The "Exclusive 12" of the T205 set

[tedzan]

Hey guys....here is that recurring 12 factor again....that is found throughout the various white-bordered & gold-bordered sets' structure (1909-1914). These 12 subjects in the
T205 set differ from the "Exclusive 12" in the T206 set. There are several reasons why I refer to these 12 as such. For starters, they are the only Minor Leaguers in the T205
set. All 12 subjects represent teams in the Eastern League. They are found only with 2 advertising backs....HASSAN Factory #649 or POLAR BEAR. And their artistic designs are
unlike the other T205 designs. I would speculate that the artist that that drew these 12 subjects is the same artist that created the T80 (Military Series) cards. However, these
12 Minor Leaguers were printed at the tail-end of the T205 press run....as, the bios on the backs of these cards detail events as late as the Summer of 1911.

I do not claim to be an expert on T205's. However, we do have T205 experts on this forum, who have different theories than mine as to when these 12 guys were introduced
into the T205 set. So, I would really appreciate if they would chime in here with their thoughts on this subject.









T80 examples





TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Ronnie73]

Ted, I always enjoy your thoughts and questions. They always make us think. My thought is that the minor league cards are not a part of the T205 set but a part of the total of T205's. I know this sounds crazy but putting it out there for positive and negative criticism. I think the T205 set that we know of could be T205-1 since they mention the 1910 season and the minor league cards T205-2 and the remainder of the 400 designs maybe a combination of the T205-2 or maybe a T205-3 subset. I find it odd that the minor league cards mention the 1911 season as if it already passed. Kinda like the cards were issued late in the year of 1911 or early 1912. Maybe there were plans for the rest of the 400 designs when something happened and the rest of the 400 (T205-3) were called off. This is just a thought of mine. I just have a hard time believing that the 400 designs is the total of T205's, T80's and the gold border birds series. What does everyone else think? Be easy on me

[Ease]

I do believe the same artist did the fronts for the T43 birds, T80s, and minor league T205s, but the backs on the military series are all "more T206-like" than similar to T205s. Cairo, Uzit, Old Mill, Tolstoi, all brands we don't see in T205. The minor league T205ers have the same style backs as the T205s we know and love. I think the minor leaguers were printed at the same time as the other major league guys, whenever that was. Ron, I dunno man

[Wite3]

Ted and Ron,
I have mentioned this before but a little research into the backs of the minor leaguers pretty much proves that they were issued later in the set. Most probably in early 1912...Hick Cady was sold to the Red Sox in January of 1912 and it makes mention of this on his t205 card. Not to mention that many of the cards reference happenings towards the end of the 1911 season (Dunn talks about early August 1911 and Frick being sent to Troy which happened late in the season....he only played about 40 games with Troy).

I have a feeling the fronts were created first but the back type was created later. Thus the mention of some of the team changes, stats, etc. from later in 1911/early 1912.

There are also some other oddities about the teams mentioned on some of the backs of the MLers but they escape me at the moment.

Joshua

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by Ronnie73

This is just a thought of mine. I just have a hard time believing that the 400 designs is the total of T205's, T80's and the gold border birds series. What does everyone else think? Be easy on me

Ron I concur. About 2 yrs ago I wrote about the t80 and bird series equaling 400 if we use the front only variations. I have some thoughts on the 12 minor leaguers but its met with resistance. I can say the numbers are uncanny but its just my opinion.

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by Ease

I do believe the same artist did the fronts for the T43 birds, T80s, and minor league T205s, but the backs on the military series are all "more T206-like" than similar to T205s. Cairo, Uzit, Old Mill, Tolstoi, all brands we don't see in T205. The minor league T205ers have the same style backs as the T205s we know and love. I think the minor leaguers were printed at the same time as the other major league guys, whenever that was. Ron, I dunno man

We have to remember the ATC break up may have caused this difference.

[peterb69]

Jimmy Collins card mentions he retired early 1911 so I also would assume the backs we created late 1911 or very early 1912.

[peterb69]

Also, Ted, that is a very nice Jimmy Collins card. He is my favorite card in the set. Is that auto real? If so then Jimmy had nice pensmenship.

[tedzan]

The guy I acquired this Jimmy Collins card from said he did not think it was an authentic autograph.

Perhaps, someone on this forum has an original Collins autograph that we can compare with ?


Thanks,

TED Z

[Ease]

Ted, here's a piece on Collins autograph style.

[tedzan]

Thanks

The autograph on my card does not appear to be that far off from Jimmy's real autograph.

I guess, the next time I see Jimmy Spence, I will have him check it out.


Best reagards,

TED Z

[EvilKing00]

love hearing more info of the T205 set! Great posts

[tedzan]

Hey T205 guys

I do not think it is just a coincidence that this Minor League sub-set comprises of 12 subjects......a recurring factor (12) found in the T206 series structure.
It is logical to conclude that American Litho used the same printing presses and printed the T205's on the standard 19" x 24" size cardboard sheets of that
they printed the T206's (and, also T213's. T214's, T215's etc.).

