Hey folks....reprising my case for the "12 factor" in the T206 structure

[tedzan]

Here again are the Exclusive 12 with SWEET CAPORAL 460, Factory #42 back advertisements.

These 12 are the only subjects in the 460-only series printed with this SWEET CAP back......proving that American Litho
formatted configurations with 12 cards across the sheet.

Stay tuned......there are more such examples that will be presented which reinforce the 12 factor premise.







TED Z
.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by tedzan

American Lithographic introduced the 350/460 series in the printing of the SOVEREIGN "apple green" cards during 1910. This series comprise of 66 subjects.

Depicted here is my simulated 72-card sheet (6 rows of 12 cards) of this series. I don't think same-name cards of any of these 60 subjects with SOVEREIGN backs (not including 6 super-prints) have been reported;

I don't recall having seen any S350AG miscuts at all... definitely don't have any scans; Doug (Phillies*phan) has a vast collection of double-namers. I've asked him if he has (or has seen) any.

Originally Posted by tedzan

Here again are the Exclusive 12 with SWEET CAPORAL 460, Factory #42 back advertisements.

These 12 are the only subjects in the 460-only series printed with this SWEET CAP back......proving that American Litho
formatted configurations with 12 cards across the sheet.

There is actual proof that some of those cards appeared together; scraps presumably from the same sheet(s) Piedmont 350-460 factory 25. Some of them can be proven to be adjacent. All of the scrap pictured (eight subjects) are from the Exclusive 12. This image is from Chris Browne posted in a separate thread.


So, the fact that there is proof from scrap that many of those appeared together, and the exclusivity mentioned above would give credence to the probability of those 12 appearing on the same sheet.

I would not say, however, that this is proof of a 12 card row. A theory? Sure. Proof? Nope. Reality? Maybe. There could have been single prints... or double prints... or an eight card row (ABCDEFGH, EFGHIJKL, IJKLABCD)... or an eighteen card row (ABCDEFGHIJKLABCD, EFGHIJKLABCDEFGH, IJKLABCDEFGHIJKL). Maybe some or all of the super prints appeared on the sheet with those 12.

I'm not saying that SC460-42 was not printed in 12 card rows, I'm just saying that the acceptance of 12 cards appearing together doesn't prove it.

[tedzan]

It's not only the T206 issue, but also the "12 Factor" is evident in the T205 printing format. There are twelve Minor League subjects in the T205 issue. These 12 guys where printed at the tail-end
of the T205 press runs (circa late 1911). How do we know this......because the bio info on the backs of 8 of these cards reveal this timeline.







Furthermore, some of our resident Net54 T205 experts have told me that the T205 structure lends itself to formatted sheets printed in columns of 12.



TED Z
.

[tedzan]

Further proof of the "12 Factor" in the printing of these T206 cards is evident in these 12 subjects in the 460-only series, which I refer to as the "Exclusive 12".
Only these 12 guys in this series of 48 subjects were printed with the rare red HINDU back. For more detailed information regarding these T206 cards, check out
this link......EXCLUSIVE 12











TED Z
.

[t206hound]

Please refer to Post #5 as to why a list of 12 cards (in fact, the same list) is not "proof" that there were twelve card rows. Could there have been? Certainly. Is this proof? Nope.

[Howe’s Hunter]

– common thought believed to be true in 1492.

And then something new came along and changed all those old thoughts....

[tedzan]

Double post

[tedzan]

Your "broken record" replies are becoming boring (if not tedious). These comments of yours indicate that you do not understand the significance of
the Exclusive 12 series of either the T206 issue or the T205 issue.

Furthermore, it appears that you don't understand the significance of the 12 subjects in the 150-only series, or Elite 12 group of rare PIEDMONT 350
cards, or other T206 sub-sets.
.

But, then I may be misjudging you ......for perhaps you do understand these factors. However, your mindset is so stuck in this "17 or 34 myth" that
you are incapable of accepting facts regarding the T206 set's structures which have been established for years. You're bent on trying to "re-invent"
the T206 structure.

Look, I didn't "invent" this 12 Factor. It was inherent in the T206's structure. The numbers are there; and, they do not lie. Any logically thinking mind
realizes the mathematics of the various series in the T206 structure....and, that translates to printing formats which strongly suggest columns of 12
cards on a sheet.


Your latest thread.."Proof? T206 were printed in rows of more than twelve"..is so misleading that it is laughable. You have PROVED nothing with your
"SMOKE and MIRRORS" diagrams.

Much less claiming you have proof that the printed sheets were not formatted in rows of 12 cards.


Please do us both a favor.....do not respond anymore to my threads on the subject of printed sheet sizes and configurations....and, I'll refrain from
responding to your's.


T-Rex TED

[abothebear]

Hey Ted,

I enjoy your posts. And I know almost nothing about T206s, especially compared to you. But I don't understand your tone in your replies. You keep using "proof" for your 12 theory, and if you merely mean that there is proof that the subjects are in multiples of 12, then there is no problem... and no drama, because no one would deny that. But several of your claims sound like you should be using "evidence" instead of "proof." As in - evidence that seems to support your theory.

I think that other guy (sorry other guy for forgetting your name while typing this) is merely pointing out that your claims using "proof" (if I am reading your claim correctly) are bigger than the logic supports. I don't see what the big deal is. Following different lines of speculation can only help the quest to find out something more definitive in the long run.

(In my best Rodney King voice) "Can't we all just get along?"

George

[tedzan]

Brian W

You want to know what is "RIDICULOUS" ?

The following wise-ass comments by Erick........


On Thur 8/14....I reply to Erick's question........

Originally Posted by tedzan

As I noted above, Erick.

This is not new news, it has been previously discussed. The arrangement of the 48 subjects that I have displayed here is by no means a singular grouping of these subjects.

The 6 super-prints certainly exemplify this fact. They are repeated on subsequent series sheets (e.g. they are included again in the 66-subject Sovereign apple green sheet, also, T213, T214, T215 issues).
TED Z

Thur 8/14....Erick replies to my above response to him

Originally Posted by t206hound

I'm really confused... how can you assert that the 48 absolutely appeared together on a Piedmont 350 sheet when you also acknowledge that there were instances when they didn't appear together on a Piedmont 350 sheet? That's like saying I have a lot of money in my wallet, except when I don't.

[Edited] Just so that I make sure that we are discussing the same thing... I fully understand that between different series P350 vs S460 (superprints for example) that the layouts were different. Are you are saying that within a series (Piedmont 350 in this instance) that the layouts did or did not change?

Friday AM.....My wife and go on vacation to Cape May, NJ for 3 days


Meanwhile, Erick posts the following snide remarks to my non-response while I'm on vacation.

Fri 8/15..... still curious

Originally Posted by t206hound

Curious as to the answer to my questions...

Sat 8/16..... even more curious

Originally Posted by t206hound

Still waiting...

Sun 8/17..... well

Originally Posted by t206hound

Well, my beer is gone. I waited all weekend and no discussion.

Furthermore, upon my return I try to answer his question(s) and try to have a reasonable discussion with him regarding T206's.

But, all he keeps repeating is...."he's confused".



So, pardon me if I am quite ticked-off with his attitude.

Look, I don't expect that people agree with my theories. I present my ideas in order to stimulate some meaningful thoughts and discussion.

And, you damn well know this from our interactions in past years....when I considered you a great friend and had a lot of respect for you.



TED Z
..