T206 backs in 1978-80

[Joshchisox08]

Originally Posted by trdcrdkid

Yes, the Doyle was first found in 1981 by Larry Frisch, but not made public until 1987 when somebody else found one. Before that Sweeney with no B on his cap was often considered a separate card, thus making 524 in the set, but that is now considered a printing error and not a distinct card. Heitman was writing after the Sweeney card was relegated to a printing error, but before the Doyle was discovered.

I never knew that Sweeney was considered a separate card holy scnikies!

What's the story on that?

And how much a premium do those go for?

[trdcrdkid]

Originally Posted by Joshchisox08

I never knew that Sweeney was considered a separate card holy scnikies!

What's the story on that?

And how much a premium do those go for?

I don't think they really go for a significant premium, other than what other printing oddities might go for.

Here is a thread from last summer where I mentioned a little bit about the history of the Sweeney "no B" version:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...+B#post1434376

And see the second-to-last paragraph on the first page of Heitman's 1978 article (the first scan in the first post of this thread), where he discusses why he doesn't consider "Sweeney no B" to be a separate card:

"The Sweeney, Boston National with no "B" on jersey, is really just a printing oddity. I have seen the card with about 10 different shades of the B, some of them very close to being plain. I have seen other T206s with the same problems, some with skin tones totally bleached out, but none have ever gained the notoriety of Sweeney. Unlike Magie, I do not consider the Sweeney, no B, to be a separate card. Although interesting, I leave collecting these cards to those who have the patience to look for the slightest error, variation, misprinting or oddity in the printing of cards. Printers are not perfect."

[Joshchisox08]

Originally Posted by trdcrdkid

I don't think they really go for a significant premium, other than what other printing oddities might go for.

Here is a thread from last summer where I mentioned a little bit about the history of the Sweeney "no B" version:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...+B#post1434376

And see the second-to-last paragraph on the first page of Heitman's 1978 article (the first scan in the first post of this thread), where he discusses why he doesn't consider "Sweeney no B" to be a separate card:

"The Sweeney, Boston National with no "B" on jersey, is really just a printing oddity. I have seen the card with about 10 different shades of the B, some of them very close to being plain. I have seen other T206s with the same problems, some with skin tones totally bleached out, but none have ever gained the notoriety of Sweeney. Unlike Magie, I do not consider the Sweeney, no B, to be a separate card. Although interesting, I leave collecting these cards to those who have the patience to look for the slightest error, variation, misprinting or oddity in the printing of cards. Printers are not perfect."

Thanks David it's reasons like this that I log in to this site everyday!!! Found something else to add about the Sweeney.

"For instance, the well-known Sweeney (Boston) “no B” variation resulted from the final printing stage, red, having been bypassed.8 Other subjects known to exist without red ink in at least one instance are Beck, Bowerman and Lindaman and Spencer, and when auctioned these ink-challenged specimens often sell for a substantial premium."

Source: Inside t206 Centennial Edition

[deadballfreaK]

In 1977 at the National convention in Detroit I purchased 100 t206s for $25.00 from a well known dealer. Backs were not even considered at that time I guess. I know I didn't consider them as anything other than interesting. In that group which were lower grade (most fair-vg) were three Uzits, 1 Drum, a couple of Carolina Brights, a few Tolstois etc. The next day I traded one of the Uzits (Doc Crandall I think) to a friend for a common card I needed. I already had Crandall. Just a dupe to me.

[epike3]

thanks for the great posts!