|
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
![]() ![]() (LOL. Sorry couldn't resist that one). There are more I am sure but these are off the top of my head and I don't mess with the Monster to much. Farmore variations to collect than the T205's thank god but none the less most of these are sought after by back collectors and not set builders. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hi all,
The Matty is a variation to me. Not so much because the the stats are off but because it is a Cycle back. All my research points to these cards being printed by the same company in the same location. Several different print runs were produced within 1911 with several different backs. Maybe we could call them parallels instead since that seems to be a more accurate description to me. Also, the correction you think was made may never have happened. As others and I have discussed these were most likely printed with movable types and the other "1" in 11 could have been there to begin with and then broken. In fact, it could have broken on the first printing and there may be only one T205 Matty with the correct stats! Wouldn't that be something. I do think that it was a missed number and corrected in later printings but you never know. Should there be a premium on this card. Absolutely!! The premium should be the same as for any other Cycle card in the set. Nothing more, nothing less. There seem to be as many Cycle Mattys as any other Cycle card and he was not short printed. No extra premium should be attached. As many have also said...collect what you enjoy. Joshua |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well said Josh
|
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thanks Josh for your insight and I agree totally about the Matty. A few other questions:
How are the stray lines and added lines explained? and why the different factory numbers? were they just for the tobacco and had nothing to do with where they were printed? Is it possible they had to reset the typesets with each factory and color and thus causing our problems? Why 2 colors of American Beauty's? If these questioned are answered elsewhere please direct me. Lee |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think the bottom line is that, when these cards were printed, the front design and the back text were intended to be identical regardless of the advertisement. There are really only two conceivable ways that a person can collect a complete T205 set:
1. A true master set which would include every possible front/back combination of every card. We may never even have a checklist of such a set, and certainly never anything approaching an actual complete set. 2. A set of all front/back DESIGNS regardless of advertisement. This is the method of the vast majority of set collectors and thus the way these sets are nearly always checklisted. Either way, both of these cards must be listed separately. If you are attempting option number one, the text variation is incidental and irrelevant. If you are attempting option number two, the ad is incidental and irrelevant. However, there can be no definition of a "complete set" that does not list these cards separately, either by design variation or by ad variation. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Joshua,
Thank you for your explanation. Very helpful. Last edited by Matt E.; 10-19-2009 at 12:01 PM. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
I know this thread is not drawing alot of T206 collectors but you could ask CFC1909. I know for a fact he collects AB backed cards and knows about the color difference. There was also a thread about the sovergeins a bit back. I have notices a few color vaiency with some of my AB backed T205's. I am hoping they were printed about the same time the T206's were and that maybe a flawed ink was to blame for it all. Are they valuable to me?? No but on a T206 they could be |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
SGC/PSA, and their interchanging Master Set Registries, have replaced the Lipset Encyclopedias, the Heitman "Monster" and All Other Scholarly Researched Information.
Also, we mustn't forget to keep checking the interchanging PSA/SGC pop reports.
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Andrew
I think you are alluding to the various green colored backs of the T206 SOVEREIGN issue. I currently have a thread here regarding these variations, titled...... "New evidence of T206 expanded 350/460 series cards". I elaborate on the significance of the different colored backs. TED Z |
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
I just hope I can get any kind of Matty for my set.
It is my favorite card in the whole darn set, and yet my chase continues. I only need 3 more HOFers with Matty being one.I have some of the variations, but not all. Will I chase all the Hobby stat variations? Probably if I can find them for cheap. Will I chase the Moran stray line? Probably if I can find them cheap. Neither are likely- but a few years ago, I never though you could get Terry Turner or Ray Fischer for cheap, yet recent prices on the SPs have plummeted. It all comes down to how much $$ you want to spend to feel 100% complete. The Matty w/ Cycle variation will always go for massive $$. My guess is if and when another one comes up for auction that it will become the second most expensive variation. To me I know I will never get to 100% on the master set because of the Hobby no stats so I really won't lose any sleep over it. If anyone has a Doc White variation PM me
__________________
t205 midgrade and always looking for M101-2 Sporting News Supplements |
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Possible newly discovered T205 variation | marcdelpercio | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 65 | 12-12-2016 05:30 PM |
| WTT: T205 Wilhelm "suffe ed" variation | marcdelpercio | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 10-14-2009 08:56 PM |
| Scarce T205 Shean CUBS variation for sale/trade | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 1 | 09-22-2005 11:54 PM |
| New T205 Variation? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 11-11-2003 01:36 PM |
| T205 Rowan Color Variation? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 19 | 02-22-2002 04:20 PM |