Can Southern Leaguers have a Piedmont 150 back

[Cory]

So I did a little digging on the forum about rebacking and how to potentially identify it - that I hadn't thought of -

Weigh the card. I have a small scale for coins that should do the trick. I will weigh it vs. some controls when I get home.

Calipers - I ordered a set on Amazon and will put calipers to the card vs. controls when it arrives tomorrow.

Blacklight- I did hit it with the blacklight and didn't see any glowing - but I didn't focus on the edges - so I will hit it again - presumably glue residue may show up under blacklight?

I also have a digital microscope that I haven't put the card under to see if I can see any other signs of rebacking.

Anybody else have any other ideas? Soaking? I've never soaked a card as the thought of putting cardboard in water just sounds like trouble - I know that soaking is a widely used and an accepted way to remove scrapbook backing. Could make the card separate if it was rebacked? Fine otherwise?

All that being said - let's assume the card is genuine. What do I do with it? Have it graded? I've never sent a card off for grading, but I do have a handful that I should. I prefer SGC slabs, but would there be any reason that would argue for PSA? Given its uniqueness does it need special instructions? Hand it off to an auction house to take care of it? I realize something like this is worth whatever someone will pay for it, but does anybody have thoughts on what it would be worth if genuine and unaltered? Anybody know what could be used as a comp?

[iwantitiwinit]

If you could successfully get that graded I would think it could be worth quite a bit. Being a one of a kind, $10,000+?

[steve B]

The edges will tell a lot.
It does seem an odd candidate for rebacking.
A sort of common but not southern leaguer with a common back it supposedly never came with. I can maybe see changing a piedmont 350 to an old mill or either to Hindu.

The edge wear is a bit concerning, as it might hide a very slight seam.

The stain not showing through doesn't concern me. The stock for many T206s was coated, and stains shouldn't show through the coating.
(a big field of study that hasn't been looked at really at all is how often the coated stock was used.

If it isn't rebacked, I would think of it as a sort of scrap. The opposite of the 150 only card with a 350 back. Which I think is probably leftover fronts being used up to fill a Piedmont order.
Here there may have been Piedmont 150 backs leftover that were printed with whatever front was current to use them up.
Or
P150 backs used as setup sheets for a front run, and accidentally mixed with the production sheets sent to cutting. (Or not if it's truly hand cut scrap)

[brianp-beme]

Hi Steve, so would this card with a heavy stain on both sides be an example of a T206 with uncoated stock, or staining so heavy that it was able to affect the other side of a T206 with coated stock?

Brian

[G1911]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Hi Steve, so would this card with a heavy stain on both sides be an example of a T206 with uncoated stock, or staining so heavy that it was able to affect the other side of a T206 with coated stock?

Brian

It looks to me like this one was involved in a spill that hit both sides.

Stains sometimes go through the other side and sometimes don't on T cards.

[Cory]

So I weighed the card vs another dozen or so. It is markedly heavier. .032 ounces vs rest clustered around .025 ounces. I had some analog calipers with 1mm increments. It is around 1mm vs approximately 0.5 mm for a comparison.

Still no visible line on borders and nothing shows up under blacklight, but as someone else proposed the edges are "fuzzed" all the way around which conceals whatever is going on. On closer inspection I did notice some wrinkling on the face like when you glue or paste paper and it slides a bit.

So I would say the skeptics were right and it is rebacked. Still a weird choice in my opinion but maybe it was just practice before moving to higher value cards/backs.

I really appreciate everyones thoughts on this. What should I do with the card? Destroy it? Write reback on the back ?

I don't regret buying it as I learned a lot and it was kind of exciting to think I had discovered something new.

I had planned on consigning to REA, but I don't think thats necessary now.

[JollyElm]

I'll throw this out there. If you are pretty certain it is re-backed, and wouldn't be risking damaging something valuable, then now is the time to go the full nine yards and try to separate the supposed layers, right? Why not arrive at a definitive answer?

