Insights into probable T206 uncut sheets

[tedzan]

Regarding your........
" The magic number for the T206 sheets is not 48 but rather 34. The evidence to back that up is strong.

The Southern League group was 48 however only 34 were printed in the initial run of the Brown Hindu set.

The Brown Hindu set has a confirmed number of 102 total. 34 x 3 = 102

The Coupon Type 1 set has a total of 68. 34 x 2 = 68 "


1.....The OLD MILL or PIEDMONT versions of the Southern League (SL) series clearly consist of 48 cards. The initial printing of the SL series coincided
with the initial Brown HINDU press runs and included only 34 SL cards. These SL cards were most likely printed on a 36-card sheet (or 48-card sheet).
In any event, Major Leaguer's cards (or Double-Prints of the some of the SL cards) were included to fill out these sheets.

It is apparent in the design structure of the T206 set, that 6 is the lowest common denominator. You cannot dismiss this fact, as it is evident through-
out the various T206 series. The make-up of each of the 5 series (150, 350, 350/460, 460, Southern League) is divisible by 6. Furthermore, this factor
is evident in the sub-series (150-only, super-prints, horizontal cards, etc.) This is not a mere coincidence, it was by design.
And my friend, 6 does not factor into 34. I don't see "34" as being any kind of a "magic number" in the production of T206's. The number 34 only exists
with the initial Brown HINDU run of the SL cards.

Incidently, regarding Brown HINDU cards, there are 105 confirmed Major Leaguer cards (not 102).


2.....The 1910 Coupon set consists of 48 Major Leaguer (ML) cards and 20 SL cards. As you know, the 48 ML subjects are derived from the 350-only
Series. Now, I think it has been established (and you'll agree) that the FRONTS of the T206 sheets were printed first. Blank-backed cards of T206's
with "wet ink transfers" of fronts have confirmed this.
So, the American Litho. Co. (ALC) stocked these pre-printed sheets of T206's; and, when an order was received from the various Tobacco Factories,
ALC would then print that brand on the backs of these sheets. Then ship the completed T206's to that respective factory.

Circa Spring of 1910, orders arrived from the ATC's newly acquired COUPON Tobacco Company. ALC grabbed some 48-card blank-backed sheets during
the printing of their 350 series ML cards; and, printed the "COUPON" backs on them. Similarly, ALC grabbed some sheets of blank-backed SL cards and
selected 20 - SL subjects, representing the Southern Association, and printed the "COUPON" backs on them. Multiple sets of these 68 cards were then
shipped to Factory #3 in Louisiana to be inserted in the COUPON cigarette packs.


TED Z

[teetwoohsix]

Great topic TedZ. Where were the cards cut down from the sheet into the singles? The ALC or the factories?

Also, this thread reminded me of a thread fellow board member Jantz started awhile back where he made some very convincing discoveries regarding similarities between certain wet sheet transfers and the 12 card possible T206 sheet. I'll try to add link below......

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...ht=T206+sheets

Clayton

[tedzan]

I would say that the cards were cut at ALC for the following reasons......

1.....ALC was in the business of producing high quality lithographs. The T-factory's were in the business of manufacturing & packaging tobacco products.

2.....It was easier to ship stacks of individual cards (rather than uncut sheets).....which would have been subject to damage.

3.....Finally, if the cards were cut at the Factory, there would have been a higher probability of finding uncut sheets of T206's these past 100 years.

And then, I might be wrong about this, but that's how I see it.


TED Z

[Abravefan11]

Ted I am going to politely disagree with just about everything in your last post directed at me.

Originally Posted by tedzan

1.....The OLD MILL or PIEDMONT versions of the Southern League (SL) series clearly consist of 48 cards. The initial printing of the SL series coincided
with the initial Brown HINDU press runs and included only 34 SL cards. These SL cards were most likely printed on a 36-card sheet (or 48-card sheet).
In any event, Major Leaguer's cards (or Double-Prints of the some of the SL cards) were included to fill out these sheets.

Yes, the Southern League group consists of 48 cards but ALC made the decision to reduce the number printed in the brown Hindu print run to 34. All 34 of these images were printed on one sheet and the Brown Old Mill cards back this up. If there was room for 36 front images why only print 34? In later print runs of Piedmont 350 and Old Mill southern league cards the sheets front image combinations could have and more than likely were different.

Originally Posted by tedzan

It is apparent in the design structure of the T206 set, that 6 is the lowest common denominator. You cannot dismiss this fact, as it is evident through-
out the various T206 series. The make-up of each of the 5 series (150, 350, 350/460, 460, Southern League) is divisible by 6. Furthermore, this factor
is evident in the sub-series (150-only, super-prints, horizontal cards, etc.) This is not a mere coincidence, it was by design.
And my friend, 6 does not factor into 34. I don't see "34" as being any kind of a "magic number" in the production of T206's. The number 34 only exists
with the initial Brown HINDU run of the SL cards.

