One T206, Two Names

[Jantz]

Nice card Adam!

Thanks for posting it.


Jantz

[Gradedcardman]

Jantz, I'm always looking now !! Thanks for bringing these to my attention !!

Adam

[mrvster]

Your a hounddog.....GREAT job, i always love your collecting focus, and your keen knowledge on 206.........i thought i was crazy following these around more than ten years ago

now i know i'm not alone.......these 2 namers fueled my freaky deakiness and continues to

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by peterose4hof

Hands down, this is one of the most interesting threads I have ever read on net54. Keep up the great work gentlemen!

+100

Sincerely, Clayton

[camlov2]

Didn't think we had any but actually found one in the pile of trimmed cards. Lake/Lake (I guess it doesn't really have two names but I think it still works.

[camlov2]

Maybe I just need to look harder...

Here are a couple more Cassidy/Cassidy and Nichols/Nichols

and a third ghost image along for the ride.

[DixieBaseball]

Guys - Reviving this old thread for a question if anyone can answer it : Why do we not see SLer's with 2 name cards ? Perhaps I have glossed over it, but I didn't see any in this thread. Obviously there are fewer numbers (48) from the set, but was wondering if anyone owns or has seen a SLer with 2 names on it ? If not, why ? Thanks & I will hang up and listen...

[z28jd]

If I may answer the last caller's question. You won't see many SL cards cut like that because of rarity+lack of subjects. They are out there though, just tough to find

http://www.ebay.com/itm/T206-GRADED-...p2047675.l2557

[Abravefan11]

I agree completely with what John posted. I hope a few surface and are eventually shared in this thread.

[mrvster]

great Zimmerman....can u post a back scan??

[DixieBaseball]

Thanks John & Tim. I guess when you deduce the number of subjects to 48 and only 3 backs possible, relatively speaking, the cards would be "rare" or scarce to find a 2 name one card scenario... Just odd we don't see more of them... So unofficially the SL list is at 2 with McCauley & Lipe. 46 more to go...

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by NashvilleBaseball

Thanks John & Tim. I guess when you deduce the number of subjects to 48 and only 3 backs possible, relatively speaking, the cards would be "rare" or scarce to find a 2 name one card scenario... Just odd we don't see more of them... So unofficially the SL list is at 2 with McCauley & Lipe. 46 more to go...

Regarding double name (not two name) SLs I've had at least two... Foley White was one. I can probably dig up scans.

[Jantz]

NashvilleBaseball/Jeremy - I've never seen a two different name SLer, but as shown by other members already, two same name SLers do exist.

McCauley and Lipe have already been mentioned. I can add Revelle to the list. By the way, all three of them have an Old Mill back.

Maybe the White Er!ck mentioned has a OM back too.

Also Jeremy, of all the two different name T206s found so far, none of them have a 460 series back.



Jantz

[Brian Weisner]

Hey Jantz,
I have a Shag and Molesworth.... both with OM backs...

Be well Brian

[t206hound]

Sold in the June 2012 Sterling Auction... someone got a steal as it cost me $100 raw. Just not quite enough name at the top for me.

[g_vezina_c55]

my first two name card and my last pick up. i dont have it in my hand now, but look like to have another Purtell name on top.

[t206hound]

I'm guilty of getting sidetracked on this thread as well... but this is about "two name" cards which are T206s with two different player names. The cards shown recently (including the White I posted) are "double name" cards which are T206s with the same name twice.

I'll put up scans of my Rossmans tonight...

[camlov2]

Oops, I thought we were posting all combinations to work towards trying to figure out the layout of the sheet. Sorry about that.

[t206hound]

Here are my Rossman miscuts. This thread can be used to help with sheet layouts, but double name miscuts won't help with that.

Rossman-Rossman is a double name
Rossman-McBride is a two name

[camlov2]

Originally Posted by t206hound

This thread can be used to help with sheet layouts, but double name miscuts won't help with that.

Is it believed that all players appear twice on a sheet (one above the other)? I hadn't heard that before but it wouldn't surprise me.

