I recall reading that Wayne Varner of Shoebox Cards owned it & held it before he sold it to Barry Halper. Perhaps, Wayne could help break the tie from that half the people thinks it's one way & half think it's another. :D

One would say you are "mathe-MATT-ically" challenged

Mark Macrae, Jamie Hull (see post #15), and I have stated the strip is not a 5-card print....but, has been pieced together.

Furthermore, there are at least 4 others who have seen this strip an agree with us. Two of them occasionally post here.
The other two do not.


I'm tired of your constant attempts to "derail" me, as you have tried in other threads. If you have something constructive
to add, then by all means state it.
Keep your negative thoughts to yourself.


TED Z

At least we know why there is a disagreement.

Ted see my post 47, what was your take on the little black line segments separating the cards along the bottom border, and how to reconcile them with theory of cards being glued together, thanks.

Mark

I think modern collectors may never know what those 19th century HOFer Halper jerseys were, but they do know what they're not ;)

very unfair
 

Hey Ted
For the record I think when Mark M said above, that he feels it is pre-production, it means that it was not put together as different cards and is in fact one strip. Maybe I took it the wrong way? I just got off of the phone with a very advanced collector who louped it at the National, with another advanced collector. He and the other chap say they are positive it is one strip. There is absolutely no doubt in their minds.

As for negative thoughts in this thread, I don't see them. I see a good debate going on, with good folks that are agreeing and disagreeing. I hope this debate doesn't get personal. best regards.....your friend ....LL

Here is the original thread http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=123958. On it both Wayne and Solomon, who held and owned the strip, commented.

What is even more mysterious than the origin of the strip is the number of experts who Ted and Leon have talked with whose names cannot be mentioned. It is just an opinion they are providing not testimony in a court of law. Why the anonymity?

One commented in this thread and the other is a bit more private but has been collecting for around 40 yrs. And my response mentioned one collector and another friend of his....so that number is 2, Greg.

Like Leon, I don't see anyone having any negativity towards you Ted. There is a good debate going on here, and there is nothing wrong with counting up who is on what side. But nobody has any personal stake in it and its all pretty much opinion, and it looks like there are opinions on both sides. Don't take it personally if we disagree with you, its all just an academic debate anyway that doesn't really matter that much...

Back to the debate, as I said on the previous thread:

Because of its plastic entombment, I couldn't determine whether it was a frankenstrip or not. What I feel totally convinced of is that the strip (or "strip") was separately produced from standard T206 press runs and thus sheds only limited light on T206 production methods.

Barry,
maybe there is some room for grey area..
perhaps its a 3 card strip with two cards added (glued on). ?

;)

SGC, where art thou?
 

Since they are the ones who slabbed the strip, it really is a shame that someone from SGC hasn't chimed in on this thread. If we keep the debate going for another 5 days maybe Brian Dwyer (who will then be formerly of SGC) will have some comments.

Marty- you are a master at finding that great middle ground.:)

well
 

I sort of doubt SGC will come on here for this debate. They do read the board quite a bit though. I would have to imagine that if they thought it were seperate cards glued onto a strip then they would not have slabbed it. If I am wrong I will let ya'll know tomorrow, after they call me and correct me :D. regards

Leon- why couldn't SGC come on here and comment? All they would have to say is whether it's a strip or an amalgamation of cards. It's easy and they certainly (hopefully) won't get attacked. I bet if you asked them they would- they've certainly commented on this board before.

Hey guys....
 

My "beef" is just with one character here....Matt, and his comment in post #48......
" My math skills must be off - perhaps I miscounted, but it looks like every single person who has examined the card
in person and come on the forum, including two people who held it raw, say it is printed, with the exception of Ted. "

While his comment may sound innocuous to you, it is unsolicited "digs" like this that he posted on several occasions,
that I have finally become fed up with.
It is apparent that he did not bother to read the prior posts here, before making that comment. Or, perhaps he did
read them; but, has a comprehension problem.

In any event, please try to understand my side of this matter. I don't post on here to generate controversy.
I have stated my opinion on this strip and that I'm entitled to do so. I fully expect & accept constructive differences
of opinion.
However, I don't think we need uninformed, sarcastic commentary.


