T207 back question ?

[garymc]

Comparing backs, what would a Napoleon be equal to in the t206 set ? Hindu ???

https://www.flickr.com/photos/151843924@N04/albums

[dabbuu]

Uzit

[timn1]

Napoleons are nowhere near as rare as Uzits. I would say probably somewhere halfway between between Hindu and Carolina Bright

Originally Posted by dabbuu

Uzit

.

[dabbuu]

Sure they are, there are only one or maybe two known of each. I think the estimates of Uzits is roughly 250-300

Originally Posted by timn1

Napoleons are nowhere near as rare as Uzits. I would say probably somewhere halfway between between Hindu and Carolina Bright .

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

I've owned several Napoleons, I have never owned an Uzit or a CB. I know that's not scientific, but I don't think they're THAT hard.

[timn1]

There are plenty of Napoleons around, relatively speaking. You can find 'em for $100 on ebay once in a while. Try doing that with an Uzit.

Some of you will remember that I did a survey of T207 populations about 15 years ago, which resulted in a two-part article in the old VCBC Magazine.

Out of 2117 T207s I surveyed, 50 had Napoleon backs - 2.4% of the total.

(A little context: Napoleon backs only appear with "Recruit players" - never with the players who are found with Cycle and Broadleaf backs. A small number of cards with anonymous backs are found on cards from both classes.)

So the 50 Napoleons I found represent 3% of the Recruit population, or about 2.4% of all T207s. Does anyone think that 0.03 of all T206s are Uzits? If you say there are 250-300 Uzits known, isn't that less than 0.0003 of the million or so T206s estimated to exist? IOW, Uzits could be a hundred times as rare as Naps, relative to the sets.

There aren't that many Napoleons graded because they haven't brought that much of a premium from collectors, unlike Uzits. (Plus there are only about 16000 T207s graded compared to more than 320000 T206s, which is an enormous disparity.) But I'll bet that like me, most people who have collected a lot of T207s have several Naps in their collections. Again not true of Uzits. The Naps are out there, not in large numbers but as the OP suggested, they are more like brown Hindus in rarity than Uzits.

[frohme]

I have to agree with Tim on this one. They're hard, sure, but they are not Uzit-level hard. It may seem so give their (apparent) scarcity, but some of that is due to the sheer volume difference between T206 and T207.... what is it ... somewhere between 6-10 to 1? It was discussed on a thread some while back but I'm remote on airport wifii on my phone, so going from (poor) memory.

They are also definitely not only 1-2 per player. Ferry has at least 4 examples, Johnson at least three... and that trend likely is general, though some maybe harder than others... like the set in general. I expect there are way more than we (presently) know, but with sample sizes this small ( so far) it's hard to draw conclusions.

Though they tend to command a relative premium these days compared to a few years ago (when they show up in auction/eBay) I think that's more attributable to (at least) a few more people paying attention to backs outside of T206. It only takes one or two to drive prices up...

Still working on the set...
--
Mike

[RCMcKenzie]

I "collect" these and I see them about as often as T206 Carolina Brights. I have about 8 or 9 of them. There is a collector on here who has scores of them, but I'd say they are very tough. Much tougher than finding a T206 Hindu back. They usually go pretty cheap compared to any T206's.

edit to add...I think I picked up the Chance in a small group, so I'm up to around 12-13..Happy collecting...

[timn1]

Believe me, I wish I was wrong because I have a lot more Naps than Carolina Brights.

But the reason you will see Hindus a lot more often than Naps is that there are roughly 20 times as many T206s in circulation as there are T207s. In terms of proportion, it's a different story.

As I said originally, Naps may be somewhere between Hindu and CBs, but I would say closer to the Hindu. The fact that you know a collector with "scores" of Naps is indicative in itself. How many people own scores of CBs?

Cheers,
Tim

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

I "collect" these and I see them about as often as T206 Carolina Brights. I have about 8 or 9 of them. There is a collector on here who has scores of them, but I'd say they are very tough. Much tougher than finding a T206 Hindu back. They usually go pretty cheap compared to any T206's.

edit to add...I think I picked up the Chance in a small group, so I'm up to around 12-13..Happy collecting...

[RCMcKenzie]

Tim, I know you are an expert on T207 and I am not. My evidence is anecdotal from collecting the Nap cards only. For example there are 11 T206 Elmer Flicks with a Hindu back on the psa pop report. I do not think psa charts T207 Napoleon backs, but I would be surprised to learn that there are 11 T207 Chance Napoleons in PSA holders.

