Possible newly discovered T205 variation

[Matt]

Originally Posted by marcdelpercio

I have tried every possible setting on my scanner to get a clear scan through the SGC slab but it always seems to come out blurry. Any tips would certainly be appreciated.

My guess is that you have a CIS scanner which can't do depth well. If you can pickup a scanner with CCD technology which handles things not directly up on the glass.

Originally Posted by marcdelpercio

I have been researching this for several months and have picked up a few of both of the variations but the Polar Bears seem to be fairly uncommon.

A quick search shows at least 3 PB backed Doc Whites sold in the last few months on eBay, including an SGC 70, but none available at the moment

[marcdelpercio]

I bought an SGC 50 and an SGC 30 on eBay over the past few months. I don't recall seeing the 70. Perhaps somebody got a steal and didn't even realize it I also posted on the BST and never got a reply.

[Wite3]

This variation has been known for awhile by a few collectors and was never really outed until now. I have charted it for about 9 months...It only occurs on the Polar Bear cards. I have seen 13 Doc Whites in the last 9 months. 4 with Polar Bear backs all of which were missing the quotes...9 with other backs that had the quotes. Small sample size but interesting. I do not think this will command a huge premium but maybe a slight premium like the Latham cards. I have to say that I have seen more Polar Bear Whites (29) than the other three backs (Piedmont 22, Hassan 649 17, Hassan 30 11, and Honest Long Cut 13) in the last few years.

I am happy this was on a Doc White and not Kirb...then we may be looking at a Wilhelm/Gray/Moran situation.

Joshua

[egbeachley]

The biggest variation is not the missing quotes.....it's the giant words POLAR BEAR on the back!

Not a variation unless the same brand has it both ways.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

Not a variation unless the same brand has it both ways.

That theory is not consistent with the other established T205 variations.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

The biggest variation is not the missing quotes.....it's the giant words POLAR BEAR on the back!

Not a variation unless the same brand has it both ways.

Tell that to the T206 Demmitt and O'Hara collectors, which variations are only available on Polar Bear backed T206 cards.

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

Tell that to the T206 Demmitt and O'Hara collectors, which variations are only available on Polar Bear backed T206 cards.

I think they know it's a St Louis variation for front collectors. No variation for PB collectors.

Well, assuming they know there isn't a non-St Louis PB back.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

I think they know it's a St Louis variation for front collectors. No variation for PB collectors.

Well, assuming they know there isn't a non-St Louis PB back.

I'm a little confused --

All Polar Bear T206 Demmitts are the St. Louis variation. Purely from a printing variation perspective, how is that any different from all Polar Bear T205 Doc Whites not having the quotation marks?

[rdixon1208]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

The biggest variation is not the missing quotes.....it's the giant words POLAR BEAR on the back!

Not a variation unless the same brand has it both ways.

I agree....if all Polar Bear backs are the same, is it really a "variation", or just a PB back?

[Tcards-Please]

Based on a request to SGC on why the Cycle Mathewson wasn't listed on the Master Registry Set, this was their reply:

Hi Frank,

"We have not added it to the Master Set because all Cycle back Mathewsons come this way so it is more of an uncorrected error rather than a variation, but I will revisit that decision a little more in depth and get back to you if anything changes."

Thank you,

Brian

So based on that response from SGC, if all PB Whites are that way, then it would fall into that same category of the Mathewson (though not necessarily an uncorrected error).

My way of thinking is if it is different than the majority of cards, then it should be classified as a variation and listed accordingly in the registry.

Just my 2 cents.

r/
Frank

[Matt]

Frank - Aside from it being incorrect (how could it be an uncorrected error if it was corrected on other backs?) that's an inconsistent response from them as it's no different then Wilhelm suffered. My guess is that they haven't indicated it yet since it has yet to be included in SCD, but it will be shortly and then I'm sure the grading companies will follow.

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by T's please

My way of thinking is if it is different than the majority of cards, then it should be classified as a variation and listed accordingly in the registry.