Therefore, here is my hypothetical simulated sheet of 108 cards that would fill-out an 19" x 24" size sheet.

I would be very interested in your ideas pertaining to the printing of the T205 cards ?

T205 Minor Leaguers (12 subjects)














Thanks,

TED Z
.

[Ease]

I think its a good possibility Ted. I'd love to see some miscuts of the Minor leaguers, it would help us to piece together the sheet. This old thread was a good start. I'd love to see that miscut Bergen again too...hint hint Adam.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Ease

I think its a good possibility Ted. I'd love to see some miscuts of the Minor leaguers, it would help us to piece together the sheet. This old thread was a good start. I'd love to see that miscut Bergen again too...hint hint Adam.

Eric

Thanks for bringing up my 6+ year old thread....you certainly did some searching. Anyhow, here are a some of my mis-cut T205's that tell us
something about the printing of these specific cards.

Most interesting is the Eddie Collins card, since it obviously indicates that this Collins was at least DOUBLE-PRINTED horizontally on its sheet.

Whereas, the John Titus/Tony Smith mis-cut was printed as expected (as we know that these 2 subjects were in the same series (or sheet).












TED Z

[Cerberus]

As touched upon above, it has always been my feeling that the "Minor Leaguers" subset (if you will) was, in essence, a precursor of the "Topps Traded" set-- prepared late in the distribution process to account for some rookies who made it to the majors, as well as some of the players who were traded, subsequent to the initial issuance of the bulk of the set. Talk amongst yourselves.

[Leon]

Love that Titus card Ted.....thanks for sharing...

[T205 GB]

Have we found any top bottom miscuts of the same card? I know that there are some showing same colors but it could be 5+ different cards. We have seen several side by sides. I was able to confirm Joss side by side on Pied 25 last yr at nationals.

[Ease]

Here's a Hoffman top bottom. I don't own it.

[T205 GB]

That's awesome Eric. So far only the SP's are found side by side and looks like the commons may have been printed top to bottom. Any thoughts on that??

[peterb69]

Is there any kind of color pattern on the sheets? For instance yellow/reds on one side and blue/greens on the other. In the Titus/Smith example, both cards are reddish/yellow.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by peterb69

Is there any kind of color pattern on the sheets? For instance yellow/reds on one side and blue/greens on the other. In the Titus/Smith example, both cards are reddish/yellow.

Peter

I would say there was a color pattern. And, I tried to illustrate this in my 12-card scan............






TED Z

[obcmac]

It seems that every side to side miscut of the short prints has the same card next to it...so I wouldn't say that the Collins in a double print...but that this series or class was printed in rows. I'd love to see more examples or something to disprove this idea...or hear other thoughts on it.

Mac

Originally Posted by tedzan

Eric

Thanks for bringing up my 6+ year old thread....you certainly did some searching. Anyhow, here are a some of my mis-cut T205's that tell us
something about the printing of these specific cards.

Most interesting is the Eddie Collins card, since it obviously indicates that this Collins was at least DOUBLE-PRINTED horizontally on its sheet.

Whereas, the John Titus/Tony Smith mis-cut was printed as expected (as we know that these 2 subjects were in the same series (or sheet).


TED Z

[Ease]

Originally Posted by T205 GB

That's awesome Eric. So far only the SP's are found side by side and looks like the commons may have been printed top to bottom. Any thoughts on that??

It sure appears that way, it would be great to see more examples though. I wish we could tell which card is under that Collins mouth open that Ted has. Collins mouth open is a 6 back sp, found with less backs than a normal common (8-12), but more than others like Chase one ear (3). That's got to play into it somehow too, though idk how...every card, other than the ones with corrected text variations on the backs (Hobby, Gray, Wilhelm, etc) or fronts (Shean, etc) & MLers can be found with Piedmont 25. Maybe they ran off a bunch of Pied25 sheets to start, someone saw the errors & had them corrected for the next run which was Pied25, Hassan30, Cycle. More changes, then a run of 6 backs, Pied25, Pied42, Hassan30, Honest, AB, Polar Bear. Then a final run with all the backs. Does something like that sound viable at all?

[T205 GB]

Eric anything is possible. I have always been outside the box in saying that the fronts were printed first and then the backs. Also I do think that there were more than one back being printed at once.

It has kinda been proven that these so called SP's with more than 3 backs are nothing more than tougher cards that have been snatched up. When I discussed this before, specifically the K White, there was only a few available but still not unobtainable. Now there seems to be a flood of them available in multiple conditions. Maybe someone could find the SP list thread I made?

