![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Felicia
Excuse my ignorance and please don't bash for asking, I have been reading these boards for awhile now and I love the T-206's. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
It's a good question, and no one will bash you. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
A T206 set comprising 520 cards for most collectors is considered "complete", for all practical purposes. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Felicia
I really appreciate the insight, as I navigate thru this journey I will make mistakes, I am sure. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Jon Canfield
Ted, Barry, etc - are any of you aware of any collectors out there trying to complete a true master set with all front/back combinations? Obviously, this may be near impossible considering the the fact you would need 2 Wagners, 2 Planks, not to mention countless rare backs, etc? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Jon- I know of two but it's not right to post names on the board. Ted in fact has embarked on one of the more interesting T206 quests, completing sets all with one back: Sovereign, Sweet Cap, and Piedmont (less the big 4). But I will let him elaborate. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: David Moriarty
I agree that most people will consider a complete set to be 520 cards, but I took Ted's reasoning on the Magie/Magee card a little further. My set will be complete at 517 as I am not going to include the O'Hara, Demmitt and Elberfeld cards just because of the team change. I can't see spending $1,000 + for a card because it has a different team on it when the same, and more common, card is available with a different team on it. The one good thing about these cards is you can collect them in a lot of different ways. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: T206Collector
...won't even attempt a T206 set because they don't want to be stuck at 520 when there are 4 more out there that are truly difficult, if not impossible, to acquire. But, as you can see, most people who attempt T206 are content with something near 520, based on any number of rationale explanations. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Felicia
David, |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Anthony S.
Elberfeld (portrait, NY) --- common |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
These are the 4 cards that have identical duplicated pictures that reflect team changes...... |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: T206Collector
Read all about the Demmitt and O'Hara variations here: |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: davidcycleback
With card collecting you often hear the terms complete set and masters set. The master set includes all the variations and errors as is applied when collecting modern sets, like 1981 Fleer. So, with T206s, the complete set would be all the different card fronts, and the masters set would have all the variations and combinations. No one has completed a masters T206 set, or probably come close. For many modern sets, the masters set can be a challenge but doable. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Ted- you left out Lundgren, G. Brown, Smith, among others, as cards with team changes but identical pictures. In each case there is a scarce and common pose. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Felicia
Thank you all for your patience and for explaining this to me. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
Received your email and replied. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Craig W
T-REX TED |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave Hornish
I think the Elberfeld has some subtle differences that go beyond a mere changed team but that is for another thread. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: ChiSoxFan
Here is what Oldcardboard.com has for a checklist: |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Dave- you are right about Elberfeld. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Felicia
Thank you for the checklist. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
The total number of front/back combinations would be less than 6700 as many of the brands only issued a portion of the set. I think the actual number is well under 5000. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave Moriarty
I am not considered a big collector, but I don't consider the Ty Cobb back card to be part of the set. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Good question, but I know of no resource that gives a player's eye color. It may remain a mystery. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
The Elberfeld NY version (printed in the 150/350 series) is ONLY found with BROWN eyes. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: T206Collector
...was seeing it show up in SGC's Set Registry, which I thought was ridiculous because even if you credit it as a T206 card, it is really just a Red Portrait Cobb with an ultra-rare back. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Ted- I didn't know that. Interesting. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Complete 1914 Cracker Jack Set on the PSA Set Registry | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 01-06-2008 07:01 AM |
For sale 1950 Big League Stars Complete set YES complete set | Archive | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 8 | 10-11-2007 04:58 PM |
What is considered scarcer M116 or T-206? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 01-21-2007 03:06 PM |
Why is T206 considered One set | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 12 | 05-24-2005 10:56 PM |
COMPLETE T-206 SET FOUND! | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 30 | 04-18-2005 12:06 PM |