|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>I like your idea of comparing the pop report numbers on certain T206's....then we can correlate the #s to the known<br>scarcity of a particular card.<br><br>Please start this thread.<br><br><br>TED Z<br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Scott Fandango</b><p>if current availability means anything....there are copies of all the "scarce" cards for sale as BIN on ebay ..EXCEPT for the WAGNER THROWING...VCP hasnt logged a sale in OVER A YEAR....<br><br>has anyone seen a wagner throwing for sale in a while? i havent and i have been looking...<br><br>i think this card is a scare as the other "toughies" but this is 1st tier HOF....i believe in time, this will surpass the Mitchell in Value.....there are way FEWER copies of the Wagner.....<br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>Scott, I agree that Wagner throwing is tough. And he may well have been somewhat overlooked. But I think that some of the pressure on that card is that it is a Wagner card contemporary with when he played. The collectors of a generation ago scratched and clawed around trying to amass the American Caramel cards. If those old guys discussed their quest, those who'd captured a Mitchell had a glow in their eyes; those that lacked him had an obvious distaste or distraction... Mitchell was the key, and still is.<br><br>Scott, we need your skill and help on that T206 superprint thread, please sir!
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Richard Masson</b><p>I would be inclined to believe the Wagner throwing pose may be one of the scarce cards in the set. I looked for an upgrade (to a modest VG) for several years before finding one. It may not be obvious because the pose is repeated on other caramel cards (Dockman, Nadja, Crofts, E106, etc., etc....).<br><br>My further two cents is that the pop reports are not meaningful to determine scarcity. There are not many registry collectors of the set, and I crossed two full sets (Caramel Monster and Caramel's Little Brother) from PSA to SGC last year, so I know there is at least some double counting. There are also many raw sets still floating around out there. This set is part of any decent "old school" collection.
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>scott fandango</b><p>"I would be inclined to believe the Wagner throwing pose may be one of the scarce cards in the set. I looked for an upgrade (to a modest VG) for several years before finding one. It may not be obvious because the pose is repeated on other caramel cards (Dockman, Nadja, Crofts, E106, etc., etc....). <br><br>My further two cents is that the pop reports are not meaningful to determine scarcity. There are not many registry collectors of the set, and I crossed two full sets (Caramel Monster and Caramel's Little Brother) from PSA to SGC last year, so I know there is at least some double counting. There are also many raw sets still floating around out there. This set is part of any decent "old school" collection."<br><br>......................... .......................<br><br><br><br>your caramel monster sets are amazing! i look at them frequently! can i ask why you havent moved them to the RETIRED section of the registry if they no longer exist in PSA holders? thanks!<br><br><br>ps....we know this is a highly crossed over and crackedout out set, but it is true for the entire set, not just for 1 or 2 cards, so the overall numbers still should be accurate relative to each other eventhough they may not be individually correct.....
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Eric</b><p>Scott,<br><br>You bring up an excellent point. I personally think that Richard's sets should be listed as retired. It helps other collectors know more about the sets and certain cards populations.<br><br>Richard,<br><br>Any reason why you keep these sets are listed as they are? Its "unfair" to other collectors that are working hard to build up their sets!<br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Michael Steele</b><p>I agree that Pop reports are not accurate when considering this set because of the "crack out and resubmit" game being played but I still think the Wagner throwing was printed in the same series right along with some of those rarities from the set. Maybe it was not the last series, who knows but there are just too few around of this card to say it is not up there with some of the scarce cards.<br><br>Sure there are raw sets galore out there but that's just it, these sets have equal numbers of each player. One stat was 176 Cobbs or so and 18 Wagners? That's like 10-1 and even with the Cobb double printed, it would still be 5-1. <br><br>I am not a pop report guy but I am looking at this as more of a logic-math point of view and throw in the fact that Wagner is ultra popular and people would be playing the same "crack and resubmit game" with his cards as with the others. <br><br>Also the American Caramel Company seemed to love the Pirates so why not throw another card of a couple of the best players such as Wags and Gibson on a final print run to help with sales. Just a thought. <br><br>Anyway, I'll be quiet now as you guys have moved on to that T-206 super thread or something like that <img src="/images/happy.gif" height="14" width="14" alt="happy.gif">.
