What We Have Learned About Ty Cobbs With a Ty Cobb Back

[E93]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Why are some speculating that this card was issued in "1912" ? ....Damn it, how many times do we have to state and reiterate
that this card was printed and issued in 1910 ! ?

We have Shawn's newspaper advertising evidence that the Ty Cobb Cut Plug Tobacco was available in the Spring of 1910.

We have the evidence from Senator's Russell's T206 collection which includes a Ty Cobb back card that was acquired in 1910
near Atlanta, Georgia (where he grew up collecting his tobacco cards).

How many times do we have to "bang this evidence into heads", till it sinks in. We've had numerous posts on this information,
yet some here continue to be contrarians. I, for one, cannot understand this ? Why, are we even re-hashing this "old news" ?

Is, it just because some people lack the intellectual curiosity required to simply click onto the SEARCH feature on this forum;
and, find this information ?

Damn man, how many times do we have to re-invent the "wheel" on this forum ? ?


T-Rex TED

Ted,
I share your frustration, as do many others who have contacted me privately.
JimB

[Chicago206]

"Ted,
I share your frustration, as do many others who have contacted me privately.
JimB "


You are "frustrated" that not everyone agrees with your assesment? As I stated previously, if this was as "clear cut" as you make it out to be, then why is the subject continually revisited?

[Abravefan11]

I wasn't questioning when the card was produced, the evidence is very clear on that.

I was curious as to who was controlling Penn at the time the card was produced as I thought that may have some importance to the cards designation.

My intentions weren't to frustrate anyone.

[whitehse]

Originally Posted by Chicago206

"Ted,
I share your frustration, as do many others who have contacted me privately.
JimB "


You are "frustrated" that not everyone agrees with your assesment? As I stated previously, if this was as "clear cut" as you make it out to be, then why is the subject continually revisited?

For the love of our sanity...sell your stuff and leave the hobby like you said you would!!

[sgbernard]

Originally Posted by whitehse

For the love of our sanity...sell your stuff and leave the hobby like you said you would!!

Amen!

[Chicago206]

Originally Posted by whitehse

For the love of our sanity...sell your stuff and leave the hobby like you said you would!!

Changed my mind. Think i'll stick around a bit. By the way, look at every post I have made here. Have I attacked anyone, or been anything OTHER than a perfect gentleman in these discussions? Yet you are pushing me out the door because my opinion differs from yours?


Edited to add: In fact, i've just made another major purchase! :-)

[Potomac Yank]

Some can't handle different opinions .....

Whilst others know what button to touch .....

You gotta luv those flippers .....

[e107collector]

Maybe it's me, but it seems like every Ty Cobb with a Cobb back, the card seems to be out of focus. Every card I looked at, Cobb's eyes seem to be fuzzy, or maybe the registration is bad on each card?

Anyone else notice this?

Tony

[nam812]

Best thread ever.

[Potomac Yank]

Originally Posted by e107collector

Maybe it's me, but it seems like every Ty Cobb with a Cobb back, the card seems to be out of focus. Every card I looked at, Cobb's eyes seem to be fuzzy, or maybe the registration is bad on each card?

Anyone else notice this?

Tony

*

That's found on most non T206 cards.

[E93]

Originally Posted by e107collector

Maybe it's me, but it seems like every Ty Cobb with a Cobb back, the card seems to be out of focus. Every card I looked at, Cobb's eyes seem to be fuzzy, or maybe the registration is bad on each card?

Anyone else notice this?

Tony

This one is pretty sharp. I traded this to a board member a few years ago. By the way, there is no gloss on this one either.
JimB



Edited to add: This is the nicest example in the hobby.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by e107collector

Maybe it's me, but it seems like every Ty Cobb with a Cobb back, the card seems to be out of focus. Every card I looked at, Cobb's eyes seem to be fuzzy, or maybe the registration is bad on each card?

Anyone else notice this?

Tony

While reading this old thread I came across this observation. Is this generally true of Cobb back cards? I've looked at Ryan's card and it seems fuzzy, but that could be the scan? I know that the recently found "matchbox" Cobb back has this same poor registration. The red background seems to be shifted down slightly, causing the eyes to appear unfocused. Does anyone know if this is true of the cards in the Lucky 7 find? And does it seem to be true of all Cobb backs?