I don’t think there is any pattern in the T206 set of the number 6 that I have seen that is anything more than coincidence to the point you’re trying to make. Yes there are six super prints and six horizontal cards but that number has nothing to do with the makeup of a T206 sheet that I am aware of. It’s just several incidences of the number six within a huge set. In large amounts of data false patterns are often found but are otherwise meaningless. It's called apophenia.

Originally Posted by tedzan

Incidently, regarding Brown HINDU cards, there are 105 confirmed Major Leaguer cards (not 102).

My confirmed list is at 102. If and when I see the other 3 I will gladly add them. Until I do I will admittedly be a little skeptical that they exist.

Originally Posted by tedzan

2.....The 1910 Coupon set consists of 48 Major Leaguer (ML) cards and 20 SL cards. As you know, the 48 ML subjects are derived from the 350-only
Series. Now, I think it has been established (and you'll agree) that the FRONTS of the T206 sheets were printed first. Blank-backed cards of T206's
with "wet ink transfers" of fronts have confirmed this.
So, the American Litho. Co. (ALC) stocked these pre-printed sheets of T206's; and, when an order was received from the various Tobacco Factories,
ALC would then print that brand on the backs of these sheets. Then ship the completed T206's to that respective factory.

Circa Spring of 1910, orders arrived from the ATC's newly acquired COUPON Tobacco Company. ALC grabbed some 48-card blank-backed sheets during
the printing of their 350 series ML cards; and, printed the "COUPON" backs on them. Similarly, ALC grabbed some sheets of blank-backed SL cards and
selected 20 - SL subjects, representing the Southern Association, and printed the "COUPON" backs on them. Multiple sets of these 68 cards were then
shipped to Factory #3 in Louisiana to be inserted in the COUPON cigarette packs.

This theory isn’t plausible as Coupon Type 1’s were printed on a different stock. The Coupon Type 1 was a set comprised of its own unique front image combinations consisting of 68 cards.

One day Ted you're going to allow me to change your opinion on something regarding this set.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Circa Spring of 1910, orders arrived from the ATC's newly acquired COUPON Tobacco Company. ALC grabbed some 48-card blank-backed sheets during
the printing of their 350 series ML cards; and, printed the "COUPON" backs on them. Similarly, ALC grabbed some sheets of blank-backed SL cards and
selected 20 - SL subjects, representing the Southern Association, and printed the "COUPON" backs on them. Multiple sets of these 68 cards were then
shipped to Factory #3 in Louisiana to be inserted in the COUPON cigarette packs.

The second part of this bit makes no sense from a production standpoint if I'm understanding it correctly.

They took 48 card sheets of SL players and printed coupon backs on 20 of them? Leaving 28 cards blank or printing some other back on them at the same time or discarding more than half of each sheet? It's possible, but the first option of leaving some blank would leave them with a smaller sheet to print backs on later - a big nuisance. Multiple backs on the same sheet would be possible, and they could probably handle it, but there's always a big possibility of getting the brands mixed up.
Discarding more than half the sheet would be very unlikely. That percentage of waste wouldn't be tolerated unless the customer paid for the whole sheet.

Steve B

[tedzan]

OK folks, check this out......


SERIES..................CARDS

150-only...................12

150/350..................144

350........................270

460..........................48

So. Lge.....................48

....................total = 522


Furthermore, within these Series are the following sub-sets......

Super-Prints = 6 cards

Horizontal designs = 6 cards

Texas Leaguers. = 6 cards

350/460 Series (design intent) = 66 subjects
Note....5 cards are 460 series No-Prints (due to retirements, or trades at the time of printing)


It is obvious that the number of cards in each of the Series is divisible by 6. Therefore, did 6
factor into the design of the T206 set ?

Or, is it just mere coincidence ?

We report....you decide ? ?



TED Z

[barrysloate]

I've never once used apophenia in a sentence. Good word.

[tedzan]

Clever....however, the data in my above post indicates that this word was misused.

As, there is a definite pattern in the design of each series in the T206 set.


TED Z

[FrankWakefield]

From reading through this, it seems to me that 12 is a significant number... not 34.

Thank you mkdltn, for the post about the press. (Are those letters for Mark Dalton?)

And I was aware of apophenia, but had not encountered the word for it. Thanks for posting that. Is there a word for when someone sees a pattern or connection that others don't, while seeing randomness and perceiving others suffer from apophenia? What would that be? I think Ted's line of thought seems more likely.

And I don't think it was suggested up there that a sheet of 48 was printed so that 20 could be gleaned from it and the rest discarded.