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Marty Ogelvie</b><p>Even with the falty data you can pull from the population reports, I do believe the Wags throwing pose is one of the rarities of this set.. has to be.<br><br>marty
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>peter ullman</b><p>I can't remember the last time a cy young, clev went on the auction block...does this card look exactly the same as the boston var...except for the team designation? Can someone please post a pic. And the big book has the clev variation at almost 1/2 the value of the boston var...funny!
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Richard Masson</b><p>I use the registry as a checklist, so I don't pay attention to the numbers. I have not bothered to figure out how to delete a set since they changed the web site. We did give PSA all the flips last year.<br><br>I'll try to figure out how to nuke them.
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Eric</b><p>Richard,<br><br>Simply go in to the PSA registry to edit the two caramel sets, under edit mode for each set, about a few inches down simply click "retire set".<br><br>Your sets will still show up as the ALL TIME FINEST but make the current set list open to others.<br><br>Eric
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Double post
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Paul Kaufman</b><p><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1234378628.JPG" alt="[linked image]">
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>peter ullman</b><p>paul...thanks!
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Take a good look at your E90 set....and study it. My study of my set reveals the following pertinent observations.<br> <br>Look guys, we can debate the relative merit of pop reports....or collector's anecdotal experiences (like mine). But,<br> we can't refute the set's stylized design characteristics, similar background artwork, and the color of certain inks<br> tell us more than any amount of our guesswork. <br><br>Here are 5 observations on certain critical cards in the E90-1 set that really tell us what series they were printed<br> in......<br><br>1....cards in last Series as the function of trades:<br><br>Demmitt....with St Louis AL (Spring 1910)<br>Duffy........Mgr. Chicago AL (Spring 1910)<br>Karger......with Boston AL (traded June 1909)<br>Willis......with St Louis NL (traded Jan 1910)<br><br>2....cards with the solid Reddish-Orange backgrounds were in the last series (1910):<br><br>Bemis<br>Bescher<br>Demmitt<br>Gibs on (back view)<br>Leach (follow thru)<br>McLean<br>CYoung (Cleveland)<br><br><br>3....cards with sunset and similar mountain range backdrop were drawn by the same artist and printed in last series<br> (1910): <br><br><img src="http://i529.photobucket.com/albums/dd339/tz1234zaz/e90wagner.jpg" alt="[linked image]"><br><br><img src="http://i529.photobucket.com/albums/dd339/tz1234zaz/atrispeak.jpg" alt="[linked image]"><br><br><br><br>4....Philadelphia A's in 1st series (1908) with ringed cap:<br><br>Collins<br>Davis<br>Dygert<br>Krause<b r>Plank<br>Thomas<br><br>5....Philadelphia A's in 2nd series (1909) with white cap:<br><br>Baker<br>Barry<br>Bender<br>Heitmuelle r<br>Jackson<br><br><br>So guys....my study here convinces me that Wagner (throwing) was printed in the last series....1910.<br><br>I'm in agreement with you....you see, you can teach an "ole dog" new tricks....but, I had to see it, myself.<br><br>I guess I was lucky in acquiring the 2 nice Wagner (throwing) cards for my sets, this card is a tough one.<br><br><br><br><br>T-Rex TED<br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Eric</b><p>Once again ted makes everyone's thoughts into sense...<br><br>Now that we are past that... how about selling one of those two wagner throwing cards?
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>I sold my 1st set some time ago. The Wagner pictured in my above post is in my current set.<br><br>And, if I find one in lesser grade....or, ungraded, I will sell or trade this graded one.<br><br><br>TED Z<br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>ScottDango</b><p>If its possible, i have gained even more respect for you Ted!<br><br>great last post BTW!<br><br>PS ..i may have a groung breaking find in regards to E90-1...just trying to dot my I's....<br><br><br>Pop reports may not be 100% accurate when viewed in a vacuum, but they still hold considerable value and accuracy when making comparisons within the set!<br><br>until next time....
