FYI...E90-1 Confirmed Shaded Back Versions
 

wanted to revisit this, as new information comes up...

here is a scan of an OBVIOUS SHADED VERSION:

http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/j...backshaded.jpg

just checked the PSA pop report again,and it sure confirms the shaded versions!

cards found with shaded version

group A (solid red background, action posses )

Richie 10 on the Pop report, yes only 10!!!
Sheckard 11
Tenney 11
Demmitt 11
Pastorius 12
Marquard HOF 22
Wagner batting HOF 28

amazingly similar pop reports!!!! shows how rare and tough these cards are ...raise your hand if you are surprised to see the pop reorts on these are less than those listed rarities below!!!!

as a comparative reference to KNOWN rarities:

mike mitchell 18
peaches graham 18
larry mclean 11
hans lobert 12
ed walsh 20
H duffy 16

(joe jackson 58)

my discovery may change the way we look at E90-1 RARITIES...[Peaches graham are so numerous, i need a RICHIE! POP 10..and maybe i can get a shaded version Richie!! POP 3]

group B
 

Confirmed Group B (Blue and green background with mountains)

roy thomas 14 pop only!!!!
wiltse 15
froome 17
schlitzer 14
camnitz 16
groom 13

Again all VERY SIMILAR POP NUMBERS that are far less than the COMMONS which many have over double and triple the amount of graded examples....

If one of these shaded cards in groups A or B had a POP report dissimilar to the others, then that could blow a hole in the theory...BUT since they have uncanningly similar POP reports, it supports my theory.....


comparative pop reports:
summers 43
Bailey 36
f clarke 42
h howell 39
mullin 38
hartzell 34
sweeney 36
criger 32

HOF's
Cobb 114
Lajoie 54
wallace 52
joss portrait 59
bender 44
HR baker 58
jennings 57
mathewson 66
cy Young 55

ED, i dont agree with your assessment that Wagner batting or marquard are "common" ...they have half the amount of graded cards of most other HOF in this set (1/3 less than many)...they are actually 2 of the rarest (POP wise) HOFs found in this set! Known HOF toughies Tris speaker has pop report of 14, and Cy Young Cleveland has 16 POP report...so POP 22 is in the ballbark of these known HOF rarities!!!!

in this set, HOFers are graded about twice as often as a similar non HOF counterpart...this appears true on the POP report and on the Group A shaded cards (wagner and marquard have almost exactly double the graded version of sheckard, demmitt, tenney, pastorius)




please post scans of any cards with shaded backs!

Scott
 

can you post a scan of each version?

the Ritchie is a tough e90-1 and I know there is a PSA 4 example coming to auction in June.

?
 

does this interest anybody?

are people here so set in their ways that no discussion is generated?

just because a few people think this is a printing error, it does not make it meaningless, nor is it the end of the story...

look at facts, forget preconceived notions...

THE CARDS THAT EXHIBIT SHADING ARE NOT COMMON CARDS, they happen to be some of the lowest population cards! If this doesnt smack you in the head, i dont know what will...

Also, the shaded cards have the same style fronts!

people thought Albert Einstein was crazy too...

Scott-I collect e90-1s. Obviously I am interested your conclusions. But the reality is, I'm not interested in an internet fight over whether or not a little shading is a real variation or not, and I'd guess most people aren't either. I've seen a couple posts asking you to post both of your versions-- that would be interesting to see.

Scott,

Here is the problem your having IMO, your using pop report numbers as the basis for your theory. The problem is your data is flawed. I went to the PSA pop reports and there are several cards with lower pops that are not rare.

Cliff Blankenship -17
Frank Corridon- 13
Frank Isbell- 13
Harry Davis- 14
Sam Leever- 16

These all have population numbers close to what you have shown, yet not of these cards are rare IMO.

Obviously you can not compare a HOF to a non HOF as we all know more HOF will get graded.

The way I see it you would have to id a specific group of cards (which it seems you have) and show that they turn up with this shaded back on a semi regular basis, otherwise it was just something in the press IMO that ran for a while and was corrected. Neat but not a huge deal.

If you have a list of cards that only came with the shaded backs then that would be something else, but if I understand what you saying it is that this group comes with and without, and that the shaded are rarer and should carry a premium and be noted on the flip.

James G