[tedzan]

You are correct in that I did not say (or imply) that a pre-printed 48 card sheet of Southern Leaguers (SL)
was used to print the "COUPON" backs.

It could have been as small as a 24-card sheet, in which the 20 Southern Association SL were gleaned from.

And, if they discarded 4 cards, big deal. As scarce as these 1910 COUPON cards are, I don't think ALC printed
to many of them.

TED Z

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

Is there a word for when someone sees a pattern or connection that others don't, while seeing randomness and perceiving others suffer from apophenia?

Frank I'm no alone in the belief that the number 34 is significant in the printing process. My use of apophenia was not meant to be condescending to Ted but rather illustrate how patterns can be seen but have no meaning. John Nash (A Beautiful Mind) is a great example of the best and worst of seeing patterns.

Remember we are looking for patterns in the printing process to gain insight into how a T206 sheet would have been laid out.

Using the number of examples in each given series and relating it to the printing process doesn't work. For example the 150 Only group of 12 that Ted cited above. Their only relationship is that they were not continued into the 350 series. There are no indicators that they were related in the printing process but actually the contrary as some can be found with backs others can not. The completed number of printed examples over a period of time does not give us proof of the number printed at a specific time.

Yes there were a total of 48 Southern Leaguers and 48 is a multiple of 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 but that is not how the cards were printed so it gives us no insight into how a sheet would have been set up.

The Southern League group that I have researched and studied at great length does give us insight into the printing process at a specific time. As my research has shown all 48 of the SL players were decided upon early in 1909. However when the first run of SL players were printed in the brown Hindu offering the number was reduced to 34. Most importantly all brown Old Mill cards are from this group of 34 which indicates they were all on one sheet. No major league player has ever been found with a brown Old Mill back indicating no other players were on the sheet but these 34.

So why would ATC or ALC reduce the intended number of Southern League players to be included in the set from 48 to 34 if not because 34 was the number of available images that could be printed on each sheet? A number not divisible by 6 or 12.

Is it a coincidence that a pre printed sheet of Sweet Caporal 150's were over printed with Factory 649 and the number of cards in that set is 34?

[NYHighlanderFan]

And then there are the American Beauty cards which are narrower than the other brands because of the old theory they were inserted into 8-packs.

[Jantz]

One interesting point I would like to add to this thread is that over the last 3 years I have seen 16 T206s with two different player's names on the same card. All 16 cards were from either the 150/350 group or 350 only group.

Two of these cards were of Lundgren(Cubs) and the names on the top were of Doolin and Ball(NY).

Also, Cicotte's name has appeared on the top of two different cards. One was on a card of Spade and the other of Abbaticchio(Brown). The latter could lead us to believe that the cards were not arranged alphabetically.

I have yet to see a two different name T206 from the 350/460 or 460 only groups. If a board member has one, I would sure like to see a scan of it.

As far as the 460 only group, Clayton has posted a link (post #17) to some of my research on that group.

By the way, Thank you Clayton for doing that.

Great thread topic Ted!


Jantz

[yoyot1]

Originally Posted by Jantz

One interesting point I would like to add to this thread is that over the last 3 years I have seen 16 T206s with two different player's names on the same card. All 16 cards were from either the 150/350 group or 350 only group.

Can you post the list of the 16 you have seen? I've tried to track this but think I only have seen 14. Thanks

[Jantz]

Tom

Here is the list:

Card - Name on top - Back (if known)

1. Killian(Pitching) - Chance - Piedmont 150
2. Lundgren(Cubs) - Doolin - back unknown
3. Lundgren(Cubs) - Ball(NY) - back unknown
4. Phillippe - Engle - Piedmont 350
5. Snodgrass(Batting) - Maddox - Piedmont 350
6. Atz - Hoffman - back unknown
7. Hoblitzell - Stephens - back unknown
8. Abbaticchio(Brown) - Cicotte - back unknown
9. Elberfeld(NY) - Parent - Piedmont 350
10. Delehanty(Wash.) - Waddell - back unknown
11. Jennings(Port) - Jordan(Brkln) - back unknown
12. Pickering - Myers - Sweet Caporal 350
13. Lindaman - Bresnahan(Port) - Piedmont 150
14. McElveen - Dygert - back unknown
15. Killian(Port) - Dubuc - Sweet Caporal 350
16. Spade - Cicotte - Piedmont 150

Hope this helps

Jantz

[yoyot1]

Thanks - the back on the Jennings/Jordan is P350, I own that one: link

I have the Engle/Phillippe listed with the Engle on the bottom, Phillippe on top.

I also have 4 side by side possibilities listed, based on scans I've seen (left/right):

Fletcher/Charles
Sheckard, no glove/Goode
Schirm/Mullin portrait
Willett/LaPorte

Any others known like that?

Tom