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>Where have all the images gone??? I don't think anyone put this guy up. So I dug him out of hiding. FW<br><br><img src="http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j106/greatwake/KargerAmericanCaramelE90-1.jpg" alt="[linked image]">
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ed Hans</b><p>Ted,<br> Excellent observation on the A's ringed/white caps. I hadn't considered that angle before. I'm not sure I agree that the designs correlate exactly to the series though. I'm also not sold on the "reddish-orange" theory, as there are numerous common subjects with red or orange backgrounds (Chase, Clark, Summers, Mullin etc.) <br><br> One of Frank's posts above mentioned the possibility of some of the difficult subjects being printed in the early print runs. I strongly concur with this idea. <br> <br> I'll repeat what I said above-E90-1 simply can't be thought of as three series; 1909, 1910, and 1911. The vastly different levels of rarity alone are enough to confirm this. I believe that the E90-1 set was issued in 5-7 series (printings?); the first two in 1909, at least three others in 1910, and possibly one in early 1911. I am still trying to piece together a theory on E90-1's distribution that will fit the existing patterns of scarcity, player movement, artwork, and backgrounds. Keep the ideas coming!
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Scott Fandango</b><p>Great Food For Thought!<br><br>i think it is VERY important that we nail down the printing METHOD first and then work from there....<br><br> were these cards made on 30 card sheets? YES OR NO
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ed Hans</b><p>I think the 30 card theory is quite plausible. Several candy issues of the era were printed that way and I am using that as a starting point. It is interesting to note that four 25 card sheets would make "100 subjects". Is a 5X5 printing sheet possible? Were E95s printed like that?
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>ED<br><br>My research indicates that the American Caramel Co. (ACC) issued the E91-A set of 33 cards<br>in mid 1908. And, then ACC followed it up with the 1st series of the E90-1 set in late 1908. I<br>do not accept the dating of "1909-1911".....it should be 1908-1910.<br><br>There is evidence that ACC printed its E91 series on sheets of 36 cards (containing 3 double-<br>prints on each sheet).<br><br>So, where does that leave us regarding the sheet format of the E90-1 series ? It's anyone's <br>guess. Obviously, 36 doesn't divide evenly into 120 cards. However, there certainly had to be<br> some double-prints. Frank W has suggested that Cobb was possibly one of the DP's. I would<br> add Plank as another DP.<br><br>Anyone else here have any ideas ?<br><br>TED Z<br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Scott Fandango</b><p>so 30 cards per sheet really gives you room for only 4 series unless the same cards were printed in different series, then you could have 5 or six series....<br><br>anyone else have thoughts this may be more than 3 series?
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>scott fandango</b><p>Highest Population cards (possible DP's)<br><br>Cobb 176<br>B wallace 104<br>c Mathewson 102<br>Jennings 102<br>Plank 101<br>Young Boston 100<br>hr baker 98<br>Lajoie 96<br>j jackson 95<br><br>next is in the 80's (pretty steep and obvious drop off in pop here)<br>81 Bender<br>80 crawford<br>78 chase<br><br>PS ED, Chase, Clark, Summers, Mullin etc. are not the same color as the orange red color<br><br><br>and edited a few spaces out..
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>This set is not as simple as 4 different 30 card sheets.<br><br><br>For starters, the cards don't bunch up into 4 groups of cards sorted by difficulty to obtain, ie there aren't 29 cards that are as difficult to locate as Mitchell.<br><br><br>I have seen one complete set of these cards. I'm not saying that complete sets are rare... what I'm getting at is that I've seen 120 different, in my hand (raw, no slabs or sheets) once. What I've not seen is a box of 300 of 'em. With T206s sometimes someone (Ted, ahem) has more than 500 at a time. Once I had about 550 T206s, only 513 different. What would be really helpful is to spread out a dozen or so of each player, to look for ever so slight printing differences and consistencies in a particular card. What we might see is that there were 7 printings of 30 cards at a time, as Ed H mentions above. That maybe they only changed a few of the cards, instead of all of them, once or twice. Each of the 7 printings need not have the same size press run. Maybe they were going to lay out 30 new cards but thought hey, why not leave Ty Cobb on there and let's print only 29 different. Maybe at the end someone had Mitchell on a new plate when an art guy came in with a new Wagner throwing design, and thought 'let's pull that moonhead image of Mitchell and put a real ballplayer, Honus, on there.' <br><br>With T206s we're more likely to have duplicate fronts because of the back differences. We as collectors are less likely to do that with E90-1s. And maybe we're missing some front detail or plate wear because of that.
