T206 Question ?

[buymycards]

The problem with using the thin paper of the Type 1 Coupon's as a reason to exclude it from the T206 set doesn't hold water. What about American Beauty, which are narrower than other T206's. Should they also be excluded?

We have discussed this on the board many, many times. The reason for the T206 set being defined the way it is, is that one person, many years ago, with very limited information, made this decision. I am in awe of the work that Burdick did in regard to cataloging the sets, but in some cases, new information has come to light that Burdick wasn't aware of.

Rick

[bounce]

Originally Posted by buymycards

We have discussed this on the board many, many times.

Coupons are not just different because of paper, there are other differences including font/color of the names, etc. They are not the same as T206 on the front, however they are very similar.

Ty Cobb backs are always debated, most "purists" I think feel those cards are not really part of T206 because there's zero evidence they were ever issued in packs or tins. Lots of various theories on them, but that's one that IS normally included as T206 despite lots of reasons not to be.

Agree that ultimately the cataloging that was originally done stuck, and it's not likely changing any time soon.

[buymycards]

The Type I Coupon has the same color font as a T206. How is this different than a T206?

[Rhotchkiss]

Personally, I think both t213-1 and t215-1 should be t206s. They both have same pics and names, in black, on front, and we’re issued between 1909-11. Not sure when the Cobb back was issued, but it too has same front and black writing, so I am fine with it being considered a t206.

T213-2/3, t214, and t215-2 were issued after 1911 and have the blue writing on front. No way these are t206s

[Leon]

So much hogwash (to me) in this thread. While Burdick didn't get everything correct (and absolutely knew that) he did get T206 correct. No, T213s or T215s are not, and never will be, T206. They are different cards and series. No gray area to me. To each their own.

[packs]

Why though? If it's the method of distribution, I could see Polar Bears being a distinct set too. The distribution was totally different from the other T206s in that the cards came in a pouch of tobacco and not a pack of cigarettes. What differences exist between type 1 issues of T213 and T215?

[Rhotchkiss]

Leon, in your opinion, why should T cards issued between 1909-11, with same t206 fronts, including black lettering, not be included as t206s? Specifically I am talking about T213-1 and T215–1. What makes these cards any less a T206 than American Beauties, other than they were not initially classified as such?

I am very open to opinions, but merely calling a stance hogwash is not evidence/persuasive. I know there are others threads and plenty of arguments, but why specifically do you think t213-1 and t215-1 are not t206s (besides initial classification)? Thanks

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Leon, in your opinion, why should T cards issued between 1909-11, with same t206 fronts, including black lettering, not be included as t206s? Specifically I am talking about T213-1 and T215–1. What makes these cards any less a T206 than American Beauties, other than they were not initially classified as such?

I am very open to opinions, but merely calling a stance hogwash is not evidence/persuasive. I know there are others threads and plenty of arguments, but why specifically do you think t213-1 and t215-1 are not t206s (besides initial classification)? Thanks

T213s were issued over a span of how many years? How many years were T206s issued.
No T206 has a blue caption on front. No T206 is paper thin. No T206 has multiple colors of print on front (with the different series).

T215s- Were issued later than T206. Have different colors of captions on front. Have different type card stock for the 2 series (though could be mistaking on that one as I haven't handled both versions recently)

Burdick knew exactly what he was doing on these series as, in the ACC, he said that 213, 214 and 215 were similar to T206. That is perfect proof he got them correct. He is the one that wrote the catalog and gave ample evidence why those series were cataloged differently. It is really not even close imho....but again, everyone can believe what they want to. I go by the facts.

[insidethewrapper]

My initial post was , why isn't each T206 back a set in itself ( ie. Polar Bear, Piedmont, etc, etc.) not which cards should be included in the T206 set. Please stay on the posted topic. If Coupon is on the back it is a Coupon Set, if Polar Bear then a Polar Bear set, etc. If this is the knowledge we have now, let's change it. IMO - Should be a checklist for each " Back" in the Catalogs. I think Ted has been trying to do this.

[edhans]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Leon, in your opinion, why should T cards issued between 1909-11, with same t206 fronts, including black lettering, not be included as t206s? Specifically I am talking about T213-1 and T215–1. What makes these cards any less a T206 than American Beauties, other than they were not initially classified as such?

I am very open to opinions, but merely calling a stance hogwash is not evidence/persuasive. I know there are others threads and plenty of arguments, but why specifically do you think t213-1 and t215-1 are not t206s (besides initial classification)? Thanks

There are cogent arguments for classifying T213-1 and T215-1 as T206s. To me, the primary reason that leads me to believe they are properly classified as distinct sets is that the selection of subjects does not fit into the print group rubric of the other backs.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by buymycards

The problem with using the thin paper of the Type 1 Coupon's as a reason to exclude it from the T206 set doesn't hold water. What about American Beauty, which are narrower than other T206's. Should they also be excluded?