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by Chicago206

Changed my mind. Think i'll stick around a bit.

If you want to participate in this forum like a normal person and not like an antagonist, you ought to keep your posts to a minimal and your opinions to yourself for awhile. Like I previously mentioned, because of your behavior, you have zero credibility -- no one cares about your opinion and even those of us that might agree would never stick up for you right now. You are radioactive.

Take a couple weeks off, share some pick-ups in the Pick Up thread, but leave your opinions at the door -- no one is interested.

[Potomac Yank]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

If you want to participate in this forum like a normal person and not like an antagonist, you ought to keep your posts to a minimal and your opinions to yourself for awhile. Like I previously mentioned, because of your behavior, you have zero credibility -- no one cares about your opinion and even those of us that might agree would never stick up for you right now. You are radioactive.

Take a couple weeks off, share some pick-ups in the Pick Up thread, but leave your opinions at the door -- no one is interested.

*

Then why are you answering?

[Kawika]

Joe: A sadist is someone who wouldn't hurt a masochist.

[jmk59]

Originally Posted by Chicago206

Edited to add: In fact, i've just made another major purchase! :-)

Thanks for the heads up. I'll be watching the BST for it.


I'm enjoying the substantive parts of this thread. Good points, explanation and observations all around, for the most part. Leon makes a good point in that if there isn't consensus, then it makes sense to go by what Burdick originally decided - sort of like having to knock him off the hill. I like the thought of that.

And for my money, Ted is practically a national treasure when it comes to T206 discussions. So I'm not spending a whole lot of time trying to decide if I should consider his opinion or that of someone that is admittedly new to the hobby.

As to Chicago thinking that people are getting on him merely because they disagree with his assessment, well I guess I disagree with his assessment. It's like hearing a big crash, looking up and seeing a Chevy wrapped around the light post. Steam coming out from under the hood. Hysterical driver. Probably you can figure that the Chevy just hit the light post. So if someone wants to come by and say that the Chevy was already smashed up and just parked in front of the lamppost, using vague logic like one tire is less flat then the others and the lamppost is tilted toward the street, I think the howls of frustration and derision are less about disagreeing with a reasonable assessment and more about not wanting to hear random and undeveloped thinking. Even more so on this, one of the hobby's more sophisticated issues. If that makes sense.

And Jon - thank you for the observation on the tobacco stains. I might not know anything about this or that factory or exact dates of issue, but that's something I can appreciate right away in terms of the implications.

J

[Chicago206]

Ok

[Abravefan11]

Here is a larger image of the ad originally posted by Shawn.

[Jim VB]

Originally Posted by jmk59

Thanks for the heads up. I'll be watching the BST for it.

A reminder of why Joann needs to post more frequently.

[Potomac Yank]

Originally Posted by whitehse

For the love of our sanity...sell your stuff and leave the hobby like you said you would!!

*

whitehse why don't you try reverse Psy.
Something like:

Hi Chi-town, don't ever change your eva-changin modes.
You keep remindin us of Sybil, or was it The Three Faces of Eve?

[canjond]

Originally Posted by E93

Ted,
I share your frustration, as do many others who have contacted me privately.
JimB

Jim - well this is my fault for starting this thread. With that being said, my original intent still holds true. I still believe this is the first instance where direct evidence present on a Cobb back clearly indicates it was in contact with tobacco. This, in my book, is a fairly significant step in continuing to prove how and why the cards were produced and issued.

[E93]

Originally Posted by canjond

Jim - well this is my fault for starting this thread. With that being said, my original intent still holds true. I still believe this is the first instance where direct evidence present on a Cobb back clearly indicates it was in contact with tobacco. This, in my book, is a fairly significant step in continuing to prove how and why the cards were produced and issued.

Jon,
My frustration is 100% with Chicago206 who seems to have gotten out of line when logic and reason were distributed. I think the information you brought to our attention about tobacco staining is very interesting. Looking at the example in Goodwin, it looks to have mild staining as well.
JimB