T206 Demmitt & O'Hara....are they 350-only Series cards ?

[tedzan]

You stated......
"I have no idea what you're rambling on about Ted. I don't believe I posted anywhere in the thread you linked.

I didn't say you did.


You stated......
"If you have a problem with Rob, feel free to take it up with him."

I already have.


You stated......
"As far your post to Matt, I'm not trying to distract. I was as direct as can be."

Are you Matt's lawyer ?


You stated......
"It just means they don't understand and/or don't agree with you. It's you who then goes on the personal attack."

Matt and I exchanged at least 24 emails and net54 posts between us trying to resolve our differences regarding
Demmitt & O'Hara.

So, what the hell are you talking about ?
What do you really know ? ? All you have is a kneejerk rush to judgement....without knowing what transpired be-
tween Matt and I.


You stated......
"I also have no problems with Frank Wakefield or Joe P. Again, you're making stuff up. I anxiously await your
apology."

Perhaps, I'll apologize to you when you first apologize to me regarding your sarcastic comments to me in a recent
thread......
"Sorry if that attempt at humor sailed right over your head. I'll try to keep it more lowbrow going forward."


Look, we are just talking past each other. You totally disregard what I am telling you. And, I don't really under-
stand where you are coming from.

At least we have one thing in common......we are NY Yankees fans. So, let's leave it at that.


TED Z

[tedzan]

Rob D

These words of yours......" you're not worth the trouble of responding to anymore. "

You made my day.

[Jim VB]

You stated......
"I have no idea what you're rambling on about Ted. I don't believe I posted anywhere in the thread you linked.

I didn't say you did.

You said Rob and/or I interject the T206 Dunn into unrelated threads. I don't recall ever doing that.


You stated......
"If you have a problem with Rob, feel free to take it up with him."

I already have.

Good. Then leave me out of it.

You stated......
"As far your post to Matt, I'm not trying to distract. I was as direct as can be."

Are you Matt's lawyer ?

That makes no sense at all. Most lawyers are more circumspect than direct. I was merely pointing out you had been rude to Matt on the board.


You stated......
"It just means they don't understand and/or don't agree with you. It's you who then goes on the personal attack."

Matt and I exchanged at least 24 emails and net54 posts between us trying to resolve our differences regarding
Demmitt & O'Hara.

So, what the hell are you talking about ?
What do you really know ? ? All you have is a kneejerk rush to judgement....without knowing what transpired be-
tween Matt and I.

What I'm talking about is that you are a bully. You carry a discussion to a certain point then you want to end it by citing your experience and implying that anyone who disagrees with you isn't very sharp. Matt didn't need my help, but I felt like calling you on it.

You stated......
"I also have no problems with Frank Wakefield or Joe P. Again, you're making stuff up. I anxiously await your
apology."

Perhaps, I'll apologize to you when you first apologize to me regarding your sarcastic comments to me in a recent
thread......
"Sorry if that attempt at humor sailed right over your head. I'll try to keep it more lowbrow going forward."

My "sarcastic comment to you only came after you interjected yourself into a discussion I was having with another board member. You referred derogatorialy, to the "Ohio/Texas dudes". You were so focused on the fact that I made a comment that you didn't even notice that I WAS ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE ARGUMENT YOU WERE. You didn't get my humor. It went over your head and you shot back.


Look, we are just talking past each other. You totally disregard what I am telling you. And, I don't really under-
stand where you are coming from.


I disregard what you're telling me? That's rich, coming from you. You disregard everything that everyone tells you, unless it fits neatly into thta packet of "what you already know."


I started on this discussion by trying to be as polite and respectful to you as possible. I certainly respect all you have done for the hobby in the way of research, but you reduce your reputation when you go on the attack with anyone who dares to ask too many questions or, God forbid, disagrees with your conclusions.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Matt and I exchanged at least 24 emails and net54 posts between us trying to resolve our differences regarding
Demmitt & O'Hara.

So, what the hell are you talking about ?
What do you really know ? ? All you have is a kneejerk rush to judgement....without knowing what transpired be-
tween Matt and I.

I'm only chiming in here to correct the implication that something happened off-line that somehow warrants your post above. I sent you maybe 2 emails a few weeks back on the topic and both were completely civil discussions as best I can recall. If you have them saved, feel free to post any part of them that you feel was not civil.


Edited to add: Just found the two messages I sent. Here they are:
"Ted - I'm not sure our public discussion is of much use to others, but if you are relying on his clarification we should discuss because his logic is badly flawed. I'm happy to continue offline if you think there is value there. Without the survey results in hand, I can 't say for certain, but my guess of of what you have shared is that the statistics may show an 80% likelihood that they are 350 series cards. We already have enough info to know that it is certainly not anything like 95%+.

kind regards,
-Matt"

"Hey Ted - if your premise is that it's more likely then not that they were 350 only series, then I certainly agree. However, your original post which started this stated as fact that we know they are 350 only series and that I don't support. I also don't think it is "very highly likely" as you said in your most recent post, but those are subjective words so maybe you meant 70% to which I do agree.

As far as the team IDs - I did respond in the thread. How is my answer not viable? If it was done for other players why should they be any different?

kind regards,
-Matt"

[FrankWakefield]

When the meteors kill the dinosaurs off of this board, that will be a day the board moves into a new epoch... a time when the collective knowledge has been significantly diminished. A bit more civility and deference would postpone that day.