The Doc (no quotes) White is different than the majority of cards. The difference is that it has a Polar Bear back. A master set of all front/back brand combinations already has this card.

Same thing with the Mathewson. Not a variation either.

And how is SCD going to list this differently? They already acknowledge the White comes with a Polar Bear back.

[marcdelpercio]

Thanks for the reply and the data Joshua. That seems to confirm that it is in fact a variation. I'm surprised that nobody has outed it until now. I didn't figure it would command much of a value premium as the Polar Bear backs seem to be relatively common throughout the set. It is interesting that you haven't noted any other backs besides the four I mentioned. I wonder if this card exists with any other backs.

[marcdelpercio]

egbeachley,
So do you feel that the other print variations mentioned in this thread by myself and Joshua should also not be considered variations? Most if not all of those only occur with one back.

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by marcdelpercio

egbeachley,
So do you feel that the other print variations mentioned in this thread by myself and Joshua should also not be considered variations? Most if not all of those only occur with one back.

The Hoblitzel No Stats is definitely a variation. Same brand with 2 clearly defined differences where a change was made at the printers. Right?

I think the Suffered is more a printing error in that there wasn't a deliberate change in the typeset. But I can see a viewpoint of it being a collectible difference.

Think of it this way, when someone says they have a missing quotes variation of the "Doc", is the reply going to be "oh, you mean a regular Polar Bear back?"

[danmckee]

Are all of the Moran and Gray variations consistant with a specific back like the Wilhelm? Meaning is all brands of the back that these variations are found all have the variation? I thought the Moran and possibly Gray are found with both variations on the same brand back? I am not sure but I think this makes a huge difference as to scarcity and value. I don't think the Wilhelm Piedmont card should command an extra value at all. The Hassan back is much tougher to find for Wilhelm. Thanks, I think Joshua can answer this for me. Dan.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by danmckee

Are all of the Moran and Gray variations consistant with a specific back like the Wilhelm? Meaning is all brands of the back that these variations are found all have the variation? I thought the Moran and possibly Gray are found with both variations on the same brand back? I am not sure but I think this makes a huge difference as to scarcity and value. I don't theink the Wilhelm Piedmont card should command an extra value at all. The Hassan back is much tougher to find for Wilhelm. Thanks, I think Joshua can answer this for me. Dan.

I think everyone is in agreement that the White "no quotes" shouldn't carry any major premium.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Wite3

This variation has been known for awhile by a few collectors and was never really outed until now.

Josh - any chance you want to share any other not publicly known variations? I know you put a ton of work into your research so I understand if you want to keep it close to your vest, but at some point it would be a good idea to get a complete "master" checklist out there.

[Wite3]

Matt (and everyone else)...

I do not have a master list. YET. I have been tracking this set for a long time now. I have seen thousands of different T205s but I still seem to find new ones to confirm. Ask Rawn. He and I were looking for a Polar Bear backed Carrigan for a long time. Just in the past three months, I have seen at least three different ones. I have several other T205s that should exist but just have not seen examples of (not including the really tough backs i.e. Drum, Hindu, Broadleaf) them...like an Honest Long Cut Bates.

As to sharing the information. I made that mistake once before when I shared a great deal of my back information, variation info. (including the Wilhelm), and pop. reports with a fellow collector who said he would help write an article, give me credit, and let me look over the final draft before submitting it. That did not happen and the article was published without me.

Since then, I have been willing to share some of the knowledge I have gathered but stopped publicly sharing my back info. and population reports. I used to share these once a year around September. I stopped doing that in 2004 or 2005.

I am always willing to share information with fellow collectors but putting together a comprehensive list is a massive job and I just did not think there was such a huge interest. As far as I know, the last two variations that I had marked down were the White and the Matty. Anything else is new to me.

Joshua

[Matt]

Josh - thanks; you've put a TON of work into your research and it's your right to keep it private. I was really asking for the full list of variations you know of, not the front/back combos. If the only other ones you know of are the Mathewson "37-1" variation and the White "no quotes" variation then we've got as complete a full checklist as is known at this time.
thank you!