TED Z

I can think of a few reasons. One is that it establishes a precedent I'm guessing SGC would like to avoid. If someone from SGC comes on the board and provides details on the strip, then where do they draw the line? Are they required to do it the next time there are questions about a high-profile card? Plus, my guess is they'd prefer to let their work do the talking. I don't think it would be slabbed like it is if it were five cards pasted together (the collective opinion of Ted's group of experts not withstanding).

Second, I'm sure they feel a responsiblity to their customers to not publicly comment on cards they grade. I'm betting they would feel the need to get permission from the card's owner before commenting.

Third, I'm sure they've seen how quickly other threads have deteriorated when folks who don't post that often come aboard.

Finally, I doubt it would end up being a simple post. One answer would lead to another question, which would lead to another, etc., etc., etc. They received the card, received payment and did their job. I don't think SGC should be expected to host a Q&A. At least at this point in time.

Of course, now that I've said all this, expect someone from SGC to post within the hour.

Ted, quite simply: No, you do not.

Rob- I agree that even the simplest threads can end up in dogfights, so I'm with you there.

But we aren't asking them to reveal anything even slightly confidential or controversial. We're merely asking if it's a single strip or not.

And as far as where they draw the line, it would pretty much stop right here. This is an extremely unusual, and admittedly unique item. I don't care how they came to the conclusion it's genuine, I don't care who submitted it...I just want to know if it's a strip or not.

And I agree that they wouldn't have slabbed it if it were five cards glued together. Therefore, I have to put myself in the camp that it is a strip and not five individual cards. But it would be nice to hear it from them.

That said, they probably will not chime in.

I disagree. Two or three times a week on this board, I see people calling for a representative from a grading company to chime in to a thread and offer an opinion or explanation. The first time a grading company representative does this, it sets a precedent. There have certainly been plenty of other high-profile items where grading companies have been asked to comment on this board.

I also know that if I submitted a card to a grading company, or if I owned a card that was the subject of some discussion, I wouldn't want the grading company to be making public statements about my card - whether they be positive or negative or indifferent. SGC is not the owner of the card; they were asked to render an opinion for the owner of the card at the time of submission, and not to make a public statement to the entire hobby at the request of someone who has no ownership interest in the card at all.

My suggestion would be to have one of the academics here contact the owner of the card, and in the interest of learning, ask if the slab could be opened at next year's National, in a public forum. It could be examined under a loupe, and then re-slabbed. I'd be happy to pony up some cash for re-slabbing the card.

-Al

Fair enough Al. I'll go with that. It doesn't seem like a big deal to me but this board can often be a lion's den so maybe they shouldn't say anything.

Could they at least give us a hint?

Not to disagree or agree with anybody-just my opinion.

I examined this piece 2 different times while at the National. I thought it was odd all the cards had heavy creasing except the Bowerman.
The cards have perfect registration and appear to be a first run or very close, much better quality than any other cards I have seen of these players.
The piece appeared to be one strip of cards to me. I couldn't see any evidence that these were pasted together but I only could examine it through the plastic.
The vertical lines looked to be printed on and unique to this piece because if these lines were on all 206 sheets we would see them on other 206 cards. I don't think if cards were pasted together, vertical lines would appear.

I have taken 5 raw 206s and put them together. Where they touch doesn't appear to be a printed vertical line.

It would have been nice to hold it and feel the cardboard and run my fingers across the strip.

Great idea !!! Then all of us Net54 members could take turns examining it. We could vote one piece or not one piece. The item would then be re-slabbed with that info on the label on what the majority of members decide.

another 2 for a strip.....
 

I have emailed back and forth with Wayne Varner about some other things in the last day or two. He and his partner Bill have handled this raw. Here is his message (I hope he doesn't mind)...

" By the way that Wagner strip is the real thing. No cards pasted together. You can talk to Bill and I about it at the Valley Forge show next month if you are planning to be there. I am sure Ted Z, Bill and I will have conversation. He sits up right next to us if you recall. Hope to see you there.

