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

[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.

[Jim VB]

I go away for a few days and return to find that Chicago206 has continued his whirlwind, friend making, tour of Net54.

Since Marshall Barkman III, has anyone alienated more people in a shorter time span?

[lsutigers1973]

Originally Posted by Jim VB

I go away for a few days and return to find that Chicago206 has continued his whirlwind, friend making, tour of Net54.

Since Marshall Barkman III, has anyone alienated more people in a shorter time span?

Get used to it. He does it every where he goes.

[Griffins]

I think many of the objections (including the OP's) to inclusion of this card in the T206 set would not be voiced if this was a $100 card instead of a $40,000. one.
What next? Arguing against American Beauty's because they are narrower?

edited to say- I meant Chicago, not Jon, when stating the objection to inclusion in T206 was due to money and not substance.Apologies.

[canjond]

I, personally, don't feel the lack of additional subjects should preclude its inclusion with the T206 set. In fact, considering that that the brand is called "Ty Cobb" and the slogan "Ty Cobb King of the Smoking World," I actually would find it a little odd if any subject other than Ty Cobb would be included in the packaging. Imagine a Moose Grimshaw Ty Cobb backed card! I also think that when you take a step back and look at the T206 series as actually being 15-16 stand alone sets, all of which have been designated under the umbrella classification of T206, it's much easier to argue for its inclusion.

[bobafett72]

If you need a stiff drink I will send you something.

[sgbernard]

Ted, it was a pleasure shaking the hand of someone with 30+ years (I hope I have that right) of card collecting experience at this year's Philly show. Evcharisto polu for your many knowledgeable posts on T206s, we all stand to learn much from reading.

This is an issue of classification not personal opinion: the crucial factor of distribution puts the card, in my mind, in or out of Jefferson Burdick's ACC designation as a T206 (remember to those, ahem, who post: the T206 is an artificial category created by Burdick to describe a certain class of cards printed and issued in a similar manner in the same time). We can argue until we're blue in the face about what does and doesn't constitute our own definition, but as far as Burdick's is concerned, the fact that these ATC cards were distributed similarly puts them under his same umbrella.

Jon, that was a great call in the first post: I had missed those tobacco stains. I thought, no way he's right, but sure enough the REA card has what can only be tobacco stains and, as you point out, resemble quite clearly the polar bear staining of loose-tobacco. It's a clincher for me. I went back to other Cobb/Cobbs and found no such staining, so as far as I'm concerned this is an important new observation.

[quinnsryche]

Originally Posted by Jim VB

I go away for a few days and return to find that Chicago206 has continued his whirlwind, friend making, tour of Net54.

Since Marshall Barkman III, has anyone alienated more people in a shorter time span?

I thought he was getting out because he didn't like this sort of bickering and arguing, yet he always seems to be at the center of it????

[tedzan]

This card falls within the T206 rubric of being a White-bordered Tobacco card that was printed and issued in the T206 time period
which is 1909-1911. And, we have empirical evidence that this card was issued in 1910.

Of the 15 that are known, some are found with "glossy" fronts and others that have been found without glossy fronts.

Some have tobacco stains and others don't. So, your statements are incorrect.

And, regarding your......
" 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. "

Not, only are there some cards with tobacco stains; but, Shawn has posted several different Georgia newspaper clippings, advertis-
ing Ty Cobb Cut Plug Tobacco (tin).....the Factory (#33 N.C.) is on the tin and the Ty Cobb card.

Finally, the fact that this card stands alone because of its unique back, is a weak argument. The Demmitt and O'Hara (St Louis ver-
sions) stand alone with their single backs (that do not indicate "350 Series")....POLAR BEAR.

Incidently, POLAR BEAR is a Cut Plug Tobacco as is the Ty Cobb Tobacco.

TED Z