T206 Black vs Brown Lenox

[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.

[tedzan]

Apparently, you are having a lapse of recall. Several years ago in one of your "gotcha Ted" posts, we discussed that exact list from 2009. And, I explained to you that the Baker
and Elberfeld had partial paper loss on their backs which obscured whether they were 350 or 460 cards. Obviously, they were AB 350 cards. I assumed otherwise....my bad.
And, I told you that I did not have Ames,. It was a mistaken typo on that list.

I'd like to think that you have forgotten that conversation, and now you have gone to the trouble to play this "gotcha Ted" game.

On the other hand, if you do recall our conversation on this subject from several years ago, and you are trying to instigate it again....then, sir you have a serious problem.

[Rhotchkiss]

So much for discussions about Lenox.....

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Here is a comparison of the rare Black Lenox vs the super-duper rare Brown Lenox. Anyone else have a black and brown combo?

Anyone know the theory on why there are browns, why they were distributed in packs, whether all blacks should conceivably have at least one brown counterpart out there, why some players seem to have a decent amount of Browns (McQuillan - like 4-5) and others have one (or none)?

What do we know about the elusive Brown Lenox?

Ryan

I'm sorry about this....but, as Billy Joel sang "I Didn't Start This Fire".

I simply responded to your 1st post here with my theory on how brown LENOX cards could have been printed, and which T206 subjects can (or will be) found with brown LENOX backs.

And BAM ! "Mr. Negativism" had to resort to his usual B-S tactics. He's done this numerous times in the past on other Threads that I have posted on.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

So much for discussions about Lenox.....

+1

I do not do 06s but do follow many of the threads more out of fascination about how complex the set is and the passion 06 collectors have for the issue but I have to say that I have seen Ted go bonkers on people for taking his thread OT but here he seems to be ok with hijacking this one. That is sorta disappointing.