T206 Black vs Brown Lenox

[Pat R]

It's not photo-shopped Ted

https://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=236800

https://www.amazon.com/1909-Tobacco-.../dp/B00KVOZOZG

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Pat R

It's not photo-shopped Ted

https://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=236800

https://www.amazon.com/1909-Tobacco-.../dp/B00KVOZOZG

Pat

Great, then it's back is "black". First one that I've seen. I have an assortment of about 60 cards of T80's with CAIRO MONOPOL (CM), LENOX, TOLSTOI, UZIT, and Blank-backs.
My 50-card set is near complete set.

In an inverse way, your "black" back CM card supports my theory which I noted in post #10 in this thread (i.e., the brown LENOX T206's are the result of printer's mistaken ink
application on a press run of T206 LENOX cards. And why brown ink ? Because the prior press run was CM cards. So, your CM card with the "black" is the result of vice-versa.
The more significant factor that reinforces my theory is the fact that ONLY Group B subjects of the 350/460 series have been found with the brown LENOX backs.

Printer's errors such as this have also resulted in other T206 backs having the wrong color.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Pat

Great, then it's back is "black". First one that I've seen. I have an assortment of about 60 cards of T80's with CAIRO MONOPOL (CM), LENOX, TOLSTOI, UZIT, and Blank-backs.
My 50-card set is near complete set.

In an inverse way, your "black" back CM card supports my theory which I noted in post #10 in this thread (i.e., the brown LENOX T206's are the result of printer's mistaken ink
application on a press run of T206 LENOX cards. And why brown ink ? Because the prior press run was CM cards. So, your CM card with the "black" is the result of vice-versa.
The more significant factor that reinforces my theory is the fact that ONLY Group B subjects of the 350/460 series have been found with the brown LENOX backs.

Printer's errors such as this have also resulted in other T206 backs having the wrong color.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Hey Ted,
I was posting to show how the Brown Lenox stands out when compared to the Black Lenox and the Cairo Monopol it had nothing to do with your
theory. As a matter of fact your group theory mirrors what I posted 5 years ago with the exception of Ames who is to use Scot Readers phrase is a rule breaker.

I posted this thread 5 years ago

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...ighlight=Lenox

It didn't receive a response but I brought it up again in one of your threads

img884.jpg

Your response was it was worth tracking and coincidentally
a few months later you started your Brown Lenox theory
that with the exception of Ames mirrored what I posted.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Hey Ted,
I was posting to show how the Brown Lenox stands out when compared to the Black Lenox and the Cairo Monopol it had nothing to do with your
theory.

As a matter of fact your group theory mirrors what I posted 5 years ago with the exception of Ames who is to use Scot Readers phrase is a rule breaker.

I posted this thread 5 years ago

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...ighlight=Lenox

It didn't receive a response but I brought it up again in one of your threads

Attachment 413518

Your response was it was worth tracking and coincidentally
a few months later you started your Brown Lenox theory
that with the exception of Ames mirrored what I posted.

Pat

Do we have to "re-hash" all this stuff all over again ?

First of all, I presented my "Mutually-Exclusive" theory (Group A and Group B) regarding the 350/460 series back in 2009. And, at that time I noted that Ames (hands over head)
was in the Group B. Ames did not fit the pattern; therefore, I had serious doubts about it. I did some "detective" work and tracked down the Net54 member, who posted that the
Ames was "confirmed" with an AMERICAN BEAUTY 46O back (which was posted in Bill Brown's Super Set back in 2006). This fellow stated that his post in the Super Set regarding
Ames was a mistake.

So, I REMOVED Ames from my Group B list, and transferred him into the Group A list.

What does it take to convince you that this AMES does not exist with an AMERICAN BEAUTY 46O back or a UZIT back (as T206resource incorrectly claims) ?

We have "hashed" this over and over again in the past.....and, I'm tired of dealing with your repeated "crap" on this matter !

How's about, I offer you these FIVE CRISP $100 BILLS if you can find an AUTHENTIC Ames (hands over head ) card with an AMERICAN BEAUTY 46O back, or a UZIT back.

Furthermore, this offer goes to anyone else here on this forum.





TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Pat

Do we have to "re-hash" all this stuff all over again ?

First of all, I presented my "Mutually-Exclusive" theory (Group A and Group B) regarding the 350/460 series back in 2009. And, at that time I noted that Ames (hands over head)
was in the Group B. Ames did not fit the pattern; therefore, I had serious doubts about it. I did some "detective" work and tracked down the Net54 member, who posted that the
Ames was "confirmed" with an AMERICAN BEAUTY 46O back (which was posted in Bill Brown's Super Set back in 2006). This fellow stated that his post in the Super Set regarding
Ames was a mistake.

So, I REMOVED Ames from my Group B list, and transferred him into the Group A list.

What does it take to convince you that this AMES does not exist with an AMERICAN BEAUTY 46O back or a UZIT back (as T206resource incorrectly claims) ?

We have "hashed" this over and over again in the past.....and, I'm tired of dealing with your repeated "crap" on this matter !

How's about, I offer you these FIVE CRISP $100 BILLS if you can find an AUTHENTIC Ames (hands over head ) card with an AMERICAN BEAUTY 46O back, or a UZIT back.

Furthermore, this offer goes to anyone else here on this forum.





TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Ted, The Ames AB460 and Uzit has nothing to do with what I posted but
since you posted a challenge can I use you as a reference for the $500?

img895.jpg

[tedzan]

Pat

What the hell don't you understand. ! ?

I explained all that, and how I talked with the Net54 member, who said it was a mistake when he posted Ames in the Super Set.

Your derangement syndrome against me (over these past 4 years) has blinded you to grasp what is clearly written. Go back and read what I posted, and let it sink in to your mind.

And, quit this $H**T.

Ted
.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Pat

What the hell don't you understand. ! ?

I explained all that, and how I talked with the Net54 member, who said it was a mistake when he posted Ames in the Super Set.

Your derangement syndrome against me (over these past 4 years) has blinded you to grasp what is clearly written. Go back and read what I posted, and let it sink in to your mind.

And, quit this $H**T.

Ted
.

I don't know Ted what I see clearly written is you saying you have an
Ames American Beauty 460 in the 70 card set you completed.