T206, or not....let's have a continuing conversation....Ty Cobb Smoking Tobacco card

[rats60]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

It looks like PSA calls them T206. I assume Burdick did not know about these? What would these be called if not T206? T-unc?

(example of card from PSA website)

PSA calls 1949 Leaf Baseball 1948 Leaf Baseball too.

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by rats60

PSA calls 1949 Leaf Baseball 1948 Leaf Baseball too.

When did 524 cards become a "set of T206"? Do we know who became the first collector to complete a 524 set? I would think when people started to see a card with a Piedmont 150 back, they thought they were looking for a set of 150 cards. I understand the view that "Burdick catalogued them" argument, but I don't think he called these Cobb Cobb's anything, unlike T213-1.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

When did 524 cards become a "set of T206"? Do we know who became the first collector to complete a 524 set? I would think when people started to see a card with a Piedmont 150 back, they thought they were looking for a set of 150 cards. I understand the view that "Burdick catalogued them" argument, but I don't think he called these Cobb Cobb's anything, unlike T213-1.

Larry Fritsch was the first one to complete the 524 set. He discovered the Doyle error, but he kept his hobby discoveries to himself. It wasn't until a second Doyle was discovered in 1987 and auctioned off by Bill Huggins that the hobby became aware of it's existence.

I don't consider Doyle part of the set either. I would consider it part of the master set like the different backs. No Topps set requires you to have every error or variation to have a complete set. 1952 Topps is complete at 407 cards. You don't need the Sain/Page errors, Mantle, Robinson, Thomson variations, etc.

As far as the Cobb back, I believe that it was not issued until after production of the t206 set was complete. The Ty Cobb brand was not owned by ATC until after the break up of the ATC monopoly in 1911. It was a product of the FR Penn tobacco company which ATC had secretly invested in to keep in out of the government's antitrust case against. It seems very unlikely to me that there would be any cross promotion between two companies who were hiding their relationship.

[tedzan]

Jim Blumenthal started the "ball rolling" regarding the Ty Cobb/TY COBB card when he posted this thread in 2006...... Senator Russel's tobacco card collection.......

Furthermore, Jon Canfield posted this Ty Cobb/Ty Cobb thread that sparked some spirited discussion. Including information revealing that the Ty Cobb Cut Plug Smoking
Tobacco was marketed in the Spring of 1910...... What We Have Learned About Ty Cobbs With a Ty Cobb Back

My research regarding this Ty Cobb card begins from reading Senator Richard Russell's biography. Russell was an avid baseball fan in his youth. As a 13-year old in 1910
he collected T206 cards, and OLD MILL (T210) cards.

The University of Georgia has on display Senator Russel's tobacco card collection which includes a near complete set of T206's (497 cards). It's missing Lundgren, Plank,
and Wagner). The highlights of his set are the T206 Cobb/Cobb card and the Doyle N.Y. Nat'L card.

It appears to me that 1910 was the only year he purchased PIEDMONT cigarette packs, since his parents sent him off to Military School in 1911.

Having said all this, I could continue with more information, but I will leave that for later.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[parkerj33]

Ted, did Russell have a magie? I don't think so. And is his collection solely piedmont? And do we know if he obtained cards after 1910? I ask because you seem to insinuate that he only bought cards in 1910, and perhaps only piedmonts. So given that it seems curious that he obtained a cobb/cobb.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by parkerj33

Ted, did Russell have a magie? I don't think so. And is his collection solely piedmont? And do we know if he obtained cards after 1910? I ask because you seem to insinuate that he only bought cards in 1910, and perhaps only piedmonts. So given that it seems curious that he obtained a cobb/cobb.

Hi Jim

No Magie card.

Most of the missing 27 cards in his T206 set are from the 150/350 Series. Which suggests that his T206 collecting days did not start until 1910 (at age 13).

Furthermore, regarding the cards in the 150/350 series group, his collection included multiples of the Elite 11 subjects (with the rare PIEDMONT 350 backs).

Mr. Russell grew up in Winder, Georgia (near Atlanta), which has been the source of most of the Elite 11 cards.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[FrankWakefield]

And the Senator didn't have all/only Piedmont cards, he had T210 Old Mills, also.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by parkerj33

Ted, did Russell have a magie? I don't think so. And is his collection solely piedmont? And do we know if he obtained cards after 1910?

