T206 Sweet Caporal Census Project

[53toppscollector]

19. Barger (Print Group 2)



Barger is a very low pop Sweet Caporal, and his Fac 25 back is extremely tough. The low pop count is visible in the number of cards I was actually able to find, with a huge majority of the sales being Piedmont 350s.

[53toppscollector]

20. Barry, Jack (Print Group 2)



Jack Barry has even fewer total Sweet Caps than Barger right before him, but his Factory 25 is not as rare. Interestingly, using the 29 graded PSAs with factory numbers, the Factory 25 looks more common (24%), but in my survey of 31 PSA slabs, only 16% were Factory 25s. I found only 6 SGC graded slabs, and 2 of the 6 were Factory 25s.

[53toppscollector]

21. Barry, Shad (Print Group 2)



Another lower pop Sweet Cap here, just 83 combined graded copies. Do we know why?

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by 53toppscollector

21. Barry, Shad (Print Group 2)



Another lower pop Sweet Cap here, just 83 combined graded copies. Do we know why?

I think the reason that both Shad and Jack Barry have low Sweet Caporal pops is because they were skipped in one or more of the Sweet Caporal stages.

This is just my opinion but I've said it before that I think there were several stages of printing in each print group and I think one of the stages involvedaround 25-30% of the Old Mill and Sweet Caporal 350/30, 50-75% of the Sweet Caporal 350 factory 25's and around 5-10% of the Piedmont 350's. Both Barry's are unconfirmed Old Mills and I think they weren't in that print stage and that's the reason for their low Sweet Caporal numbers.

Here's an example of a print flaw that I think occurred during that stage with the flaw data.

PD350-2 - Copy.jpg


Old Mill-2.jpg

PD350-1.jpg


SC350-25-2.jpg

SC350-30-1.jpg

[Ronnie73]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I think the reason that both Shad and Jack Barry have low Sweet Caporal pops is because they were skipped in one or more of the Sweet Caporal stages.

This is just my opinion but I've said it before that I think there were several stages of printing in each print group and I think one of the stages involvedaround 25-30% of the Old Mill and Sweet Caporal 350/30, 50-75% of the Sweet Caporal 350 factory 25's and around 5-10% of the Piedmont 350's. Both Barry's are unconfirmed Old Mills and I think they weren't in that print stage and that's the reason for their low Sweet Caporal numbers.

Great info Pat. That is sometimes the only way to break the print groups into sub print groups or possible sheets. I used a few ways to break down the 460 series cards. 350 series cards are a bit more tricky but not impossible. With some exceptions though, which will be found out as this Sweet Caporal breakdown continues. Then another secret will be revealed.

[RCFire82]

☝️🤔...

[53toppscollector]

23. Batch (Print Group 2)



Batch's Factory 25 percentage appears to be lower than the PSA estimates. Only SGC graded copies and no Factory 25s that I could see (2 that were just too blurry to read). Lots of "T206" labels for Batch, but most of them were Piedmont 350s, unfortunately.

[53toppscollector]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I think the reason that both Shad and Jack Barry have low Sweet Caporal pops is because they were skipped in one or more of the Sweet Caporal stages.

This is just my opinion but I've said it before that I think there were several stages of printing in each print group and I think one of the stages involvedaround 25-30% of the Old Mill and Sweet Caporal 350/30, 50-75% of the Sweet Caporal 350 factory 25's and around 5-10% of the Piedmont 350's. Both Barry's are unconfirmed Old Mills and I think they weren't in that print stage and that's the reason for their low Sweet Caporal numbers.

That is really interesting. Has there ever been any actual confirmed writing about how the print process worked in detail? I know assumptions have been made about sheet size (based on your plate scratch work) and we've been able to draw some assumptions based on populations (the super prints and the exclusive 12)

Finding those old records/details about how subjects were selected, how the print runs were ordered, etc, would truly be the holy grail to me. Reading the rationale for why so few Drums were printed, why more Polar Bears were printed compared to EPDG, etc etc. That is the stuff I am truly most interested in.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by 53toppscollector

That is really interesting. Has there ever been any actual confirmed writing about how the print process worked in detail? I know assumptions have been made about sheet size (based on your plate scratch work) and we've been able to draw some assumptions based on populations (the super prints and the exclusive 12)

Finding those old records/details about how subjects were selected, how the print runs were ordered, etc, would truly be the holy grail to me. Reading the rationale for why so few Drums were printed, why more Polar Bears were printed compared to EPDG, etc etc. That is the stuff I am truly most interested in.

I don't know of any confirmed writing on the printing process but there was an
old journal that discovered that included an order page for non-sports cards.

0 NS Journal page.jpg

If you haven't seen this thread there's some interesting information in it.
https://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=309276

Even if there is an uncut T206 sheet discovered some day IMO that will only tell us a small part of the T206 printing process because I think there were different sheet sizes and the layouts changed numerous times during the printing process.

[53toppscollector]

24. Bates (Print Group 1)



Here is a fun one. The PSA pop report does not include an entry for the SC 350/25 of this card, yet there were 2 cards that are labeled as 350/25, and I found a total of 5 of the 350/25s in PSA holders (the other 3 were in Sweet Caporal or T206 slabs)

We've now looked at 2 subjects (Alperman and Bates) that have the 649OP back, and I think the spread between the 5 SC factories is pretty interesting