[atx840]

Here is a good article on a possible sheet layout, it is thought multiple examples were stacked three to four high.

http://www.t206resource.com/Article-...stique-34.html

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by atx840

Here is a good article on a possible sheet layout, it is thought multiple examples were stacked three to four high.

http://www.t206resource.com/Article-...stique-34.html

Very nice article. The 34-card, 2 player per column sheet theory would mean that for each column you could have one card with two different names (the 3rd card from the bottom) and four cards with two of the same name (all but the top card in each column and the aforementioned 3rd from the bottom).

If each '2-name' card has the same odds of being miscut to show 2 names (Steve or Tim would have to answer that question), then that's a 4-1 ratio - is that about what we've seen?

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Very nice article. The 34-card, 2 player per column sheet theory would mean that for each column you could have one card with two different names (the 3rd card from the bottom) and four cards with two of the same name (all but the top card in each column and the aforementioned 3rd from the bottom).

If each '2-name' card has the same odds of being miscut to show 2 names (Steve or Tim would have to answer that question), then that's a 4-1 ratio - is that about what we've seen?

I'm not sure about the ratio of double name to two name cards.

The likelihood of the same number being cut wrong depends on the order of the cuts. If they started by removing the edges then cut into strips by height or width, the chances are that the same cards would always be miscut since an error gets worse as the cuts progress.
If the first card is off center or oversize by 1/64, the next cut will be off center by 1/32nd since it starts already off by 1/64th and the next cut adds the same error. In reality the errors that begin at one end would be much less.
A more typical cutting sequence has the sheet being cut into blocks that are then cut progressively with the longer sides done last.

But there's plenty of eveidence that T206s weren't cut with a consistent pattern, or sometimes with much accuracy. Diamond cuts are far more likely if you're doing the narrow ends last. On a job as big as T206s the cutting would have been done by more than one guy, some of them more skilled than others.

The number of examples of the same card on each sheet I think is more than 4. It's at least 3.
Sheet layouts that are entirely unbalanced are also possible if not likely. So there might be several rows of say 4 over 4 and then maybe a row of 6-8 of a popular player or star.

Between the two name cards, the plate scratch, the registration layout marks, and a few other things I think it will eventually be possible to get very close to what a sheet might have looked like.

Steve B

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by steve B

The number of examples of the same card on each sheet I think is more than 4. It's at least 3.

My numbers are 'per column', not sheet.

[steve B]

Unless they had multiple columns of the same player - which is possible of course- It works out the same.

In other words, if Spencer was only in one column, saying there are 3 Spencers in the column and 3 Spencers on the sheet is the same thing.

I think that number is actually at least 4, maybe as much as 6.

Steve B

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by steve B

Unless they had multiple columns of the same player - which is possible of course- It works out the same.

In other words, if Spencer was only in one column, saying there are 3 Spencers in the column and 3 Spencers on the sheet is the same thing.

I think that number is actually at least 4, maybe as much as 6.

Steve B

Oh, I see what you are saying.

I described the exact position of each card. If you can think of another position within a column that I missed, please describe, but I think my numbers are correct.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Oh, I see what you are saying.

I described the exact position of each card. If you can think of another position within a column that I missed, please describe, but I think my numbers are correct.

Nope, we're talking about the same thing.


I think the number of each card in the column would be more than 3-4.

with 3 you get
edge card- name and wide blank margin
middle card - two of the same name
upper/lower card- two different names

If it was three, I'd think the ones with different names would be much more common, roughly equal to the edge and same name cards. That's definetly not the ratio we see so far.

Steve B

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by steve B

Nope, we're talking about the same thing.


I think the number of each card in the column would be more than 3-4.

with 3 you get
edge card- name and wide blank margin
middle card - two of the same name
upper/lower card- two different names

If it was three, I'd think the ones with different names would be much more common, roughly equal to the edge and same name cards. That's definetly not the ratio we see so far.

Steve B

Steve, it's an exact thing that can be determined just by looking at Tim's sheet example. Not 3 or 4, not 'more than 3-4'. I don't have the software to draw a graphic for you, but I think I described it exactly in my original post:

Again, per column, 1 physical card with 2 different names, and 4 physical cards with 2 of the same name. Given Tim's layout, it can't be anything else.

