T213 (1910 COUPON) Major Leaguers & imagine if Joe Jackson was in this set

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by g_vezina_c55

Do you know why Jackson was not included in this set or in the t206 regular set

Nelson

During the 1908 season, Connie Mack closely followed Joe Jackson's performance at Greenville (Carolina Association); and, was impressed with Joe's all-
around game. Connie Mack purchased Joe from Greenville (Carolina Association) for $1,000 on July 30, 1908. Connie Mack told Joe to report to the Phila-
delphia A's at the end of the 1908 Carolina Association season. Joe played in 23 games for the A's in Aug-Sept 1908. Joe Jax's Major League debut was
on August 25, 1908. **
Joe Jax started the 1909 season with the A's, but was sent down to Savannah in May after only 18 games with the A's. **


The American Caramel set (E90-1) was printed & issued late in 1908. Joe Jax was included in an early series of the E90-1 set (a dozen A's players were
included in this series).

So, the big question that mystifies us to this day....why wasn't Joe Jax in the T206 (1909-1911), or T205 (1911), or T201 (1911), or T202 (1912), etc. ?

Especially the T202....since he batted .408 in a 147 games with Cleveland in 1911. That kind of performance certainly warrants his picture on a BB card.

Well.....there are some who say that Joe is pictured on the centerfold of this T202. Although the backdrop is certainly Cleveland's ballpark, I'm somewhat
skeptical that this is Joe sliding in. Nevertheless, I'm saving this card for when Joe becomes a HOFer and then I will cash in






** Reference....Connie Mack and the Early Years of Baseball (by Norman Macht)


TED Z

[usernamealreadytaken]

Ted. I am confused. Of all of the known 1910 Coupons, all depict T206 images (in fact you have detailed how they follow the T206 series scheme). So I am not sure how there could ever be a "new" 1910 Coupon image that would not also have been on a T206. Isn't the more appropriate thread title "T206 . . . imagine if Joe Jackson was in this set."?

In fact, if there was a 1910 Coupon Joe Jackson (but not a Joe Jackson T206) there could be no argument that T213-1 are in fact another T206 back (as I believe they are).

[tedzan]

Hi Chris

Thanx for an excellent question. Let's see if I can "un-confuse" you with the following......

Initially for the T206 issue, American Litho. (ALC) printed 34 (150 Series) Southern Leaguers which included 16 - Southern Association (SA) subjects.
Subsequently, ALC then printed the entire 48 - Southern Leaguers (350 series), and added 4 more SA guys.....Hart (Little Rock), Hart (Montgomery),
Lentz & Rockenfeld).

So, in the printing of the T206's, with respect to the SA guys, there were 2 phases. Now consider a 3rd addition.....the printing of the 1910 COUPON
cards were circa Spring (or Summer) of 1910. Concurrently, ALC was printing the T210 (OLD MILL) cards. The printing plate for the T210 image of Joe
Jackson (New Orleans) was most likely designed and ready then.

So, with Shoeless Joe having a great season (BA = .358) in 1909 playing for Savannah and tearing-up the SA with his hitting in 1910 (at a .354 clip)....
ALC could have added a Shoeless Joe card to this COUPON set and forever rendered this set a very unique issue in the hobby.

I know, this is wishful thinking....but, there are times my imagination goes wild.


Best regards,

TED Z

[usernamealreadytaken]

Thanks Ted.

I think you and I agree with the following:

1.) T206s were produced in a remarkably complex and precise manner (as it relates to subjects/series/issues/front-back combinations), and

2.) T213-1s should be properly classified as a T206 back.


Any idea that there could have existed a 1910 Coupon subject who is not also a T206 subject upsets both of the notions above - it would not conform to the parallels between the T206 and T213-1, and therefore, would put the nail in the coffin as to the argument that 213-1s are actually T206s. As it stands now, the fact that there is not a 1910 Coupon Jackson (despite his popularity) supports the argument.


That said, I understand where you are coming from - IF Joe Jackson happened to appear on a T206 and/or T213-1, it would be an incredibly desirable card (analogous to the idea of a 1914/15 Cracker Jack Babe Ruth).

[g_vezina_c55]

Sorry for my noob question but why the coupon back is not considered as a t206 back and t206 card

[Leon]

Originally Posted by g_vezina_c55

Sorry for my noob question but why the coupon back is not considered as a t206 back and t206 card

Most collectors of pre-war cards go by the numbering in Jefferson Burdick's, Card Collectors Catalog (1946,1953,1960). He cataloged white border cards as we know them, T206, and he cataloged cards similar to those but with"Coupon" backs, "brown or blue and on thin or thick stock", as T213. The "T" being for Twentieth Century Tobacco card. Hope this helps.

[g_vezina_c55]

Thx guy

[FrankWakefield]

The T213 type 1 "Coupon" cards are very thin. Virtually paper. If you had a bunch of T206s and T213-1s in you hand, loose, and you decided to sort them into two piles by type, you'd find yourself being careful so the T206's didn't damage the T213-1's. The latter are very thin and fragile. The front's surface seems slightly different from the T206's, quality-wise it is an inferior card. Mr. Lipset and others before him considered distribution about 1910-11. Seems to me that the American Tobacco Trust wanted thin, affordable cards for Coupon cigarettes, so some were made with the plates/stones still around from T206 card production. Some folks think the type 1 Coupons should be considered as part of T206. I don't. I think fewer would if they actually held a few in their hands, felt how thin they are, and noticed the quality of the printing. Mr. Burdick thought them separate... Mr. Lipset did. Those two were pretty smart about cards.

[tedzan]

Hey guys........

This 1st Coupon issue was marketed circa Spring--Summer 1910. And, this is where Burdick got it wrong, for his dating of these cards
was circa 1911-1912. Burdick's accomplishments were tremendous (especially in cataloging Non-Sports cards), so do not misconstrue.
I'm not being critical of him. Had he the correct year of issue of these COUPON cards, I feel certain that he would have classified them
in the T206 family.

American Litho. printed these cards on thinner cardboard stock because theywere NEVER meant to serve as cigarette pack "stiffners".

The COUPON brand was a new cigarette being marketed by ATC in the deep South. These cigarettes were packaged in large-lot boxes
that were labelled "COUPON" Cigarettes.

Therefore, the "thinner card" excuse is just a red-herring.

This is an un-deniable fact....in every respect, these white-bordered, brown-captioned cards, with a stylistic back design that matches
a T206 AMERICAN BEAUTY, BROAD LEAF, CYCLE and DRUM cards. Furthermore, they were printed within the 350 Series timeframe of the
T206 set.
What more do you need to know to convince you that these cards are indeed T206's.


TED Z

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by usernamealreadytaken

Ted. I am confused. Of all of the known 1910 Coupons, all depict T206 images (in fact you have detailed how they follow the T206 series scheme). So I am not sure how there could ever be a "new" 1910 Coupon image that would not also have been on a T206. Isn't the more appropriate thread title "T206 . . . imagine if Joe Jackson was in this set."?

In fact, if there was a 1910 Coupon Joe Jackson (but not a Joe Jackson T206) there could be no argument that T213-1 are in fact another T206 back (as I believe they are).

Chris

Well stated, and yes Joe Jax would first have been printed in the T206 regular press runs with whatever backs (respective of the series he was printed in).

The 1910 "COUPON" printing was incidental to the T206 press runs (especially the PIEDMONT, SOVEREIGN, and SWEET CAPORAL press runs).


TED Z