![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Beside my big collection on Deaf Sports, I have this itch to do one of T set and I have about 10-12 of T205 and T207. Im having hard time decide which set I should focus on. Im not going to do both sets. I would love for your inputs and thoughts.
I don't collect T206 but Luther "Dummy" Taylor's T206 cards. I have almost 100 cards in 11 out of 14 backs. Best, Danny
__________________
_________________________ Always buying Deaf Sports related, William Hoy, Luther Taylor, George Kihm, Grover Alexander, Dick Sipek, Curtis Pride, Carlton Molesworth, Lou Burdette, Gil McDougald, Ralph Lin Weber, Gallaudet University Set 1909 E-91A (23/33) 1993 Topps Finest Refractor (109/199) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I love both sets. But if you are only doing one, unless you are really drawn to T207, I would do a basic 208-card T205 set and save yourself a mountain of headaches that T207 will cause.
__________________
T205 (208/208) T206 (520/520) T207 (200/200) E90-1 (120/121) E91A/B/C (99/99) 1895 Mayo (16/48) N28/N29 Allen & Ginter (100/100) N162 Goodwin Champions (30/50) N184 Kimball Champions (37/50) Complete: E47, E49, E50, E75, E76, E229, N88, N91, R136, T29, T30, T38, T51, T53, T68, T73, T77, T118, T218, T220, T225 www.prewarcollector.com |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
For me it is T205 as I have always thought they are one of the most aesthetically pleasing sets. Here are my latest pickups. it's been a while since i have added any.
![]()
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
t205 is a prettier set by far than t207. I'd go the t205 route! It's a fun set to complete!!
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
05 set was the most fun set I ever built. It’s economical and easy to build up and sell off.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
T207, with all of it's rarities, is very tough to complete; reaching 75% completion is quite an accomplishment in itself.
T205, even though it has a handful of rare cards, isn't much different from T206 in toughness. If you stick to the basic set, without the Mathewson Cycle-back, Hoblitzell no-stats and the other variations, it is doable. I'm working on the T205 set myself, and after four years, I'm down to needing only two cards to finish the basic set (plus six more for the master-set). Steve
__________________
Successful BST deals with eliotdeutsch, gonzo, jimivintage, Leon, lharris3600, markf31, Mrc32, sb1, seablaster, shammus, veloce. Current Wantlist: 1909 Obak Howard (Los Angeles) (no frame on back) 1910 E90-2 Gibson, Hyatt, Maddox |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'm a big T207 fan and am creepng up on 90% completion. Many (40+) T207s are difficult to find no matter the pocketbook wheareas T205s are relatively available. There are very many more big stars in T205 (Cobb, Matty, Young, etc.), but T207 has many obscure players known only because they exist in the T207 set.
When faced with a similar decision, I chose the T207 set to go after. I'm close, but it may be months, years, before the few I need to complete the set become available. A basic T207 set will cost 2-3 times what a complete basic T205 set will cost. What deters many collectors from the T207 set is the most expensive cards are Louis Lowdermilk, Irving Lewis and Ward Miller. T205 top dawgs are Ty Cobb, Christy Mathewson and other HoFs. I like the T207 design - there is something haunting and the poses vary. T205s are much more colorful. T207s are much, much rarer and may offer an advantage if the set regains popularity - it was hot ten years ago and prices for individual cards were often twice / thricewhat they are today - it is certainly depressed. Best I can offer - pick whatever set makes you happy to pursue - all are great cards - good luck!!! Last edited by wondo; 11-12-2019 at 06:04 PM. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Each time I start coming back around to prewar, I have a similar dilemma except it is deciding between collecting T205 or T206. So I know how you feel, OP.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
![]()
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
To the question of the thread, as for the T207s, I think they might be an acquired taste. ![]()
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
In my view, t207 has a cleaner look, and it seems to contain a lot of cards that are not in t206, so it seems, to me, a natural set to follow up on the t206. True, there will be lacuna, but when you make progress in the set, it will be clear that you have a collection rather than an accumulation.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Both sets are beautiful and present their own challenges, but if it were me, I'd go with the 1911 T205 basic set. While not as plentiful as the T206, they aren't too difficult as the T207 whereas you could go a lifetime without seeing certain cards.
|
![]() |
|
|