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Cory

So I weighed the card vs another dozen or so. It is markedly heavier. .032 ounces vs rest clustered around .025 ounces. I had some analog calipers with 1mm increments. It is around 1mm vs approximately 0.5 mm for a comparison.

Still no visible line on borders and nothing shows up under blacklight, but as someone else proposed the edges are "fuzzed" all the way around which conceals whatever is going on. On closer inspection I did notice some wrinkling on the face like when you glue or paste paper and it slides a bit.

So I would say the skeptics were right and it is rebacked. Still a weird choice in my opinion but maybe it was just practice before moving to higher value cards/backs.

I really appreciate everyones thoughts on this. What should I do with the card? Destroy it? Write reback on the back ?

I don't regret buying it as I learned a lot and it was kind of exciting to think I had discovered something new.

I had planned on consigning to REA, but I don't think thats necessary now.

Having measured but not weighed a lot of mine, that would be a clear indication of a rebacking. The ones I have were remarkably consistent in thickness.

Double thickness would seem to indicate two cards glued together. I would try soaking it. At worst you end up with a SLer with a damaged back, and a common with a damaged front. But the card is already in rough shape.

They take soaking well, and if a water soluble glue was used, should come apart easily. It will take time, probably a few hours. But you could put it in a bowl, watch a game or two and check on it.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Hi Steve, so would this card with a heavy stain on both sides be an example of a T206 with uncoated stock, or staining so heavy that it was able to affect the other side of a T206 with coated stock?

Brian

Hard to tell coated from uncoated from a scan, but I'd go with uncoated and a spill that hit the front and both partly soaked through and likely was bad enough to puddle on the table and soak in from the back.

The front has a more well defined stain, while the back is less clear and more "blurry" at the edges.

The uncoated stock is more like finished cardstock, where one surface is smooth and a bit pressed from a roller in the paper making machine. It has no real coating, but absorbs most things better on the reverse side. It's good for printing on, since that finished side makes the ink stay on the surface making for brighter colors and crisper images.

If you look at a coated stock T206 under high magnification you can see the cracks in the coating.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by steve B

Hard to tell coated from uncoated from a scan, but I'd go with uncoated and a spill that hit the front and both partly soaked through and likely was bad enough to puddle on the table and soak in from the back.

The front has a more well defined stain, while the back is less clear and more "blurry" at the edges.

The uncoated stock is more like finished cardstock, where one surface is smooth and a bit pressed from a roller in the paper making machine. It has no real coating, but absorbs most things better on the reverse side. It's good for printing on, since that finished side makes the ink stay on the surface making for brighter colors and crisper images.

If you look at a coated stock T206 under high magnification you can see the cracks in the coating.

Thanks Steve. Another side question. The T206 Manning I shared is a Piedmont 350. I have heard (and noticed) that for the Piedmont cards in the 150/350 print group, the cards with the 150 backs are typically bolder and more colorful than their 350 counterparts.

Are the 150 cards typically uncoated, which is why they usually look bolder and more colorful? And which surface that you refer to is smooth and roller pressed on uncoated stock...the front or the back?

Brian

[The Nasty Nati]

Did the original seller of this card ask for a lot of $? If so, I think that's a clear indicator they knew of the significance of this SL with Piedmont 350 back, hence why they may have rebacked it.

But if it sold for cheap, then it just seems strange to me why they would go through all the trouble to reback it.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Thanks Steve. Another side question. The T206 Manning I shared is a Piedmont 350. I have heard (and noticed) that for the Piedmont cards in the 150/350 print group, the cards with the 150 backs are typically bolder and more colorful than their 350 counterparts.

Are the 150 cards typically uncoated, which is why they usually look bolder and more colorful? And which surface that you refer to is smooth and roller pressed on uncoated stock...the front or the back?

Brian

I haven't looked at them for that beyond noticing different stocks. My collection of them is mostly lower grade, so the coating may not be apparent on some.
One of those things I need to go through and check.

It is possible that some series are more often on coated stock.