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Scott Fandango</b><p>you trying to throw water on this fire?
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>not at all, Scott.<br><br>But these cards can't be separated into 4 piles of 30 cards each, with the cards of any one pile of equal difficulty.<br><br>Mr. Lipset ranked the tougher E90-1s into 4 groups, Extremely Rare, Rare, Very Difficult, and Difficult. He had Wagner throwing in the VD group, and you guys have convinced me to move him up to the R group. But I still don't think he is as tough as Mitchell, Graham, or Sweeney with Boston.<br><br>Much of Mr. Lipset's work is compounded onto the fine work of Richard Egan. Mr. Egan shows there to be 119 cards in the set at one place, and 118 another place in his Handbook. Wagner throwing is in the 119 listing, I'm not sure which card was added to get to 120, it might have been Clarke, Pittsburgh. In my 1960 edition of Mr. Burdick's American Card Catalog, he shows 111 subjects seen. The first edition of Egan's Handbook was 1969.<br><br><br>Those rascals, why'd they put 100 subjects on the back? I think there are 104 different players depicted. Some players have more than one card, getting us to 120 different. I wonder who the last 4 were? Seems to me if we took out Mitchell, Graham, Walsh and McLean (about the 4 most difficult single card ballplayers in there), then we're at that 100 subject total. Probably a worthless thought, not intended as 'water' on the fire, Scott. But rather as a small spark to the synapses. <br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Eric</b><p>I just picked up this card yesterday... <br>Most here say that its in the middle group of difficulty to get?<br>I must say that to me Shean appears to be harder to get than most say. <br><br>Looking at PSA's pop report, just 5 graded with the highest being a 3...? <br>Can someone tell me what the SGC pop report says for this card?<br><br><img src="http://www.247hq.com/SHEAN.jpg" alt="[linked image]">
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>I agree, Shean is underestimated. Nice card!!
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Note that both your Karger and Shean were apparently drawn by the same artist (the fence and the color of the <br>sky are almost identical).<br><br>Also, let's not forget that a good number of these scarce cards in the last (1910) series represent these 4 teams:<br><br>Boston AL......<br>Hall (horiz.)<br>Karger<br>Speaker<br>Stahl<br><br>Bost on NL......<br>B. Brown (horiz.)<br>Graham<br>Richie<br>Shean<br>Bill Sweeney<br><br>Cincinnati......<br>Bescher<br>Lobe rt<br>McLean<br>Mike Mitchell<br>Seigle (horiz.)<br><br>Cleveland......<br>Bemis<br>Joss (horiz.)<br>Upp<br>CYoung<br><br><br>Does any one here have any ideas as to why the majority of the scarce Subjects are from these 4 teams ? <br><br><br><br>TED Z<br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>Boston had the worst teams for a few years in both the NL an AL...<br><br>maybe they just didnt use the last place teams for the first few series...when they planned on "100 subjects" they must have known they had to draw a line somewhere...
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Scott Fandango</b><p>what about R Thomas Boston?
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Check my list again....Richie is listed under Boston NL.<br><br><br>TED Z<br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Paul Kaufman</b><p>Frank, in reference to Egan's 119......I think Lipset mentions that the Bemis card was not known until the mid-1960's.
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Scott Fandango</b><p>i think your onto something by concentrating on the backgrounds and the colors used...there are some card with such similar backgrounds that you would almost have to assume they were from the same series...