Now, if you think Tim's layout is incorrect, then that's a different story.

[atx840]

Steve, it may be an indication that there were 6+ of each player stacked based on the ratio we see of double names vs two names. We may learn as you mentioned that some players had 4 stacked and others 6 or more, maybe multiple columns of the same player on one sheet. Fun stuff

If we could confirm the print press or sheet size it would be a good base to start with.

Jantz or Erick, is there a new Rossman or other example I need to add to list?

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by atx840

Steve, it may be an indication that there were 6+ of each player stacked based on the ratio we see of double names vs two names. We may learn as you mentioned that some players had 4 stacked and others 6 or more, maybe multiple columns of the same player on one sheet. Fun stuff

If we could confirm the print press or sheet size it would be a good base to start with.

Jantz or Erick, is there a new Rossman or other example I need to add to list?

Exactly, which is what I was trying to get at with the comments about ratios we are seeing. Chris - thanks for bringing this point up again.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by atx840

Jantz or Erick, is there a new Rossman or other example I need to add to list?

Not to my knowledge. I have the McBride... and want the Thomas.

[Jantz]

Chris - My total count to date of two-different name T206s is at 37.

Your grouping below is correct to my knowledge except we need to add Walsh/Lumley and Egan/Warhop to the grouping.

No new Rossman that I'm aware of.


Jantz

[Brian Weisner]

Here's another with two names.... Both from Cleveland....Piedmont 150







Be well Brian

[atx840]

Nice card Brian, looks like Stovall, I'll work on it.

[Brian Weisner]

Hi Chris,
Yes it is Stovall.... I will post another after dinner that is much tougher to guess...

Be well Brian

[Gradedcardman]

Jantz,

Is the Walsh/Lumley the only Lumley combo to show up to date ?

[Jantz]

Brian - Nice card! Thanks for posting it. Looking forward to seeing the other card you have to post.

Adam - So far the Walsh/Lumley is the only combination I've seen with Lumley's name on it.


Jantz

[Brian Weisner]

Here's another.... Pied 350 Herzog/.......? I'm 99% sure I know the other player, but would like to see what everyone else thinks...









Be well Brian

[Jantz]

Brian

Is it Ritchey, Boston Nat'l?


Jantz

[Gradedcardman]

I concur with Jantz...

[Brian Weisner]

Winner... Winner... Chicken Dinner....





Be well Brian

[Gradedcardman]

Brian, Love the no red !!

Adam

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by Brian Weisner

Winner... Winner... Chicken Dinner....





Be well Brian

I wish I had a scan of your Ritchey when trying to get my Gilbert no red slabbed by SGC... They had a problem with the "missing" color since it was color on top of color... like in this case there is a base of yellow for the belt with red applied on top. Sweet Card!

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by atx840

Jantz or Erick, is there a new Rossman or other example I need to add to list?

I was wrong!!!! I simply assumed my Rossman-McBride was the one that had previously been identified, but alas, mine is a different one!

Does anyone know if the other Rossman-McBride is a Piedmont as well. Interesting that the Rossman-Thomas is a Sweet Cap.



http://www.net54baseball.com/showpos...34&postcount=5

[lharri3600]

Here's one I just picked up

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by lharri3600

Here's one I just picked up

Larry, I think that card has the same name at top and bottom, not two different ones. But I've been wrong plenty of times before.

[lharri3600]

me too

[Pat R]

I found the scans of the Lundren/Ball, maybe it's me but this card doesn't look
legit to me.

[g_vezina_c55]

Two name card command a premium value ? According to you what is the premium for a two name card.. ? Same name on top and bottom

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by g_vezina_c55

Two name card command a premium value ? According to you what is the premium for a two name card.. ? Same name on top and bottom

Two (different) names command a premium based on relative scarcity. Only on the order of 3 dozen known. Double (same) names do not command the same premium. I will pay nicely for a double name (or miscut) if the full name is at the top, but it is still no where near the price you would expect for a two name card.