What We Have Learned About Ty Cobbs With a Ty Cobb Back

[wonkaticket]

Originally Posted by Chicago206

" Please name the 350+ Uzit, or Drum, or Carolina Brights subjects that qualify those brands as "T206" by your definition. "
Ever seen a Drum backed card? Whats it say right beneath "Base Ball Series"? Just because not all 350 subjects have been accounted for does not mean they do not exist. I can tell you FOR A FACT however that just 1 solitary subject exists for the Cobb back!

Do you even want to know why that statement is all wrong? Do you even care to learn or are you here just to hang out and bang on your keyboard?

Just asking before myself or any of us try to inform someone who just doesn't care to be informed.

[teetwoohsix]

Well,the one thing I've learned recently is that not all Cobb/Cobb's have the glossy finish on the front.

I wouldn't doubt if some of these cards had been packaged directly with the tobacco-there's always the possibility that they were distributed in multiple ways?

You would think there would be a little more data out there on this,seeing how popular Ty Cobb was-hopefully one day more information will surface about this-that would be awesome!!!

Sincerely,Clayton

[tedzan]

Hey Chicago206....why don't you start using the SEARCH feature here....before you post on subjects you are ill-informed of ?

We had several threads on this subject and here is the most recent one; and, the most informative.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...2Fty+cobb+back

This thread garnered almost 100 posts and we were able to come up with new info. regarding this mysterious Ty Cobb card,
that dates it within the "350 series" period (1910) of the T206 press runs.

Sit down, take a deep breath, and take the time to read every post in this thread. Then if you have any intelligent questions,
we will try to answer them.

Prior to this thread (Jan 2009), I was skeptical regarding this Cobb card. Now, I feel it should be considered as a T206.






TED Z

[uniship]

"Prior to this thread (Jan 2009), I was skeptical regarding this Cobb card. Now, I feel it should be considered as a T206."


Ted - i did not know you had a change of opinion on this issue. To me this is huge news as clearly you are one of the most respected and knowledgable T206 collectors out there.

[Chicago206]

Ted, I have read that thread. Just because ATC made this card during the same period the other T206 cards were made means nothing. The United States mint was making Phillipines coinage in the exact same facility, and at the exact same time as they produced our coinage. Yet, not many would consider a 10 centavos to be a "U.S." coin.

When a card such as the Cobb back actually has more differences than similarities then other T206's, perhaps its time to consider it is simply a different species....even though it is very closely related. Subjects, Gloss, and Distribution concerns are the biggies here. They dont match the pattern of any of the other 15 cigarette brands. CLEARLY the Cobb back IS different Ted, or else we wouldnt even be having this discussion. And the discussion keeps coming up. Whats that tell you?

[smokelessjoe]

Found this in the book, "Ty Cobb: Safe at Home"...

Says the article is from the March 10 1910 Augusta Ga. Paper.

Though the image is blurry, notice that is says "Now on the market 10 cents the? package - Try One"

[tedzan]

Great piece, Thanks for posting.


TED Z

[tedzan]

1st....to compare the striking of various coins at the US Mint to the printing of T206 cards at American Lithographic
during 1909-1911 is totally absurd.

2nd....Regarding your......." When a card such as the Cobb back actually has more differences than similarities then
other T206's "


REALLY NOW ? ?

Is it not a White-Bordered card ?

Does it not have BROWN lettering in its caption ?

Does it not have the T206 stylistic designed back ?

Is the front not American Lithographic's SIGNATURE PICTURE (the red Cobb) ?

Finally, was it not printed and issued in the Spring/Summer of 1910 ?


Please answer these 5 questions....if you avoid them then my conversation with you ceases....as it is not worth my
time to debate with you.


TED Z

[Chicago206]

Originally Posted by tedzan

1st....to compare the striking of various coins at the US Mint to the printing of T206 cards at American Lithographic
during 1909-1911 is totally absurd.

2nd....Regarding your......." When a card such as the Cobb back actually has more differences than similarities then
other T206's "


REALLY NOW ? ?

Is it not a White-Bordered card ?.....Yes, but so are the majority of other baseball cards.

Does it not have BROWN lettering in its caption ?.....The letters are brown....again, this is NOT exclusive to just T206 cards.

Does it not have the T206 stylistic designed back ? .....It has a cigarette ad on the reverse...but so do T205's, T213's , etc, etc.

Is the front not American Lithographic's SIGNATURE PICTURE (the red Cobb) ?.....Again, I do not debate that ATC made the card. T213's also present the EXACT SAME pictures as T206's, yet they are a different series.

Finally, was it not printed and issued in the Spring/Summer of 1910 ?....Time of issue holds little weight as to inclusion into a group. In 1987, there were Topps, Donruss, and Fleer cards. ALL 3 were issued around the same time, yet all 3 are distinctly seperate issues.


Please answer these 5 questions....if you avoid them then my conversation with you ceases....as it is not worth my
time to debate with you.


TED Z

In summary, each of the similarities/differences hold a weighted value. For example, saying they both have white borders means almost nothing since I can list over 100 other sets of cards (tobacco and not) that were also issued with white borders. In fact, thats like saying "They are both made from cardboard!". Simply a ridiculous comparrison. The difference that holds the most weight is the number of subjects. That alone precludes the Cobb back from being categorized with the other 15 brands as being T206. It is a "stand alone" issue which we dont even have concrete evidence that it was even distributed with tobacco. If...and thats a big if....it were ever discovered that the card WAS NOT distributed with tobacco (like ALL other T206's were), then its clearly not a T206 card.