View Single Post
  #1  
Old 06-08-2007, 01:26 AM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default Thank you ..... Joe D.

Posted By: Joe Pelaez

I think you solved a question that's been driving me sane ever since I got involved with the Slow Joe Doyle error card back in 1987.

We all know that they caught the Doyle league designation error faster than they caught the Magie spelling error.

They committed an error, and caught it fast, but then they went out and committed a second error, an error of omission.
They omitted to replace the Nat'l league, with the Amer league designation. ..... WHY?

Why did they leave it blank?
Why did they create the only unbalanced looking card in the T206 set?
All they had to do was reset the type.
I don't think that it would have taken that long.

I say that because back in 1944, at the age of thirteen, at a Jr. high school in NYC, I had a course in printing.
The printing press was probably from the period of the T206 set, and possibly donated to the school.
Whatever it was, that monster always scared the hell out of me, and I always visualized my hand becoming part of the printing process.

Joe D, when I read this:

"Ted - that is pretty cool June 4 2007, 6:16 PM

And I think we can safely say those cards with the dot - were almost "Nat'l"s

The printer polished out that area on the plate (instead of making a new one) and left some of the 'N' there.

I'm not sure how long plates lasted back then, how long the press runs were (or if plates were held for more than one run)....
so its hard to say how tough these would be to find.

But to me, the cool part is that the card was almost a Natl - and could very well have been part of the same press run as the Natl cards."

*
*

When I read the above, I yelled out EUREKA!
You've nailed it.
What is this polished out format that you speak of?
Remember, I didn't do this for very long, and we're talking 63 years ago.

I know that there's some one on the forum in the printing trade.
Are you the one?

Thanks again
Joe P.



Reply With Quote