|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
As Ed said this may be compelling but doesn't really prove anything. When dating sets it is very problematic to put any weight on a players last year with a particular team. The makers could be using outdated photos or information to compile the players for a set so nothing can be proven in that way. The BEST indicator for the dating of a set is finding a player that first played for a particular team in a particular year. For example the E121 Series of 80 set has multiple subjects that first played for the team listed in 1921 thus the set cannot date from before 1921 but could have been issued later than that. The rest of the subjects then cement the picture that it is in fact a 1921 set. The same analysis must be done with this set and then proven to be a 1908 set versus the date that has been used for years.
__________________
Check out my YouTube Videos highlighting VINTAGE CARDS https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbE..._as=subscriber ebay store: kryvintage-->https://www.ebay.com/sch/kryvintage/...p2047675.l2562 |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
Main point was that e102 was printed in 1909 not 1908. So the e90-1 Cobb is older
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The evidence against Barry Halper is mounting | slidekellyslide | Net54baseball Sports (Primarily) Vintage Memorabilia Forum incl. Game Used | 63 | 01-18-2011 07:41 AM |
Evidence of trimming | kylebicking | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 02-04-2010 04:03 PM |
Leon, I will post evidence this evening | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 05-01-2008 10:47 PM |
The Evidence as Promised | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 05-01-2008 07:02 PM |
evidence of trimming vs. cut short | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 04-08-2005 04:18 PM |