T206 ed walsh blue old mill sgc 30!

[packs]

I think people have a bigger issue with the lack of a reasonable explanation for how such a card could have been made in a sole individual printing. As I said every printing anomaly, even the most extreme of them, seem to have at least one other example except this card.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by packs

I think people have a bigger issue with the lack of a reasonable explanation for how such a card could have been made in a sole individual printing. As I said every printing anomaly, even the most extreme of them, seem to have at least one other example except this card.

+1 Yes

Sincerely, Clayton

By saying you need more than one for proof you are saying all single example cards are discredited. The hobby has left no stone unturned looking for the Tango Eggs Cobb and finally one surfaced after Several years of heavy debate and discussion. So that card is fake also till another surfaces?

Yes I smelled the card. Sounds weird but the simple fact I use a wrap around loupe the card(s) are always extremely close to my face. You also can't deni the fact that the card has the floral lithography characteristics. The simple fact that by SGC slabbing this card would destroy their reputation if it came out to be fake is a pretty big issue as well as some of the most respected names in the hobby staking their reps on this as well. It's hard to deni the facts but as always when the herd goes right there is always those few that stray right.

[bn2cardz]

Didn't SGC (along with PSA) also encapsulate an Old Mill black overprint that turned out to be fake?

This may be why some people are still skeptical when a new Old Mill anomaly hits the market.

Old Mill black overprint apology forum

[packs]

I'm not saying there has to be two of EVERY card. It just seems logical that cards from this particular set, of which probably hundred of thousands were made, there would have to be at least two of everything. Especially considering as I've said there are at least two of even the most extreme, semmingly one off printing freaks from this set (yellow and brown ink only cards, cards with huge color splotches across the fronts, ghost images, severely miscut half of one card half of another cards, grossly over-printed backs, etc.). There's no comparing cards printed for the T206 set to Tango Eggs or any other obscure type set when looking for variables or considering population numbers.

Edited to add we also know without a doubt that these cards were printed in sheets. That's why there would have to be at least two and why there are two of every other printing anomaly.

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

Didn't SGC (along with PSA) also encapsulate an Old Mill black overprint that turned out to be fake?

This may be why some people are still skeptical when a new Old Mill anomaly hits the market.

Old Mill black overprint apology forum

+1 And thanks for posting that link.

Sincerely, Clayton

[T206Collector]

You can put me on the highly skeptical side of the ledger. Based on nothing more than the obvious -- the color of the printing.

We now live in a T206 economy where slight deviations from the norm create huge prices. The incentive to create a deviation, coupled with the relative ease of creating only the slightest deviation, is so great.

I will take as a given that the Walsh is an authentic Old Mill T206 card. I will not take as a given that the color of the ink was blue when it left the factory over 100 years ago. I would need some additional circumstantial evidence.

[bcornell]

This has been mentioned before, but some non-sport Old Mill cards have blue ink like the kind this T206 has. Take a look at the border around Walsh's portrait. That ink is also blue (not black), i.e., it's not just the back that's different.

If a typical hobby pattern holds, another one of these may appear. Many 'one-of-a-kind' items turn out not to be unique. We've seen this many times before. I'd be just as skeptical as some of the posters here if I hadn't held the card in my hand. But, I did, and I'm confident it's legitimate.


Bill

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by Pup6913

By saying you need more than one for proof you are saying all single example cards are discredited. The hobby has left no stone unturned looking for the Tango Eggs Cobb and finally one surfaced after Several years of heavy debate and discussion. So that card is fake also till another surfaces?

Yes I smelled the card. Sounds weird but the simple fact I use a wrap around loupe the card(s) are always extremely close to my face. You also can't deni the fact that the card has the floral lithography characteristics. The simple fact that by SGC slabbing this card would destroy their reputation if it came out to be fake is a pretty big issue as well as some of the most respected names in the hobby staking their reps on this as well. It's hard to deni the facts but as always when the herd goes right there is always those few that stray right.

Hi Andrew-

I'm not sure how you are taking my posts- I'm only wanting to have a rational discussion about the card, I'm not trying to convince anyone that the card is real or fake, in fact, I have not used the word fake. But, you are correct, I am not following the herd on this one.

I highly doubt SGC's rep would be destroyed because they slabbed this card (if it did turn out to be a "Frankenstein") because they are only human, and mistakes will be made. I love SGC, and I prefer the way they grade cards. But that doesn't mean they are flawless and will never get something wrong.

