Identifying E101 and E102 purely by the front (E8, E78 tie in)

[x2drich2000]

The Young is mine. E101/102 don't have any real front differences that I am aware of. In addition to the differences Brian stated, some individual players with the same images have other minor differences in other sets. Crawford has a spacing issue, Mathewson has a text size difference, etc. Personally, I think they should all be classified as E92, but the proof is just circumstantial. E92, particularly Cocoa, are littered with all sorts of issues (miscut fronts/backs, overprint, upside down backs, etc). These types of errors aren't nearly as common with the E101/102 sets.

There is also an example of an e92 with a miscut back that shows evidence it was printed on the same sheet as a different set. From memory I think it was a Nadja Stone with American Caramel text, but I don't have access to my notes right now.

I also believe both these may have come from the same sheet as the offset on the back is nearly identical. Likewise, I think all the menageries may have come from the same sheet for the same reason. The menageries are interesting because there are at least 2 examples from non-sport sets that also exhibit the same offset. I cant prove they are from the same sheet and that multiple sheets werent just printed wrong. If they are from the same sheet though then that also points to multiple sets being printed on the same sheet.

[G1911]

Thank you guys. Very cool run of Young's

The only thing I would bet on is that the Magee and the Young are from the same set and are thus not E102 or E90.

I would think it most likely these were run through a different sheet's back by accident, rather than E78 being on the same sheet and appearing on these because it was run upside down. E78 is markedly scarcer than than most of the options here, to the extent that it wouldn't make sense to be on the same sheet. At the same time, the same is true for E79 and E80 that clearly did, for at least some of production, share sheet space with E95 and E96.

I believe American Caramel is the only one of these caramel companies possibly involved for which a printer is known.

[RCMcKenzie]

I think I own that Magee. DJ may have a better memory than me. I can look later.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

I think I own that Magee. DJ may have a better memory than me. I can look later.

If you come across it and under close examination find a message written in invisible ink on the back detailing the production of the card, please let me know

[RCMcKenzie]

The boxing backs have the stair-step style of e102, but Young is not in e102.

What if Dockman, or it's printer, made e101, e102, and e92 Dockman, and also the e78. Back is a mistake. My Magee and DJ's Young are from the same mistake sheet.

[gabrinus]

Had a card with a Menagerie back that was designated as E92...memory fails me who it was but if I remember it I will post...Jerry

[gabrinus]

It was a Red Kleinow I bought from FKW...Jerry

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by gabrinus

Had a card with a Menagerie back that was designated as E92...memory fails me who it was but if I remember it I will post...Jerry

Here is the Wagner batting -- OOPS, I see it was already posted. Sorry for the double post

I love this issue -- E90-1 (sometimes) through E106 and T216. DJ knows more about these than anyone. I wish we had the general knowledge on these cards that exist for T206