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>SCOTT....et al<br><br>My next theory will more thought-provoking. It's an idea I've come up with just this year.<br><br>Have to run out now....be back soon.<br><br><br>T-Rex TED<br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Scott Gutwein</b><p>Thank you for everyone's input on this thread. Very informative.<br><br><br><br>I recently saw a miscut e90-3 for sale. The interesting thing about the miscut is the horizontal miscut allowed the card to have the same name on the top and bottom of the card. I'm not sure if the e90-1, e90-2 and e90-3 sets were all printed the same way, but if they were then the printing in rows of the same player would be very interesting. It would actually allow the printer to double print more rows of one player if he was local (Philadelphia players). <br><br><br><br>I also would be interested in why the Wagner throwing is so rare. If it was printed about the same time as the T206 Wagner, maybe he stopped printing on all of his cards until some issues could be worked out. What are the approximate print dates of the two sets? If there was any relationship to that, maybe the red Wagner batting was the second Wagner printed at a later time which would explain why it's more common. <br><br><br><br>I appreciate all the help people have given me on my set. Thank you. You know who you are.<br><br><br><br>Scott Gutwein (ubiqty)
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>Why were Cincinnati, Cleveland and Boston teams printed last?? Maybe the guy going around and getting player permission (if that was done) didn't get to Ohio or Massachusetts first or second time around. In Philly someone could instantly get the home teams, and then wait for the others as the various teams in each league made their visit to Philly. I can't recall how long it was that Lajoie (and I think someone else) avoided road trips inside Pennsylvania because of that court case from where he jumped teams. An injunction restraining him from playing for other teams was issued at some point in time, and eventually recalled. I think E90-1 was issued after the injunction was lifted... I don't recall for certain.
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>The E90 Wagner (batting) pose is easy....the E91 Wagner was double-printed....the subsequent E-type sets<br>continued to portray Wagner.<br><br>My theory is that American Caramel had the exclusive rights to Eddie Plank and forced ATC to cease issuing<br>their T206 Plank.<br><br>Perhaps, this same scenario applied to the T206 Wagner ? ?<br><br><br>Dates....<br><br>E91 1st series.....1908<br><br>E90 1st series.....late 1908<br><br>T206 Spring/Summer 1909<br><br><br><br>TED Z<br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Dig this theory......<br><br>In 1909 (designed in 1908) the RAMLY Cigarette Co. based in Worcester, Mass. issued a 120 card BB set.<br> It competed with American Caramel (ACC) for the Rights to portray certain BB players. Specifically, most<br> Boston (AL & NL) Subjects. Furthermore, RAMLY had acquired the Rights to portray Frank Bancroft (Cinci <br>Mgr.) and his Cincinnati players.<br><br>Therefore, RAMLY prevented ACC from portraying any of these players in their E90 1908 and 1909 series.<br> When ACC printed their last E90 series in 1910, they were free to include a lot of the Boston and Cincin-<br>nati players that they were prevented from portraying in their earlier series. And, as usually occurs in a<br> final (or Hi #) series, they were short-printed.<br><br>The RAMLY set consists of many Boston & Cinci players....of which, the following were in the 1910 issue <br>of the E90-1 set......<br><br>Fromme<br>Karger<br>Lobert<br>McL ean<br>Mike Mitchell<br>Ritchey (Richie)<br>Stahl<br>Bill Sweeney<br><br>All these RAMLY Boston & Cinci Subjects did not appear in the E90-1 set......<br><br>Jim Ball<br>Bancroft<br>Bowerman<br>Burchell<br>Burket t<br>Carrigan<br>Cicotte<br>Dorner<br>Ewing<br>Fer guson<br>Gessler<br>Hoblitzel<br>Huggins<br>Lindam an<br>Lord<br>McConnell<br>Morgan<br>Niles<br><br> And incidently, Walter Johnson was in RAMLY....but, it's been a real mystery as to why he was not in the<br> E90-1 set ?<br><br>Especially, since Johnson was depicted in the earlier E91 set (albeit as a left-handed pitcher).<br><br><br>TED Z<br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Peter Thomas</b><p>T204 Ramly's broke down like this by teams:<br><br>Boston AL 15 <br>Boston NL 8<br>Brooklyn NL 7<br>Chicago AL 1<br>Chicago NL 14<br>Cincinnati NL 11<br>Detroit AL 4<br>Minneapolis AL 1<br>New York AL 8<br>New York NL 12<br>Philadelphia AL 7<br>Philadelphia NL 2<br>St. Louis AL 11<br>St. Louis NL 6<br>Washington AL 10<br>Washington NL 2<br>Worcester 1 (Burkett)<br>N.E.L. 1 (Murname)<br><br>Total 121 Players 8 AL teams, 8 NL teams plus Worcester and N.E.L.<br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Scott</b><p>By the way, the e90-3 card I mentioned above was the Blackburne and it's available in Leon's auction. Does that card have any bearing on how the e90-1's were printed?<br><br>Scott.