Wayne"




The other 1 of the 2 people that think it's a strip, which I previously mentioned, is Richard Masson....He and Scott B, my partner (and who already gave his opinion), both louped it at the National and think it's one strip. No more anonymity in my musings :). I don't really like to throw names around for a few reasons but I never make crap up.....I could be wrong sometimes, and will admit it, but if I say something there is a reason. best regards

Why not stand by your opinion
 

What I don't understand is that SGC would have a problem standing by their opinion. I mean, they examined the card and slabbed it, why wouldn't they want to express their opinion on the card? I understand that sometimes threads can become negative, but if they come on the board and express their professional opinion, I would have greater respect for third party grading.

It's a piece of hobby lore and any details about the strip should be expressed so we can come to a detailed conclusion about the piece.

I guess I am just having a hard time believing that a company created to determine the authenticity and grades of these cardboard pieces, wouldn't come onto this board and tell us their opinion on the piece?

Jeff

Sgc
 

I can see both sides but they have graded and authenticated it already by slabbing it. In essence they have already rendered a professional opinion.

Exactly!

I suggested maybe someone from SGC chime in back at post #25 so I'm guessing either they don't want to get involved in the discussion or they assume the fact that they slabbed it speaks for itself. Personally, if prior owners say it's one strip that's good enough for me. Unless I hit the lottery I won't have to worry about ever owning it so I'm not losing much sleep over it one way or the other, but it would be interesting to hear SGC's take on it.

Sgc
 

SGC gave their opinion-it is in their holder-SGC A-that is their opinion.

Anything else that is said or written should be to the owner of the card, not on a public chat board...:rolleyes:

If you step back and think about it a minute, how can 5 cards could be glued together so perfectly that it is essentially undetectable under a 10x loop 100 years after being glued, then creased, folded and tossed about.

The alignment on the top and bottom is razor perfect across all cards. I simply cannot see how it is plausible that they are 5 separate cards glued together 100 years ago. No way IMHO.

http://www.sportscollectorsdaily.com...agnerstrip.jpg

Regarding this recent comment......
"The alignment on the top and bottom is razor perfect across all cards. I simply cannot see how it is plausible that they are 5 separate
cards glued together 100 years ago. No way IMHO."

I don't think you realize that the printers employed by American Lithographic were the best at their trade. 100 years ago, they were the
foremost lithographers in this country. Accurately piecing together 5 images of BB players was a trivial task for these professionals. Have
you ever seen the amazing lithographic pieces of art produced by American Litho. ?
These little pieces of cardboard we call T206's pale by comparison.

However since you brought up this subject, I ask all of you to take a good look at the scan of this strip in post #39. Many of you have
said that the vertical lines between the cards were printed. Check it out again guys....if those lines were printed, then they would have
the identical intensity (and appearance) as the black ink printed proof cross-marks.
Instead these vertical lines are "hairline" thin and no where as intense. In no way are these hairline vertical lines the result of printing.
And, no one here has yet been able to explain these lines. Other than they are indeed the separations between these images.

I think Frank Wakefield's following post best describes the make up of this "5-image" strip.

"....It isn't cards at all. It is separate papers, printed on the papers are the images that would eventually be the fronts of certain
white border tobacco cards, the papers are pieced together as seen. It isn't a card, nor 5 cards, and it isn't even a printer's proof.
It seems a spec sample of what was planned, a demonstration of what could be....."


TED Z

Examining the proof strip
 

I have also examined it with a 10x loupe. The card was holdered so the edges couldn't be examined but I saw no evidence up peeling between cards other than areas with heavy creasing. Furthermore, I have to agree with the camp that says as a pre-production strip it's hard to hold this strip to the rules of normal production. Anything could have been done to this strip. The lines between cards could be lightly printed lines just as they print the hair on a players head? The lines could also have been put there by hand after the fact using a straight edge? The lines themselves do appear to be printed, IMHO. There is heavy creasing between the Young and the Kling along the seperation and I would think there would be more peeling if that edge was glued. The upper edge between the Brown and the Wagner has a bit of peeling that looks consistent to the heavy crease that drops towards the Brown card so it didn't strike me as odd. My last problem with the theory that these were glued together is that I would think there would be a dog ear or something along the top edge or bottom edge of the proof where the card edges meet? I saw nothing like that. If these are glued I'd like to know how because it must be one hell of a glue job after nearly 100 years in "rough" conditions. I believe many of those years were spent folded-up in Honus' old uniform pants pockets in the attic of his Pittsburgh home. The cold and the heat up there in the attic had to hurt the glue somehow, no?

