T206's....show us your BROAD LEAF's

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot Reader

Okay Jamie, Here goes.

I believe your theory is correct and explains not only the relative scarcity of Kleinow (Boston) and Smith (Chicago and Boston) but also the relative scarcity of Kleinow (N.Y. Catching) and Smith (Chicago White Cap).

First we assume for purposes of this theory that Kleinow (N.Y. Catching) and Smith (Chicago White Cap) were not introduced with the 350-only subjects but rather were introduced with the 350/460 regular print subjects. As with other 350/460 regular print subjects, these two subjects were thus shortprinted with 350 backs (relative to a typical 350-only subject) and were supposed to be continued by a shortprinting with 460 backs (relative to a typical 460-only subject). However, the team switches occurred before their planned printing with the 460 backs, and thus these two subjects never made it to print with 460 backs. This accounts for the scarcity of Kleinow (N.Y. Catching) and Smith (Chicago White Cap) relative to a typical 350-only subject. I think most would agree that these two subjects are more difficult than a typical 350-only subject. My survey data bear this out, as does the PSA population report. Now, thanks to you, I think we know why.

Continuing on, the caption changes were made and the shortprinting with the 460 backs proceeded with Kleinow (Boston) and Smith (Chicago and Boston) INSTEAD OF their predecessors Kleinow (N.Y. Catching) and Smith (Chicago White Cap). This explains the well-documented scarcity of Kleinow (Boston) and Smith (Chicago and Boston) relative to a typical 460-only subject.

WHAT DOES THIS THEORY TELL US? First, Kleinow (N.Y. Catching) and Smith (Chicago White Cap) should be just about as difficult to find as a typical 350/460 regular print subject is WITH BACKS CHARACTERISTIC OF THE 350 SERIES. I have data at my office, but I believe this means there should be roughly 2/3 as many of these cards floating around as cards of a typical 350/460 regular print subject. A price premium thus seems warranted.

Second, Kleinow (Boston) and Smith (Chicago and Boston) should be just about as difficult to find as a typical 350/460 regular print subject is WITH BACKS CHARACTERISTIC OF THE 460 SERIES. I believe this means there should be roughly 1/3 as many of these cards extant as a typical 350/460 regular print subject. A substantial price premium is thus warranted.

HOW DO WE PROVE THIS THEORY? There are several ways. First, we can look, as Jamie has suggested, at the ABSENCE of Kleinow (Boston) and Smith (Chicago and Boston) with Sovereign 460 and Sweet Caporal 460 Factory 30. These are fairly common backs that appear ONLY on 460-only subjects. Importantly, Bill Brown and Ted Z. have been able to find the Sovereign 460 back on ALL of the 54 460-only subjects EXCEPT Kleinow (Boston) and Smith (Chicago and Boston). My survey data also show no examples of either of these subjects with either of these plentiful backs. This is highly supportive of the theory.

Second, we can look at Brian W.'s Broadleaf 460 data. All of the confirmed Broadleaf 460s are found on 350/460 regular print subjects, EXCEPT Kleinow (Boston) and Schaefer (Washington). Let's set Schaefer aside for the moment. The existence of Kleinow (Boston) with Broadleaf 460 is supportive of the theory set forth here.

Additional considerations that would advance this theory would be the ABSENCE of Kleinow (N.Y. Catching) and Smith (Chicago White Cap) with backs that are only available on 350-only subjects (and the six 350/460 superprints). These backs include American Beauty 350 with Frame, Broadleaf 350, Carolina Brights and Cycle 350. Consistent with the theory, Ted Z.'s post on this very thread indicated that these two subjects have not been confirmed with Broadleaf 350. Does anyone have either of these subjects with American Beauty 350 with Frame, Carolina Brights or Cycle 350? If this theory is correct, I would suspect not.

A final consideration that would in my mind remove nearly all doubt about the correctness of this theory would be confirmation of either Kleinow (N.Y. Catching) or Smith (Chicago White Cap) with the American Beauty 350 No Frame back. With the lone exception of Nichols, this back has been seen only on 350/460 regular print subjects. If either Kleinow (N.Y. Catching) or Smith (Chicago White Cap) could be confirmed with this back, the present theory would be meanigfully advanced.

Comments welcome.

Scot