Found a few more
 

I remembered I had won an H&S lot with a lot of P150, most of which I sold. Here are a few scans... I think these are new lines. The graded card is a Bobby Wallace:

Interesting

Different Durham cards and the scratch is in a different spot.


Jantz

nevermind
 

already posted my walsh before...

Hey Jantz, hope all is well.

These cards as you know we're stacked 2+ per player and each had their own back plate up/down the column. A scratch on the lower Durham should be different then a scratch on the top one. Every sheet printed with Durham using the damaged plate should show the same scratches in the same spot. Until they ran a second print with a repaired plate.

If we can catalogue each unique front per identifiable back plate we can know those players were located in the same spot on the sheet. This indicates a unique sheet layout with that player in that location and could give us potential # of sheets used to run the series.

If there were 5 players with the same scratch then its plausible 5 sheets were used to print the 150 cards. 150/5 would indicate 30 unique cards per sheet.

Fun stuff.

There are actually five different Durhams.

Just saw the Shipke in this auction(in the pictures)

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-11-T206...fb6aff9&_uhb=1

Just saw this Donohue too...may be more, stay tuned

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-11-T206...91fff53&_uhb=1

Kleinow

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-11-T206...91fff37&_uhb=1

I am very impressed by the thought that went into this. What made you get the idea in the first place?

Again, why hasn't anyone contacted Alan Ray (the only person I know of who may have actually seen an uncut sheet)?

This plate scratch idea is 100% Steve's. From a few discussions we have had I realized that having an identifiable back marking linking a unique card to a specific position on a sheet could provide enough information to determine how many sheets were used to print the series.

If there is an identifiable marking on a back plate and confirmed on multiple examples of whomever is on the front, let's say Bates. We can then look for the exact marking on other cards. If multiple examples of Elberfeld has this same marking, then we can assume that the Bates and Elberfeld are in the same position on a sheet, but are not sheet mates.

If we can do this for several back markings, cataloguing every P150 card with that identifiable marking, a common denominator should show up. This # is highly likely how many sheets were used to run the series. Unless half way through the series they fixed the plates then we are out of luck.

With the number of sheets used in a 150 card series, we can get the number of unique players per sheet....that is if they didnt mess with the configuration and kept to the two rows consistent.

Then we can put together the back markings, two namer and side by side cards and maybe this will be enough to start to place a sheet together.

It is a lot of work to get there.

Not mine
 

found at a online shop: Kleinow NY Batting:
http://www.hofcards.com/catalog/254G.jpg

My Niles has the same marking on the back.

Hi Alex-

I've often wondered the same thing after reading "The Card",,,in the very back of the book, it states that Mr.Ray didn't return numerous calls during the research phase of the book. I guess he did admit to them that the Wagner wasn't cut by a machine & that he tried to tell people but no one would listen.

It would be nice for him to tell the whole story about whether or not it was cut from a sheet or a strip, and if it was a sheet, who was on it and how was it configured. Ray did say he was going to write a book about it all, but I am not aware of such a book yet.

Sincerely, Clayton

Looking for your opinion on this Steve. Two different seymours with the
same Criss. I tried to line up the top marks as close as I could.
The first one the bottom mark on Criss is lower and the 2nd one
is higher but the tops line up on both fairly close.

Regular scan of 2nd seymour.

I think they both fit just fine. There will be a bit of misalingnment because of centering, And a bit of distortion in the scans themselves. I think one of the pair appears slightly taller in the scan than the other.

I'm hoping to get back to you and a couple other people this weekend. I haven't had much free time this week. By the way, I finally found a use for the security inserts from modern packs. I give them to my daughter when she demands cards. They're even better than late 80's commons since she can draw her own. :)

Steve B

Ray is not the only person to see a sheet or partial-Bill Mastro and the late Bob Sevchuk did as well. Doesn't matter I guess as neither one is talking.

I have found many of matching marks with different players on the
front which could be because they were in the same placement
on another sheet. I think we should also consider the possibilty that some
were on the same sheet in another area. Many of the marks are on
the same angle and when you extend that angle you come up with
some very similar marks.

Chase white cap
 

There was a Chase white cap that sold on eBay tonight with a plate scratch on the back:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-1911...-/261167773206

I may have missed it, but I looked back through the thread and didn't see any other scratches in the same location as the Chase.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-y...s702/Chase.JPG

Covaleski

Brown (cubs)

Hahn

Great work, Steve.

T206Schaefer
 

Attachment 88563

Attachment 88564

Picked this card up from a board member today (thanx, Larry), thought it may be a fit for this research.

Sorry if pics don't load, terrible at this sort of thing. Let me know if there is anything I can do to make this easier to work with.

keith