I will see if I can find my documents I wrote. I know they are blasphemy to some collectors but who cares. They have some info regarding availability IMO.

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by obcmac

It seems that every side to side miscut of the short prints has the same card next to it...so I wouldn't say that the Collins in a double print
Mac

Ummmmmmmmm

Collins, Wiltse, white, and so on are not SP's. Way to common compared to a true SP like Grant or Dahlen. JMO

[Wite3]

I don't have my notes in front if me but I do feel that collins open wiltse one ear white sweeney and a few others are single prints. The back matrix sort of bears this out. I also believe that there is a second level of tougher single prints that include suggs grant turner wagner raymond and a few others and the back matrix bears this out as well....so really there are several layers of single prints (tougher cards). I think I made a list of these two subsets in a previous thread.

Joshua

[marcdelpercio]

This top/bottom miscut shows Brown and Shean, which with a Hassan back, would be the SP Cubs version. Not sure what info, if any, this could provide to the discussion but it would show that, on this sheet at least, the SP's were not duplicated top/bottom.

[T205 GB]

Awesome miscut Marc.

[EvilKing00]

Originally Posted by Ease

Here's a Hoffman top bottom. I don't own it.

awesome card!

[EvilKing00]

Was wondering why only the Hanford has the RED backgroumd by his name, any ideas?

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by EvilKing00

Was wondering why only the Hanford has the RED backgroumd by his name, any ideas?

Good question. Could be just where he was printed on the sheet

[marcdelpercio]

I have always found the Hanford card to be very odd because of the red background on the name and also the border design, both of which are unique to this card. All of the other minor leaguers have at least three subjects that share an identical border design and obviously the standard yellow background color on the name. It's quite curious to me that they would have drastically changed these things for a single card in the set.

[EvilKing00]

Just find it very interesting why thats the only card in the set with a red name background. There must be some reason. something made them pick that 1 card and mack such a different change.

Also the top border is different too.

[T205 GB]

That's what makes this set the best

[tedzan]

Hey guys

Some nice mis-cut cards.

Thanks for posting them; and, show us some more of these T205's.

TED Z

[Ease]

Here's one that might help, Byrne over Sheckard. Again, I'm not the owner of this card.

[T205 GB]

So far zero SP's have the top bottom miscuts making the assumption that SP's were DP side by side correct. I am going to step out on a limb and say its possible some commons could have been printed in blocks of 4. Cards like Wolter and Shean come right to mind.

[Ease]

If the t205 minor leaugers were in fact distributed around the same time as the t80s, this catalog page shows that it was right at the end of the t206 print runs in early 1911. Here's the whole thread.

[Ease]

Another top bottom miscut that I do not own. Camnitz.

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by Ease

Another top bottom miscut that I do not own.

Can't see it??

[familytoad]

I think that there were supposed to be many more T205 Gold Borders.
Obviously the backs indicate that there should be potentially 400.
It is likely that many of the unissued cards were to be minor leaguers.
Some here noted the red nameplate for Hanford.
The border is unique for Hanford because he is on a different team than the other mL players. There would be more Jersey City players with that design if they issued them, which appears unlikely by now.
The company likely created that border for JC team, anticipating issuing several other players.
It just seems like an unfinished project to me, nothing more.

This set is the best of all of them in my opinion, I wish they had finished it.

[EvilKing00]

interesting, its red cause hes on NJ, and like you said they probably were going to do more from that team but didnt finish.

When you say "Obviously the backs indicate that there should be potentially 400"

Why do you think this?

[tedzan]

In a previous thread on T205's, Andrew (T205 GB) posted his theory regarding the "400 DESIGNS" printed on the backs of the T205's......

"I have had a theory that the T80 and T42 series were part of the "T205's" or Gold Boarder's thus adding to the 400 designs. That would add 150 more designs to the 220+
cards in the t205 set. That would take the total to 370 without considering any variations possible for these sets that are unknown. Back designs are similar also, especially
the Sweet Caporal backs. Knowing that Mecca produced the T202 cards using the T205 designs as end panels in 1912 makes it possibly plausible since the T80 and 42's are
found with Mecca backs also and were produced just after. Kinda like the 1880's A&G Series cards."


This sounds like quite a plausible explanation for the "400 DESIGNS" to me.


TED Z

[Ease]

Originally Posted by tedzan

In a previous thread on T205's, Andrew (T205 GB) posted his theory regarding the "400 DESIGNS" printed on the backs of the T205's......

"I have had a theory that the T80 and T42 series were part of the "T205's" or Gold Boarder's thus adding to the 400 designs. That would add 150 more designs to the 220+
cards in the t205 set. That would take the total to 370 without considering any variations possible for these sets that are unknown. Back designs are similar also, especially
the Sweet Caporal backs. Knowing that Mecca produced the T202 cards using the T205 designs as end panels in 1912 makes it possibly plausible since the T80 and 42's are
found with Mecca backs also and were produced just after. Kinda like the 1880's A&G Series cards."