We have discussed this on the board many, many times. The reason for the T206 set being defined the way it is, is that one person, many years ago, with very limited information, made this decision. I am in awe of the work that Burdick did in regard to cataloging the sets, but in some cases, new information has come to light that Burdick wasn't aware of.

Rick

The paper is the issue. E90-1 cards share the same fronts with other caramel issues and a tobacco issue. It isn't an issue that they are catalogued as different sets. In the 90s, I collected basketball cards because of Michael Jordan. I would never dream of putting a Topps card in a Topps Chrome set. The cards are nothing alike except for using the same picture. It is the same with t206 and Coupon Type 1. They aren't the same cards, they aren't the same set. I would never buy a coupon card to fill a hole in my t206 set.

You make a good point on the American Beauty cards. I noticed that when I started collecting t206 35 years ago and I deliberately avoided buying any of those cards for my set. If there is any change to be made with the backs in the set, in my opinion it should be excluding the card backs that are not like the others, American Beauty and Ty Cobb, not adding more backs that have little in common with t206. I have no problem leaving them as is, it is Burdick's work not ours.

[sreader3]

For anyone interested, I have posted some thoughts on this topic here:

http://www.t206insider.com/store/c1/insider#research/

Cheers.

Scot

[RCMcKenzie]

Nice article on T206, Scot, I enjoyed reading it. I'm fine with the nomenclature remaining, but as a back collector, I go by the backs for all cards, T205, T206, T207, T213, T216, T218, T219...

If I find a T218 Tolstoi, I put it in a separate box from my T218 Mecca etc...When TedZ lines up all the backs to show the same design, either they are all together, or all separate. I'm fine with separate. I don't even go by the fronts in t216, I group them by the 5 backs. T216 are 5 different sets to me. It's a fun discussion. The only Latin I know is tempus fugit...Rob

I'm fine with just letting it be.

[62corvette]

I will add what I can—most of you are far more advanced than I. In winter 1971 I picked up 1100 tobacco cards from a retired farmer outside of Max, ND. He got the cards as a kid in NYC. There were a few fish, soldiers, etc. but about 1050 of them were T205 and T206. A pretty wide variety of backs, including the first T205 Hindu reported in the hobby. No other baseball, no T-213 or T-215. I know there is nothing definitive in that, and is primarily anecdotal, FWIW.

[buymycards]

Originally Posted by 62corvette

I will add what I can—most of you are far more advanced than I. In winter 1971 I picked up 1100 tobacco cards from a retired farmer outside of Max, ND. He got the cards as a kid in NYC. There were a few fish, soldiers, etc. but about 1050 of them were T205 and T206. A pretty wide variety of backs, including the first T205 Hindu reported in the hobby. No other baseball, no T-213 or T-215. I know there is nothing definitive in that, and is primarily anecdotal, FWIW.

That must have been a huge thrill. Thank you for sharing that!

But, just because there weren't any Coupons or Red Cross cards doesn't mean much. Were there Uzits, Broadleaf, Drum, etc.? If not, it doesn't mean that they aren't part of the T206 set. I'm not trying to argue with you. Just expressing my opinion.

It must have been exciting to go through 1100 cards, one by one, seeing who was on the front and then turning them over to check out the backs. I get excited when I find a group of 1989 Topps at a garage sale, and I would probably need CPR if I came across 1100 tobacco cards.

[62corvette]

Originally Posted by buymycards

That must have been a huge thrill. Thank you for sharing that!

But, just because there weren't any Coupons or Red Cross cards doesn't mean much. Were there Uzits, Broadleaf, Drum, etc.? If not, it doesn't mean that they aren't part of the T206 set. I'm not trying to argue with you. Just expressing my opinion.

It must have been exciting to go through 1100 cards, one by one, seeing who was on the front and then turning them over to check out the backs. I get excited when I find a group of 1989 Topps at a garage sale, and I would probably need CPR if I came across 1100 tobacco cards.

I had no idea what they were. I subscribed to “The Trader Speaks”, so I went home and did research. No Uzits or Drums, but several Broadleafs—-and no shortage of Piedmonts or Sweet Caps. I had to force $20 on him. He wanted to give them to me. Called him and told him that I owed him more money, and he said he kept them all those years, just hoping to find someone who wanted them.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by 62corvette

I will add what I can—most of you are far more advanced than I. In winter 1971 I picked up 1100 tobacco cards from a retired farmer outside of Max, ND. He got the cards as a kid in NYC. There were a few fish, soldiers, etc. but about 1050 of them were T205 and T206. A pretty wide variety of backs, including the first T205 Hindu reported in the hobby. No other baseball, no T-213 or T-215. I know there is nothing definitive in that, and is primarily anecdotal, FWIW.

Wonder what that find would be worth today? Thanks for sharing.

.