Maybe instead we'd be better off with an additional alternative site, 'net54 Classic', with old dinosaur opinions and wisdom, no slab or registry stuff... Ted, Dan, and I would fit right in... and a few others.

Peace, guys. Come on!!!!


Polar Bear cards don't depict 150 or 460 series subjects. They depict 350 series subjects. The minor league cards are only in the 350 series, the minor league cards are found with Polar Bear backs. Instead of reading old posts, read Mr. Lipset's article on the white border tobacco cards, then read Scot Reader's work. After that, please return to this... I have difficulty believing that we're talking about Demmitt and O'Hara not being 350 cards. Maybe I'm missing something...

[Matt]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

I have difficulty believing that we're talking about Demmitt and O'Hara not being 350 cards.

Me too.

[tedzan]

We continued our discussion off-Net54 via your 3 emails and my 3 email replies to you. They all pertained
to statistical data regarding T206 mid series cards.

Prior to and after these emails we exchanged info posts on this thread....they can be read in the following
posts......

Matt...... #8, 14, 16, 18, 20, 21, 25, 29

Ted....... #13, 19, 24, 26

As is evident in these posts, there is nothing but meaningful exchanges of information regarding T206 cards
conveyed in these exchanges between Matt and I.

So, all this conjured up crap by the likes of Jim VB, that started in his #48 post here, is imagined sheer B##S.
Simply, intended to instigate disruption in an otherwise very interesting and informative thread.

This is just the latest in a continuing game Rob D and Jim VB have played in recent years on selected threads
on Net54.



TED Z

[Jim VB]

"As is evident in these posts, there is nothing but meaningful exchanges of information regarding T206 cards
conveyed in these exchanges between Matt and I."

Yep. Civil discourse. Oh. You left out post #47 where you told Matt how wrong he was, how his thinking was blurred, and implied that he needed reading lessons.



"So, all this conjured up crap by the likes of Jim VB, that started in his #48 post here, is imagined sheer B##S.
Simply, intended to instigate disruption in an otherwise very interesting and informative thread."

The thread got nasty at #47, not #48. I just got tired of the bully and called him on it in #48.


"This is just the latest in a continuing game Rob D and Jim VB have played in recent years on selected threads
on Net54. "

Again, I don't think I do what you claim. This is the very reason, I usually avoid commenting in your threads. I've probably made 500+ posts on this new board. Very few are confrontational. And fewer still are directed toward you. Until this thread, I can't remember the last time we (you and I) had any discussion. The only threads I have regularly disrupted have been Bruce's. That one's personal. He sent me emails wishing for my death.

If you don't like me, Ted, that's fine. I'll get over it. But in the mean time, please stop lying about me.

Anxiously awaiting your retraction and/or apology. In the meantime, I'm going to bed.

[cfc1909]

this board can be great and is most of the time but I guess once in a while these threads turn from great information into throwing darts.

gas and tolls to Philly-$50

hotel for 2 nights- $215

my half of the table for 3 days- $350

hanging out with Ted and talking cards all weekend- priceless

[tedzan]

Yes, we had a great time at the Valley Forge show last weekend. Although we didn't sell too much cardboard.
But, we sure had a lot fun "talkin baseball" (cards). You and I and Ron Oser.

Then the Wonka man arrived on Sunday and we had a ball discussing 19th Century cards (BB & Non-Sports),
and T206's, and 1947 BB and Movie Stars cards.

Thanks,

TED Z

[tedzan]

The current thread...."New evidence of T206 expanded 350/460 series cards"....reveals the significance of the various shades of GREEN
colored backs found on the T206 SOVEREIGN cards. These color variations are not due to any random effects (i.e., fading, wear, etc.)
Cards, whose backs are "candy apple green", accurately delineate the 350/460 subjects from the other series in the SOVEREIGN issue.
The "forest green" colored backs clearly identify the 350-only series cards.

Regarding the "candy apple green" cards......This 1st group of cards shown here with this shade of green backs are 5 subjects from the
350 series that American Lithographic (ALC) planned to extend into the 350/460 series. Two of them (Kleinow and Smith) were extended
into the 460 series (reflecting their trades). The other 3 were not....since their major league careers ended prior to the 350/460 release
in Summer/Fall of 1910.

Joe Doyle........................traded to Cinci.(May 1910); career ends June 25, 1910
Red Kleinow (NY)..............traded to Boston May 1910
Simon Nicholls (bat)..........traded to Clev (spring 1910); career ends May 1910
Bob Rhoades (arm ext.)......career ends Summer of 1909
Frank Smith (white cap).....traded to Boston in the Summer of 1910.





Some examples of "candy apple green" backs featuring HOFer's from the "350/460" series cards.




..............350-only back for comparison


From this discovery, it can be concluded, with 100% certainty, that the O'Hara (NY); and therefore, its St Louis variation were strictly
part of the 350-only series.

The Demmitt (NY) does NOT exist with any SOVEREIGN back. Since the O'Hara (NY) & (St Louis) cards have been proven to be 350-only
series cards by virtue of the color code of the SOVEREIGN backs......then it follows that the Demmitt (St Louis) is also a 350-only series
card. As both of these St Louis variations were printed in the same POLAR BEAR press run.


TED Z

[tedzan]

Your O'Hara with the SOVEREIGN 350 back is only the 4th one that I have seen.

A really tough front/back combo. So, I'm not surprised that Wonka hasn't seen one.

Best regards ole buddy.

TED Z