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Hi Peter, <br><br>Looks like I'm missing 8 on my list of Boston (AL & NL) and Cinci. Subjects that were not<br>in the E90-1 set.<br><br>If you get a chance could you please list them.<br><br><br>Thanks,<br><br>TED Z<br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Scott Fandango</b><p>this is getting good!<br><br>i feel we are at the precipice of some majors breakthroughs with this set....<br><br>"insert foreshadowing clip here"
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Michael Steele</b><p>I thought we had moved on to the T-206 Super thread but I guess not. Which is great. I like Ted's Theory of the Ramly Co. blocking rights on the Boston A.L. and others from the E90-1 set until later on in the print runs. <br><br>But 15 Boston A.L. cards in the Ramly set has been a very expensive thorn in my side <img src="/images/happy.gif" height="14" width="14" alt="happy.gif">. <br><br>Ted: Here are 5 Boston A.L. players you missed that are in the Ramly set but not in the E-90-1:<br><br>Arrelanes<br>Cheech<br>Donahue<br>Spence r<br>Wagner (Heine)<br><br>What is interesting is the E-91C set came out about the same time (1910) as the last series of E-90-1 and the Red sox or Boston A.L are only in the E-91C set and Cinncinati is not represented at all in the E-91 sets. Of the 5 Players I mentioned above, 3 are in the E-91C set (Cheech, Donahue and Wagner).<br><br>In all of this, the one thing that is not consistent regarding Boston AL is the Cy Young Boston E-90-1 version. This card, unlike the rest of the Boston Al players, was not printed anywhere near the end or with the scarce cards.
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Thanks for posting the 5 Boston guys that I left out.<br><br>I very much appreciate your comparison of the E91-C series (with the Boston players)<br> to the last series of the E90 set. And, the omission of any Cinci guys in the E91 set.<br><br>The E91-C observation further lends support to my theory regarding RAMLY's exclusive<br> rights to portray these guys. And therefore, preventing American Caramel from portray-<br>ing them in their 1908 and 1909 series in both of the E91 and E90 sets.<br><br>It is only a theory....but, when you consider all the coincidental circumstances implied<br> here, it just might prove to be valid.<br><br><br>TED Z<br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Eric</b><p>I'm so tired of post after post about the T206s...<br><br>I'm liking the fact that the E90-1s are getting some attention here.<br><br>Its about time! I'd love to see more collectors of the set!
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Here is the link to an earlier thread on the E90-1 set that also proved to be very informative.<br><br><a href="http://www.network54.com/Forum/153652/message/1143057099/Let%27s+Talk+E90-1....toughest+Candy" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.network54.com/Forum/153652/message/1143057099/Let%27s+Talk+E90-1....toughest+Candy</a><br><br><br>TED Z<br><br><br>
|
E90-1.....and the "Dirty Thirty" theory
Posted By: <b>ScottDango</b><p>but that other thread has been locked...<br><br>i hope this doesnt get locked..just because something is old does not make it bad....i hope you all say that about your wives too!
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:03 AM. |