
Bad practice overall.

Now the idea of leftover ink being used to finish a small press run, that might be done.

Steve B

[PhillipAbbott79]

Originally Posted by Gradedcardman

Their are (2) confirmed copies of at least 1 card. Schlei Portrait.

There are more than 1 card with more than 1 example.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Jobu

My man! I like how you think

Among us can we find two people who will bring a Cairo Monopol and a Brown Lenox to the National? Perhaps we can even find a scanner and scan them side by side at the same time.

Bryan, Jim R has owned both at the same time.

post #52 in this thread
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=216722

[Jobu]

Interesting, thanks for the link Pat. They do look pretty different with the Cairo looking a lot blacker than the card in the current thread which looks a bit brown. I guess that torpedoes any thoughts of having ink shared between these two backs, though it doesn't mean that the printer wasn't just using up leftover ink - perhaps the ink for the captions like Sean mentioned.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Jobu

Interesting, thanks for the link Pat. They do look pretty different with the Cairo looking a lot blacker than the card in the current thread which looks a bit brown. I guess that torpedoes any thoughts of having ink shared between these two backs, though it doesn't mean that the printer wasn't just using up leftover ink - perhaps the ink for the captions like Sean mentioned.

Hey Bryan

That Cairo Monopol scan doesn't look right.

I've seen a number of these T80's in my time while collecting this 50-card set, and all the Cairo Monopol cards that I've seen are printed with an unmistakable BROWN ink.

Here again is the scan of my card....and, it is true to it's exact color.





P.S......I think Dan McKee has a Cairo Monopol listed on ebay....if you need to see another example.


TED Z
.

[Pat R]

There is no back scan for the one Dan has listed but there is a back
scan for this one that sold recently.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/T80-Military...p2047675.l2557

[tedzan]

A week ago (or so) ago, Dan had two T80 Cairo Monopol cards listed on ebay.

Both listings displayed back scans. And, both back scans' printing was clearly BROWN.

So, as I have already stated, the normal color is brown on these T80 cards. There are
varying degrees of shading in the brown ink on the backs of these cards.


So, if a "black" lettering Cairo Monopol T80 exists, it is definitely a printing anomaly.


TED Z
.

[Jobu]

Thanks Ted - I guess that torpedo might've missed.

So, is anyone game for getting two of these side by side in Chicago? Maybe several T80s if there is some variation in the ink - the color on the Brown Lenox backs seems pretty consistent to me.

Originally Posted by tedzan

A week ago (or so) ago, Dan had two T80 Cairo Monopol cards listed on ebay.

Both listings displayed back scans. And, both back scans' printing was clearly BROWN.

So, as I have already stated, the normal color is brown on these T80 cards. There are
varying degrees of shading in the brown ink on the backs of these cards.


So, if a "black" lettering Cairo Monopol T80 exists, it is definitely a printing anomaly.


TED Z
.