All of that said I obviously have concluded it's all one strip. Either way, it's obviously a unique pre-production piece that was not subject to the same printing rules as the cards that came later during mass production.

I guess I should also mention that I have been collecting continuously since 1975 now. 30 of those years I've been into pre-war cards. Not that it should matter when stating the observations I mentioned above, but it seems to be important to some the we are qualified to have an opinion.

I would also like to say I respect the opinions of those who feel it's a 6 piece card. It's a somewhat fascinating debate because nothing would surprise me in this hobby. I sure wish we could know the truth for sure .......but that just won't happen.

Tom Papa

One matter that everyone seems in agreement about is that some third party grader graded this... Which company graded it? And, does anyone recall what the slip indicated it was? I'm not concerned about a grade or number, I'm asking about the grader's identity of the item.

If I take a photograph next time I'm at a ballpark, and print it off with a caption added once I get home, then it seems that should be as 'gradable' as this assemblage is.

It says:
"1909 T206
Honus Wagner
Proof Strip."

With Authentic as the "grade".

http://huntauctions.com/Live/img27/242.jpg

I think it is more properly stated that they (SGC) authenticated it ("A") but then again "A" is considered a grade by some. IMO with this piece the grading neither adds to nor detracts from it, what it does do is keep people from handling it and restrains the amount of scrutiny it can be given now. I have collected pre-war for a few decades now and am an expert at nothing. It is a fascinating subject though.

"SGC" stands for Sportscard Guaranty. Here is a link to the company's website:

http://www.sgccard.com/

Thank you, guys. I now recall SGC was mentioned back up there.

I don't think it is a "proof". Proofs from this issue had the vertical and horizontal crosshairs, centered in the borders. A few of the guys here have cards like that. We've not seen anything like this for any of the other cards in the white border series, just this one item.

And thanks for the scan of it in its slab. This rascal will be fodder for discussion in future generations.

It is my understanding that this strip has been in the hobby in raw form for at least 25 years. In that time it was handled by a number of collectors who always considered it to be a complete strip of cards from the T206 era. From a scan Ted determines that it is a set of individual cards put together and goes public with this theory. After much discussion defending his view, he actually sees the piece in question, examines it through a slab, and determines that he is indeed correct.

I don't think this would have gone over well in a peer reviewed journal.

Rob D, thank you very much for your post.

dstudeba

Regarding your......
" From a scan Ted determines that it is a set of individual cards put together and goes public with this theory. After much
discussion defending his view, he actually sees the piece in question, examines it through a slab, and determines that he is
indeed correct. "

"Ted", only ? ....... have you bothered to read thru this thread ? ?

Most likely not....So, I refer you to Posts #5, 6, 15, 60. Those posts were from individuals, who ALSO question that these 5
images were NOT printed as an intact strip.
Hmmmm, so what seems to be your problem with singling out only Ted ?

Look we all agree on two things regarding this strip....

(1) It is an original pre-production piece printed in early 1909.

(2) It is a tremendous T206 artifact.


Some think it's a continuous strip, and others of us differ. The color differences in of the 5 images with respect to each other
contradicts everything we know about American Litho's 6-color printing process. That, and other more subtle aspects of this
artifact leads us to believe it is not exactly what it is advertised as being.


TED Z

Ted- Leon posted that the previous owner of the card, Wayne Varner, said with certainty that it is a continuous strip. He owned it before it was slabbed and held it in his hand. Doesn't the controversy end right there? Can one of the original owners of the card be wrong? Seems like we've passed the point of it being debatable. That cinches it for me. Don't you agree with that?

Barry S.
 

I've known Wayne and Bill Zimpleman since 1981 and have had some interesting discussions with them over the years.
We are old friends. Also, it so happens that we are set up at adjacent booths at the Philly Show, so we will certainly
have an interesting discussion next month regarding this Wagner artifact.

At the time Wayne and Bill owned this piece years ago (before Barry Halper acquired it), the 6-color printing process
and other subtle aspects that went into the production of these tobacco cards were not well known, or understood.
Therefore, no one questioned the apparent anomalies of this strip back then.


TED Z

Are you saying SGC is wrong too?
 

