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

[Leon]

While I respect Scot Reader's voluminous writings on T206 there is clearly not a consensus on the Cobb back as being included or not, in T206. That being said there would be no "T206" without the person that invented it, Jefferson Burdick. If anything, when there is not a clear consensus on an issue, we should go back to what Burdick wrote since he is the one that imagined it. There is no debate that he came up with the ACC system of classifying cards in the US. And I realize that even Jefferson said his ACC was, and always will be, a work in progress. He stated the Cobb back was a T206.

[Chicago206]

Originally Posted by Leon

While I respect Scot Reader's voluminous writings on T206 there is clearly not a consensus on the Cobb back as being included or not, in T206. That being said there would be no "T206" without the person that invented it, Jefferson Burdick. If anything, when there is not a clear consensus on an issue, we should go back to what Burdick wrote since he is the one that imagined it. There is no debate that he came up with the ACC system of classifying cards in the US. And I realize that even Jefferson said his ACC was, and always will be, a work in progress. He stated the Cobb back was a T206.

Just because something is initially classified as "x", doesnt make it neccesarily a fact. Case in point is the Tuatara. It was originally classified as a lizard in 1831. It looks like a typical lizard, and the classification persisted for 36 more years. Then it was debated that there were in fact subtle, yet important differences (kinda like what we are discussing here). Its classification was changed in 1867. Whats a lizard have to do with a baseball card? It simply goes to show that classifications can be wrong, even by the person who first classifies them! Its really no different than what we are talking about.

[E93]

Originally Posted by Chicago206

Whats a lizard have to do with a baseball card? It simply goes to show that classifications can be wrong, even by the person who first classifies them! Its really no different than what we are talking about.

Yes, but you have given no indication of where the Ty Cobb brand violates the original classification scheme.

White border baseball subject: Yes
Premium advertising at ATC brand on back: Yes
Produced between 1909-1911: Yes

You attempted to show where it violated it by claiming there needed to be 350+ subjects. That arbitrary scheme, which would eliminate several other T206 brands as well, is NOT the criteria Burdick used.

You can try to show where it violates the classification scheme set up by Burdick, but you cannot change his classification scheme and still call it "T206". It is not your designation to change.
JimB

[Abravefan11]

Jon - You're right I was just asking about who controlled Penn and when. Not trying to reinvent the wheel, but rather actually participate in the research.

[ChiefBenderForever]

One thing fot certain is Ty Cobb is king of tobacco and Jim Morrison is king of lizards.

[sgbernard]

Joe, your T206 set will never be complete without this card:

[Potomac Yank]

Originally Posted by sgbernard

Joe, your T206 set will never be complete without this card:

*

Until now, I thought all I needed was the stinkin Wagner ... now you found that beautful unknown, and unseen by Ted, The Missing Abbaticcio back.

I Gotta Have It!

Why are you doing this to me? .....