Split-personality of the 350/460 series..re: AB460, BL460, SC460, HINDU & UZIT T206's

[sreader3]

Hi Ted,

Initial reaction: Your 35 Group 1 subjects correspond with the AB 460 "no prints" identified on T206 Resource, except that your Group 1 includes Ames. So I am going to tentatively agree with you that your Group 1 subjects were printed together--probably on the same sheet--with the caveat that Ames was likely swapped-in for Dougherty on that sheet midstream as Chris Browne as suggested elsewhere. Thus, I am going to accept 34 subject sheets as most likely, with the understanding that we may part company on that. More reaction later.

Scot

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by sreader3

Hi Ted,

Initial reaction: Your 35 Group 1 subjects correspond with the AB 460 "no prints" identified on T206 Resource, except that your Group 1 includes Ames. So I am going to tentatively agree with you that your Group 1 subjects were printed together--probably on the same sheet--with the caveat that Ames was likely swapped-in for Dougherty on that sheet midstream as Chris Browne as suggested elsewhere. Thus, I am going to accept 34 subject sheets as most likely, with the understanding that we may part company on that. More reaction later.

Scot

With all due respect to Chris B's suggestion. I have to differ with his swapping games regarding Ames and Dougherty. There is no justification for ALC switching these guys.
Their careers did not change during the T206 timeline (1909 - early 1911). Ames played with the Giants and Dougherty with the White Sox. And, as we've seen throughout
the make up of the T206 set, where ALC has modified certain subjects in their printing there was valid reasons (trades, retirements, etc.). Replacing Ames with Dougherty
sounds like an unwarranted arbitrary change, which in my opinion did not occur.

Ames has been confirmed with both the SWEET CAP 460/25 and SWEET CAP 460/42 backs. ALC's printing pattern regarding these two backs correlates with the red HINDU
backs. The red ink is exactly the same on all 3 of these backs. And, it would not surprise me if ALC printed all 3 of these backs simultaneously on this group of 35 subjects.

In the past year, Murphy & Dougherty were discovered with red HINDU backs; and, I expect that Ames will eventually surface with a red HINDU back (and/or BL 460 back).

Furthermore, the red HINDU story is not complete yet. There are 3 other subjects that have yet to be confirmed with red HINDU backs......

Mathewson (dark cap)
McIntyre (Brooklyn & Chicago)
Reulbach (no glove)

So, my expectations regarding Ames are not just my "wild imagination" in overdrive.


TED Z
.

[tedzan]

I had more of these 460 series double same name cards, but I traded them away. They certainly do lend credence to the fact that these T206's were Double-Printed on their sheet.


. .



TED Z

.

[Pat R]

Ted,

If you're talking about the vertical rows I think most of us would
agree that all the subjects were at least triple printed on most if not
all sheets.The double name, two name, plate scratch ect..... are pretty
good evidence to support this.

Patrick

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Ted,

If you're talking about the vertical rows I think most of us would
agree that all the subjects were at least triple printed on most if not
all sheets.The double name, two name, plate scratch ect..... are pretty
good evidence to support this.

Patrick

Pat

Yes, we are all in agreement with this vertical printing format of T206's. But, have you ever seen any evidence of horizontal multiple printing of T206's ?

The back of my T205 Collins confirms that American Litho. also double-printed cards horizontally (at least T205's). Are there any examples of this with T206's ?






TED Z
.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Pat

Yes, we are all in agreement with this vertical printing format of T206's. But, have you ever seen any evidence of horizontal multiple printing of T206's ?

The back of my T205 Collins confirms that American Litho. also double-printed cards horizontally (at least T205's). Are there any examples of this with T206's ?






TED Z
.

First off, that's an awesome card.

To the best of my knowledge, there are no known instances of the same subject adjacent horizontally (and until now I hadn't seen a T205 like that). With regards to double printing on a sheet, absence of a side-by-side subject T206 example doesn't necessarily mean it didn't occur; and note that there would also be the possibility of the same subject horizontally, but just not adjacent.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Pat

Yes, we are all in agreement with this vertical printing format of T206's. But, have you ever seen any evidence of horizontal multiple printing of T206's ?

The back of my T205 Collins confirms that American Litho. also double-printed cards horizontally (at least T205's). Are there any examples of this with T206's ?






TED Z
.

Ted,

I haven't seen any evidence of horizontals of the same T206 subject
on a sheet but I certainly wouldn't rule out the possibility.

BTW that Collins is a really neat card.


Patrick

[tedzan]

Yes, it's a "pretty" card in a strange way. Glad you guys like it.

When I acquired this Collins nine years ago, I had to find out which T205 guy was adjacent to it. I must of compared its back to half the cards (100+) in my set with no match.
Then, a "little bird" told me to compare it to the same Collins card in my set. Well I'll be darned.....it matched exactly. This really surprised me, since I never would of guessed
that these cards were double-printed sideways.


Pat & Erick

The only miscut T206 that I know of is the yellow Chance with a hint of the red Cobb to the right of it. Do you guys have a list of all the known miscut T206 fronts that show a
hint of their adjacent cards ?



TED Z
.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by tedzan

I had more of these 460 series double same name cards, but I traded them away. They certainly do lend credence to the fact that these T206's were Double-Printed on their sheet.

TED Z

.

Yes, just like every other series of T206, there were multiples of the same subject stacked vertically. I believe it was very likely that four or more of each subject stacked.

When I see/hear the the term "double-print", I assume that is in reference to twice of many of one subject appearing on the sheet than other subjects. If I've been using that term wrong, please let me know what term I should be using.