As has been stated in this thread already almost anything can be done during a pre-production trial run. You yourself have stated these American Litho guys were the best in the business at the time. Doesn't that mean to you that they "might" be able to print outside of that normal production process if they want to for proofing purposes?

I believe those other subtle aspects have been spoken about as well. I know I spoke of them in my post. It's very clear to me, after closely examining the artifact, this just cannot be 6 pieces glued together. I'd be shocked if I was proven wrong in this particular case.

Ted - is there any chance at all that you and your friends who examined this piece just "might" be wrong this one time? Just maybe?

I know I'm not perfect so I could be wrong. The professionals at SGC agree with me though so I feel like what I saw was most likely correct. I can only add that if SGC said I was wrong and that this was a creation by somebody that I'd have a good laugh because I was fooled. They get paid to know more about this than I do so I'd go with their professional opinion. I would think they would simply not holder the strip if they were unsure. Their reputation isn't worth the $50 holdering fee.

Ted- I do agree there are anomalies regarding this strip, and even to this day we are still not certain exactly how it was printed and presented to Wagner. But with Leon's post #74, at least the mystery of whether it's a continuous strip or five glued cards has been resolved. That was my only point.

Barry, I don't see how Leon's post, #74, resolves that it is a continuous strip. I doesn't resolve it for me... If it does for you then it does, for you, but not for everyone. And in that post, is Leon saying that Ted makes crap up, and/or that Ted can never admit being wrong?


Whatever it really is, however it came into being, it does seem to me to be something from just before the ATT's distribution of the white border tobacco cards, I agree that it is an artifact in T206 lore. I still think it's a preproduction paste up assemblage of what could be.

Frank- I'm not going to speak for Leon, but Wayne Varner, who owned it for a period of time, said with certainty that it was a continuous strip. Where else but to the owner of the card would one go to settle this argument? Again, what am I missing?

How about SGC, Barry? You know. The premier pre-war grading company in our hobby that said it is an authentic proof. Thus, not a creation.

SGC's word holds a huge amount of weight also. However, they haven't said anything about it and likely won't. Wayne, to his credit, made a statement based on being its former owner. That means a lot to me with regard to this debate.

SGC merely identified it as AUTHENTIC but did not define on the flip what exactly that meant. Authentic only means the item is a period piece and identifiable as relating to a certain issue referenced on the flip. What we do know is that it is a strip, whether you feel it is a post production continuous strip or made up of 5 pre production card's obverses mounted onto some kind of backing. Given that this is a unique item and nobody knows exactly what it was made for or how it was supposed to be made, not sure you can expect a grading company to do much more. We have all seen items in both SGC and PSA holders being called Authentic even after going through massive restoration. Obviously this "strip" has not but calling it anything other than Authentic would not be prudent giving there is no other example to compare it to.

Sgc
 

While I agree with you that we have seen SGC and PSA slab items as AUTHENTIC when they are perhaps trimmed or restored I would be shocked to find out that this proof strip would be labeled by SGC or even PSA as such if it was the creation Ted has declared that it is. 5 cards glued to a strip of paper can hardly be declared as an AUTHENTIC "T206 Proof strip". If that turns out to be true I am selling my thousands of graded cards.

What borders on hiliarity about this, as well as the PSA 8 Wagner, is that both instances can be conclusively resolved, I believe, by taking the card/"strip" out of its holder and re examining it based on available grading standards. In the case of the "strip", if in fact it is a strip, then presumably when out of the plastic one can simply do the "feel" test and then we're done. In the case of the PSA 8, a high magnification analysis of the borders (and for that I'm not even sure it is necessary to remove the card from the slab) will show whether that card's borders has such physical characteristics that, over the years, has caused PSA to designate countless cards with comparable borders as "authentic". Really, this is not that complicated. We're not trying to solve who shot Kennedy here. In the case of the "strip", inasmuch as I don't believe its value willl be materially impacted either way whether it is a strip or individual pre production cards glued together, I am hopeful that to resolve this hobby discussion its owner will allow the out-of-holder anaysis. In the case of the 8 Wagner, based on what its sister card (Conlon Plank) realized in the 2009 REA auction, an "A" designation will be a financial death knell. So in my lifetime, and probably that of my childrens/grandchildrens, that card will never be voluntarily re examined.