I ask because you seem to insinuate that he only bought cards in 1910, and perhaps only piedmonts. So given that
it seems curious that he obtained a cobb/cobb.

Hi Jim

I forgot to respond to your last question. So here goes....Russell's Dad was a Circuit Judge who would often travel to Atlanta.
According to Richard's biography his Dad would occasionally take young Richard with him on these trips to Atlanta. A number
of Cobb/Ty Cobb Tobacco cards have surfaced from the Atlanta area, where I think they were just handed out as promotional
cards for this new Tobacco brand. And, that is how his Dad simply acquired this card for him.

I personally think that the majority of these Cobb cards were never stuffed inside the Ty Cobb Smoking Tobacco tins.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Jim Blumenthal started the "ball rolling" regarding the Ty Cobb/TY COBB card when he posted this thread in 2006...... Senator Russel's tobacco card collection.......

Furthermore, Jon Canfield posted this Ty Cobb/Ty Cobb thread that sparked some spirited discussion. Including information revealing that the Ty Cobb Cut Plug Smoking
Tobacco was marketed in the Spring of 1910...... What We Have Learned About Ty Cobbs With a Ty Cobb Back

My research regarding this Ty Cobb card begins from reading Senator Richard Russell's biography. Russell was an avid baseball fan in his youth. As a 13-year old in 1910
he collected T206 cards, and OLD MILL (T210) cards.

The University of Georgia has on display Senator Russel's tobacco card collection which includes a near complete set of T206's (497 cards). It's missing Lundgren, Plank,
and Wagner). The highlights of his set are the T206 Cobb/Cobb card and the Doyle N.Y. Nat'L card.

It appears to me that 1910 was the only year he purchased PIEDMONT cigarette packs, since his parents sent him off to Military School in 1911.

Having said all this, I could continue with more information, but I will leave that for later.
.

Hi Frank

The T210 cards were already noted in my Post #20.

He had many of them; however, his T206 collection was quite huge.

Circa 2006 - 2007, I acquired quite a number of his duplicates (especially Elite 11 subjects) from one of his relatives in the Atlanta area.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by rats60

Larry Fritsch was the first one to complete the 524 set. He discovered the Doyle error, but he kept his hobby discoveries to himself. It wasn't until a second Doyle was discovered in 1987 and auctioned off by Bill Huggins that the hobby became aware of it's existence.

I don't consider Doyle part of the set either. I would consider it part of the master set like the different backs. No Topps set requires you to have every error or variation to have a complete set. 1952 Topps is complete at 407 cards. You don't need the Sain/Page errors, Mantle, Robinson, Thomson variations, etc.

As far as the Cobb back, I believe that it was not issued until after production of the t206 set was complete. The Ty Cobb brand was not owned by ATC until after the break up of the ATC monopoly in 1911. It was a product of the FR Penn tobacco company which ATC had secretly invested in to keep in out of the government's antitrust case against. It seems very unlikely to me that there would be any cross promotion between two companies who were hiding their relationship.

Thank you, rats60. You have reminded me of the Doyle history. I have to relearn stuff all the time, as I forget a lot. I guess we will never know how many cards are in a T206 set. 52 Topps, as you say is 407. Did the ATC mean for collectors to chase Magie, Wagner, and Plank, or ignore them, etc.?

I follow the argument that Burdick was the classifier, so if he says T213-1 is not T206, then it is simply not, under his system.

I don't understand the argument that a Ty Cobb back is not a T206, when Burdick said that it was. Burdick created the idea of T206, so he is the final arbiter.

[steve B]

I suspect Burdick had at least a rough idea how complex the set really is. And rather than make it into three or 16 or more sets, he opted to put any card that seemed to be from the same set in that grouping.

If it's about this size, has white borders, and is on this sort of cardboard and has a brown caption then it's a T206.
Anything else is easy to categorize as its own set.

It's that way with a lot of large complex groups of related sets.
The old Judges
And the M-101s

[G1911]

I would call it a T-UNC. It doesn't really need a set designation as it is a single promo card instead of a set.

They re-used a T206 image for a one-off promo card. If this is a T206, so is T213, T214, T215. T219's and C52's would have to be T218's. Burdick was never fully consistent, but to make this consistent we would have to rewrite the entire system.