And the same goes for the most respected names in the hobby- why would their reputation be on the line?? I'm missing that point.

What I am saying is that I would think before SGC slabbed this as a "Blue Back" they should have at least one other to compare it to- otherwise, I'd think they would just label it "Old Mill".......

Packs already made the points I would make, I feel like a broken record. For all those who say the card is the real deal-more power to you and don't mind me. If you want to spend thousands on it, by all means, have at it.

Sincerely, Clayton

[teetwoohsix]

Hi Steve-

Kevin did respond about the card in that thread, but not about a black light or a loupe..,I didn't word that quite right I should of said " and of anyone I could think of who would know how to get around those things, I would think it would be him" or something to that effect

I did read your post and it is a good theory, but it's like much of the mysteries of T206....we can try to make sense of things, but proving it is difficult,if not impossible. I tried for months to come up with some kind of proof (a theory I had) that the fronts of the cards were printed at the ALC and sent to the factories to have the backs printed on them "at the factories" but could not find anything to solidify my theory....I almost started a thread about it, I was pretty convinced that the 150 series had both front and back printed at the ALC but maybe the 350 and 460 series were shipped to the factories to have them print the backs (one color ink, one pass-as opposed to a six step process). After running this by a few people, I realized my theory wasn't right * although I still wonder *

Thanks for your response, I always enjoy your posts, very informative about printing processes-I learn alot from your posts.

Sincerely, Clayton

[steve B]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

Hi Steve-

Kevin did respond about the card in that thread, but not about a black light or a loupe..,I didn't word that quite right I should of said " and of anyone I could think of who would know how to get around those things, I would think it would be him" or something to that effect

I did read your post and it is a good theory, but it's like much of the mysteries of T206....we can try to make sense of things, but proving it is difficult,if not impossible. I tried for months to come up with some kind of proof (a theory I had) that the fronts of the cards were printed at the ALC and sent to the factories to have the backs printed on them "at the factories" but could not find anything to solidify my theory....I almost started a thread about it, I was pretty convinced that the 150 series had both front and back printed at the ALC but maybe the 350 and 460 series were shipped to the factories to have them print the backs (one color ink, one pass-as opposed to a six step process). After running this by a few people, I realized my theory wasn't right * although I still wonder *

Thanks for your response, I always enjoy your posts, very informative about printing processes-I learn alot from your posts.

Sincerely, Clayton

Ah, that makes sense now.
It should be possible to add a UV blocker to get around the blacklight, but all the ones I know of would be very obvious.

And it's so true that a lot of the details about T206 or nearly every card set of the era will probably remain unproven. Unless someone turns up some paperwork from ALC or from ATC we can't know what was made when or in what quantity.

There's a lot of stuff I could pin down if I had access to some real science equipment. Like what the exact makeup of the black old mill ink was. Most black inks can't turn blue. Carbon particles in a hardener won't ever fade or turn, Iron gall ink fades brown, but not Brown OM brown and it wasn't used in lithography since it's not oil based. Some dyes can change. I vaguely recall making some stuff with my chemistry set that could be changed. But I've never seen it used anywhere and I'm not sure if it changed both ways or just from blue to black. (I seem to remember it changing both ways depending on what was added, but it was over 40 years ago)

And I'm constantly learning things that change things slightly. Like recently I found out that one particular printing of Stamps from New Zealand can be identified from another nearly identical one by the reaction of the paper to blacklight. One shows green, the other doesn't. And that printing was pre 1900. So some old papers do react, which I never knew.

Steve B

Steve B

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by packs

I think people have a bigger issue with the lack of a reasonable explanation for how such a card could have been made in a sole individual printing. As I said every printing anomaly, even the most extreme of them, seem to have at least one other example except this card.

That is not a good deductive argument against the legitimacy of any card. It has a formal fallacy. A good deductive argument has to have all true premises from which the conclusion is reached:

All men are mortal
I am a man
I am mortal.

The argument against the card is:

All genuine Old Mill cards are black backed
This card is blue-backed
This card is not a genuine Old Mill

Problem is, no one here has seen every Old Mill card ever made. The first leg of the argument is invalid. It is a fallacy of division variation: ascribing an attribute to every member of a class because every known member of the class has it. Doesn't rule out the exceptional cases within the unknown part of the group.

[packs]

I am willing to be wrong. I am just stating a case and making points.