|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 
|  |  |  | 
 | 
| 
			 
			#1  
			
			
			
			
			
		 | |||
| 
 | |||
|  E106 Doolan variation? 
			
			Posted By: jrhatchjr Greetings, | 
| 
			 
			#2  
			
			
			
			
			
		 | |||
| 
 | |||
|  E106 Doolan variation? 
			
			Posted By: Matt Looks to me like there is paper/ink loss on the angular part of the S (or where the angular part would be) and the bottom left "foot" had a little extra ink and is touching the top curve. | 
| 
			 
			#3  
			
			
			
			
			
		 | |||
| 
 | |||
|  E106 Doolan variation? 
			
			Posted By: peter ullman Hmm...looks legit to me. | 
| 
			 
			#4  
			
			
			
			
			
		 | |||
| 
 | |||
|  E106 Doolan variation? 
			
			Posted By: Matt I erased a little ink for the s on the right: | 
| 
			 
			#5  
			
			
			
			
			
		 | |||
| 
 | |||
|  E106 Doolan variation? 
			
			Posted By: leon Nice detective work..... | 
| 
			 
			#6  
			
			
			
			
			
		 | |||
| 
 | |||
|  E106 Doolan variation? 
			
			Posted By: Marty Ogelvie At first glance it looks like a clear varition but I like Matt's argument that it could easily be a case of paper loss or INK loss in the area that connects the top and bottom of the S.    I would like to see MORE scans, examples... unfortunately I do NOT have one in my possession.   | 
| 
			 
			#7  
			
			
			
			
			
		 | |||
| 
 | |||
|  E106 Doolan variation? 
			
			Posted By: Mark T it does look more like ink loss than paper loss. Maybe this blown up pic shows it better. | 
| 
			 
			#8  
			
			
			
			
			
		 | |||
| 
 | |||
|  E106 Doolan variation? 
			
			Posted By: ali_lapoint i'm having a hard time understanding why you're saying it could be ink loss. a c and an s look completely different. if there is ink missing, where? it's hard to get a c out of an s. first off, if the ink is missing how did it get bent backward? a c and an s bend in opposite directions so even if there was ink missing on the s it wouldn't bend the curve backwards to form a c. looks like a legit variation to me. | 
| 
			 
			#9  
			
			
			
			
			
		 | |||
| 
 | |||
|  E106 Doolan variation? 
			
			Posted By: Mark T It does not even look like a C....its a S that does not have enough ink. | 
| 
			 
			#10  
			
			
			
			
			
		 | |||
| 
 | |||
|  E106 Doolan variation? 
			
			Posted By: ali_lapoint i dont really see that at all. if this is an inking error then somewhere out there should be more examples. perhaps there are. | 
|  | 
| 
 | 
 | 
|  Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post | 
| T206 Doolan for trade -GONE | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 1 | 09-15-2007 08:38 PM | 
| WTB: T-206 Doolan Batting | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 07-19-2007 03:20 PM | 
| Raw T206 Doolan Fielding - SOLD | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 1 | 05-11-2007 02:58 PM | 
| M116 Doolan SGC 40 | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 1 | 04-13-2006 10:32 PM | 
| DOOLAN-BALT T213 Type 2 | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 08-21-2005 11:13 AM |