Introducing my new site ThatT206life.com

[mrvster]

on my favorites!!

I love the rea recap I felt the same about the bl 460...nice commentary on the proofs

[Luke]

1. Just posted a "guest article", written by everyone's T206 buddy, Scott Gross. It's awesome, please check it out!

2. I've settled into a groove of posting a new article every Sunday and Thursday morning. I've had a few days where I post it late, but planning to get more organized and schedule them in advance so they always publish at the same time.

3. I very much appreciate everyone's kind words. I didn't respond to all the nice posts because I didn't want to personally bump this thread too much, but I read them all.

[CW]

I will be tuning in.

Stuff like this is great for the hobby.

Nicely done, Luke!

[Rhotchkiss]

Luke, I sincerely appreciate this thread about That T206 Life. I have spent at least 2 hrs since yesterday on the (previously-unknown-to-me) site, and it is simply awesome!

I was reading your article re How to read the SGC Pop report, and I have a few questions (if you have the time, it may be best to discuss rather than respond in text/via thread). As you mentioned in another article, my interests in T206 have changed and I am now focused principally on HOFers with Rare backs (and I would like ultimately to have an example of each back, including series and Factory No) in an HOF example, but I am having trouble using SGC to determine how many HOF rare back examples exist for certain cards.

For example, looking at the SGC report, it is pretty clear to me that they do not distinguish by Factory Number. Is this correct? Also, I understand that series 150 is 1909, 360 is 1910, and 460 is 1911, but what about 350-460? And, am I correct the SGC does not distinguish between color variations of backs, such a Red v. Brown Hindu?

Moreover, sometimes multiple backs for the same player is listed, however, there is no indicator as to whether it is listing the population for a portrait or pose, etc (i.e., no "description"). For example, I have an M. Brown Cycle 460. This is a 1911 card. If you type in T206 Mordecai Brown, the entire pop report comes up. Scroll down to the 1911's and you see three different listings for M. Brown in a Cycle -- two listings have no description and one listing has "Chicago on Shirt" (which is what I have in an SGC 60). So, how do I know if there are only 2 SGC-graded M. Brown, Chicago on Shirt Cycle, 460s or whether the other two listings (one with a pop of 1 and one with a pop of 2) are also Chicago on Shirt?

Thanks in advance!

[DeanH3]

I will try and help. Hopefully my understanding is correct so someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

SGC does not distinguish factory numbers except Pied 350-460 fact 42 ( I believe).

SGC does separate the series as 1909 for 150, 1910 for 350 and 1911 for 350-460 and 460.

No subjects were printed with both brown and red hindu. So you can determine from SGC pop reports which back it is by knowing if that player was a red or brown only subject.

Decifering other backs can be challenging. I'll use Cy Young as an example. When you look up Cy Young in a 1909 Piedmont 150 listing you'll see a Young listing with no description. And two other listings that are labeled portrait and bare hand. Since we know both the portrait and bare hand were printed in the Piedmont 150 series, it's impossible to know how many are portraits and how many are bare hand in the listing with no label. However, some other backs are easier to assertain. In the Cycle 460 series, Young with glove is the only pose printed. So when you look at the Cycle 460 series in the SGC pop report, you'll know that any Cy Young listed in a generic label will still be a with glove pose.

I'm not 100% sure, but I believe in the Cycle 460 series the brown Chicago on shirt was the only brown pose printed. So you can assertain that any brown listed under the 1911 cycle SGC pop report will be that pose.

So knowing which subjects were printed, or not printed, with certain backs can help figure out the SGC pops. But subjects that had different poses within the same series is a challenge.

I sure hope I made sense with my ramblings. I guarantee others could explain it better and more succinct as I'm not the best communicator when it come to writing.

Good luck!

[Luke]

That was a great answer Dean. I would have said it just about the same. Like Dean says, a key to making sense of the SGC Pop Report is knowing which series each card was printed in. Even then, there are some entries are ambiguous. Like these Doyle Cycle 460s below. You just have no idea which card the generic listing refers to.

[mrvster]

I love your site!!!!!!!!!!! GREAT INFO