This sounds like quite a plausible explanation for the "400 DESIGNS" to me.


TED Z

Sounds plausible to me also, other than the t80s with mecca backs part, I think they come in tolstoi, uzit, cairo monopol, old mill & lenox only.

[EvilKing00]

Interesting, could be possable. The T80 are almost exact - and check this one out - http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-T80-Tob...item416a62139d

Have the red back of the name like in the, Hanford card

[Tcards-Please]

Originally Posted by tedzan

In a previous thread on T205's, Andrew (T205 GB) posted his theory regarding the "400 DESIGNS" printed on the backs of the T205's......

"I have had a theory that the T80 and T42 series were part of the "T205's" or Gold Boarder's thus adding to the 400 designs. That would add 150 more designs to the 220+
cards in the t205 set. That would take the total to 370 without considering any variations possible for these sets that are unknown. Back designs are similar also, especially
the Sweet Caporal backs. Knowing that Mecca produced the T202 cards using the T205 designs as end panels in 1912 makes it possibly plausible since the T80 and 42's are
found with Mecca backs also and were produced just after. Kinda like the 1880's A&G Series cards."


This sounds like quite a plausible explanation for the "400 DESIGNS" to me.


TED Z

Ted,

Definitely sounds plausible, but have reservations about that, as the T80s weren't distributed with the same tobacco companies that had the T205s. I would think that if they were going to be part, they would have been available with the same advertisement as their counterpart. Especially if they were to be included with the 400 design count.

I'm a believer that there was supposed to be additional cards added during a later run. Nothing to prove that, just my opinion.

r/
Frank

[Wite3]

I still think that it is an unfinished series. I am no expert here and maybe someone who has a little better grasp of the tobacco history might be able to fill in some gaps.

We know t205s were most likely distributed at the end of 1911...one really large thing happened during this time. The ATC breakup happened in November of 1911.

This could have affected several things with relation to printing of the t205s.

Here are some ideas of mine...if anybody can confirm or deny, please help...

1st. When the ATC broke up the ATC consolidated its holdings in NC, VA, and KY. These are where the Hassan cards were printed and if I recall, Hassan was a brand that remained with the ATC.

2nd. Polar Bear was to become part of the Lorillard Tobacco company after the split.

I was wondering if the Polar Bear and Hassan ML cards were printed prior to the breakup (fronts) and issued and packed before the breakup was finalized. These being the last of the t205s issued. If the breakup never happened...would the 400 designs promise be upheld?

Just wondering what impact the breakup had on this issue that was clearly produced right in the middle of the ATC anti-trust suit.

Joshua

[marcdelpercio]

Originally Posted by T's please

Ted,

Definitely sounds plausible, but have reservations about that, as the T80s weren't distributed with the same tobacco companies that had the T205s. I would think that if they were going to be part, they would have been available with the same advertisement as their counterpart. Especially if they were to be included with the 400 design count.

I'm a believer that there was supposed to be additional cards added during a later run. Nothing to prove that, just my opinion.

r/
Frank

I would tend to agree more with this. It seems strange that they would have made something they considered to be a single set, but with completely different ad backs for the non-baseball cards. For example, the T58 (fish) cards, which were issued concurrently with the T206 set AND featured some of the same ad backs, were clearly not intended to be the same set, so I don't understand the logic of combining baseball and bird/military cards as a single series the following year. Also, the text "Base Ball Series 400 Subjects" as listed on certain ad-backs of T205s certainly makes it sound like there were 400 intended baseball subjects which just never happened for some reason.

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by marcdelpercio

I would tend to agree more with this. It seems strange that they would have made something they considered to be a single set, but with completely different ad backs for the non-baseball cards. For example, the T58 (fish) cards, which were issued concurrently with the T206 set AND featured some of the same ad backs, were clearly not intended to be the same set, so I don't understand the logic of combining baseball and bird/military cards as a single series the following year. Also, the text "Base Ball Series 400 Subjects" as listed on certain ad-backs of T205s certainly makes it sound like there were 400 intended baseball subjects which just never happened for some reason.

Umm???? If you look at some set made they had baseball as well as others. Allen and Ginter and Mayo's are a prime example. The fact that baseball series is mention leads me to believe that it is only part of a series and not an inclusive baseball set. Some cards say "400 subjects" and others say "Baseball series 400 subjects" I guess its all up for interpretation.

Now we get the back issues. Who really cared what some foreign general or a bird's bio was. Much easier to use what was already made for backs and they were in very short print runs anyways. SC does show up the same on these backs though. Thats what lead me to this theory.

I was incorrect on some of what I wrote and during a conversation with Ted Z this was brought to light. I did not however go back and change it . Sorry about that guys.