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by timn1

How many people own scores of CBs?

There is a guy on here with what looks like scores of them. He has posted scans before. I haven't seen him post in quite awhile. Anyway, nice discussion.

[dabbuu]

He's saying it is relative to pop. So for example if there are 10,000 Flick T206s and 1,000 T207 Chances then the % of cards with that respective back is roughly the same.

I see the other side as well, which is why I said the rarity is equivalent to Uzits. If there is only one known example of a card and it therefore only has one back then the odds of getting that back on that card are 100%, so easier to find than a T206 Piedmont

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by dabbuu

He's saying it is relative to pop. So for example if there are 10,000 Flick T206s and 1,000 T207 Chances then the % of cards with that respective back is roughly the same.

I see the other side as well, which is why I said the rarity is equivalent to Uzits. If there is only one known example of a card and it therefore only has one back then the odds of getting that back on that card are 100%, so easier to find than a T206 Piedmont

I was an English major. I was told there would be no math. ha-ha. Anyway, I will stand by..."they are pretty tough if you are looking for a specific player with a Napoleon back." Heck, any t207 is tough compared to finding any T206.

[Luke]

When Gary asked me I said in terms of proportions, Napoleons feel like AB460 (minus the 12 easy ones). Which is just one notch below Carolina Brights in my opinion.

The correct answer really depends on what ratio of T206 to T207 we use. If it's 20:1 we're going to get a different answer than if it's 10:1.

The difference in price makes it a little tough to compare as well. I have around 40 Napoleon backs, and a big reason for that is I can afford them when I find one for sale. If I'd had the money, would I have been able to buy 400 or 800 Carolina Brights backs in the same time period that I've been buying Napoleons? I'd guess probably not. In that same time period I have probably owned 30 CB backs, the limiting factor being money.

So, I'm leaning more toward Hindu as a decent comparison after thinking about it a little more.

[dabbuu]

What would be the ratio for T206 to T207? 100:1?

[ronniehatesjazz]

Napoleon's are far harder than most think... I'd argue much harder than anonymous backs (either factory) but not at the level of Uzit. I think like others have said, it's somewhere slightly above Hindus.

[Yoda]

The Red Cross back on T207's has always fascinated me. I know there is a Weaver because I almost bought it. Has anybody kept track of how many T207's with a Red Cross reverse have surfaced over the years?

[timn1]

Luke's comments make a lot of sense to me - I too have bought Naps on occasion just because I could afford to.

The ratio of T206/T207 is a fascinating question also. As of a few months ago, when I added the (PSA/SGC only) pop reports up (all backs), I got these figures, FWIW:

total T206s graded: 320754
T207s: 16004

That's a 20:1 ratio in terms of raw numbers of cards. In terms of copies per card, it's roughly 7:65/1

T206: 612.1 (320754/524)
T207: 80.0 (16004/200)

These types of computations will always be approximate, since the pop numbers are constantly changing, and you can reasonably debate what the divisors should be: (522? 524? 523? 525? etc etc.). (In determining the divisor I would tend to count all variations within a single pose as one card.)

Then there are the uncertainties about whether a given set is for some reason more or less likely to be graded than another. I would assume that GENERALLY SPEAKING, the smaller the set, the larger proportion will be graded, since not that many set collectors are going to want to pay to get 500 cards graded, compared to sets of 30 or 50 cards. But with 524 versus 200, it's harder to estimate... And many other factors, such as the unique and enormous popularity of 6s, may impact this.

Tim

Originally Posted by Luke

When Gary asked me I said in terms of proportions, Napoleons feel like AB460 (minus the 12 easy ones). Which is just one notch below Carolina Brights in my opinion.

The correct answer really depends on what ratio of T206 to T207 we use. If it's 20:1 we're going to get a different answer than if it's 10:1.

The difference in price makes it a little tough to compare as well. I have around 40 Napoleon backs, and a big reason for that is I can afford them when I find one for sale. If I'd had the money, would I have been able to buy 400 or 800 Carolina Brights backs in the same time period that I've been buying Napoleons? I'd guess probably not. In that same time period I have probably owned 30 CB backs, the limiting factor being money.

So, I'm leaning more toward Hindu as a decent comparison after thinking about it a little more.

[RCMcKenzie]

Again, maybe I misunderstood what the OP was asking. I understand the mathematical ratio aspects, but I thought he meant how rare are Napoleon backs. There are currently 5 T206 Carolina Brights on eBay, 3 T207 Napoleon, and 45+ T206 Hindu...