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by G1911

I would call it a T-UNC. It doesn't really need a set designation as it is a single promo card instead of a set.

They re-used a T206 image for a one-off promo card. If this is a T206, so is T213, T214, T215. T219's and C52's would have to be T218's. Burdick was never fully consistent, but to make this consistent we would have to rewrite the entire system.

This is the "Burdick said" these are T206's theory. I think it's okay to use his nomenclature, but I keep my Piedmont 150's in a different box than my AB350NF's.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

This is the "Burdick said" these are T206's theory. I think it's okay to use his nomenclature, but I keep my Piedmont 150's in a different box than my AB350NF's.

I don't think it's just Burdick said". 150 and 350 are different series, but they were considered a set by the makers. There are clearly different sets of T cards. Sometimes drawing the lines can be murky for certain issues, but Burdick did not just make these sets up. The lithographers and American Lithography clearly thought of them as individual sets, as their surviving records tell us.

[RCMcKenzie]

Greg, did the issuers think there was a set complete at 524, or did collectors make that up many years later? That's all I'm saying. T206 is flawed as a set compared to e102, where the checklist is on the back.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Not my expertise by any means, but I like Frank's analogy of a cousin. In any event since T206 is just an after the fact classification anyhow, not sure why it really matters.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

Greg, did the issuers think there was a set complete at 524, or did collectors make that up many years later? That's all I'm saying. T206 is flawed as a set compared to e102, where the checklist is on the back.

I'm sorry if I misunderstood you. Your reply quoting my post seemed to state that you think 150 and 350 are not the same set and should be separate, and that the set is just considered a set because Burdick said it was? It doesn't say anything about whether its 524 or 520 or 510 or 483 or any other number?

This question of how many cards make a basic set seems to be a very different question. I don't know how many Fullgraff or whoever was the PM for T206 would say were unique cards. Probably a little short of 524, the printing certainly indicates some of what people like to count as 524 were not considered new cards, just corrections to an existing card during the print run or updates.

That doesn't seem to affect whether a card is or is not part of the set though. None of the primary evidence seems to suggest that 150 and 350 series cards were conceived of as different sets, or that T206 was treated differently than the numerous other sets that aren't considered special today.

A Ty Cobb back card, of course, would not affect the set size of a basic T206 set in any way designated as T206 or T-UNC or whatever else. It's not a unique image or caption or front.

[Casey2296]

I'm not a T206 guy so no dog in this fight but that is a very special card and props to those that own one.

[RCMcKenzie]

I should have just said your name without quoting your whole point.

The background is from old threads and TedZ's assertion that T213-1 should be called T206, which I agree with, but the reason I have been able to collect them, is because they have been called T213-1, and viewed by collectors as crummy broders, instead of very rare-backed t206's.

I can see keeping Piedmont 150 350 and 460 together. It gets complicated when you put Clarence Beaumont SC 150 30 with a Demmitt Polar Bear as the same set. One is in a cigarette product, and one is in a pouch of tobacco. Why not throw in a Cobb from a tin can with some gloss?

I think it's a fun topic, like the green bird on the 1978 Topps Bob Forsch topic, not a terribly important topic.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

T206 is flawed as a set compared to e102, where the checklist is on the back.

The E102 set is not as straightfoward as it seems on the back, as 25 players are on the back checklist, but there are actually 29 cards, with two different pose variations for players Doyle, Miller, Wagner and Schmidt (with one of the Schmidt cards misspelled Smith).

Just trying to shift this tobacky thread into a candy thread, to the dismay of the doctors on here, but probably to the delight of the dentists.

Brian (E102, the King of the Anonymous Licking Candy World)

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

The E102 set is not as straightfoward as it seems on the back, as 25 players are on the back checklist, but there are actually 29 cards, with two different pose variations for players Doyle, Miller, Wagner and Schmidt (with one of the Schmidt cards misspelled Smith).

Just trying to shift this tobacky thread into a candy thread, to the dismay of the doctors on here, but probably to the delight of the dentists.

Brian (E102, the King of the Anonymous Licking Candy World)

It's a set of 25 players with 29 cards and we don't know who made them or what they were given out with. Do we know e102 are candy cards? I kind of wish I hadn't posted in this thread, and just read, like JimB told that guy to do in 2010.