Nicholls SC150 649 OP CONTROVERSY

wonkaticket · #1 05-08-2011, 08:12 AM

Thanks Johnny, agree on all points and thanks for having the "nuggets" also to post well said all around.

Really a shame on Ted.

Cheers,

John

mrvster · #2 05-08-2011, 10:36 AM

John!!

THANKS

You Rock!!
You, Jim, Tim, Art and a few other may now be our true "scholars"...please keep up the good work guys!!

Hope you did well in rea

Peace

Johnny

Sterling Sports Auctions · #3 05-08-2011, 10:42 AM

I think what everyone what's is accurate information, if there is no proof a question they they should not be on a confirmed list. We went through the issue with a Cycle 460 card that has a good chance of existing but no one has been able to confirm it's actually existence.

I personally have submitted wrong backs To Bill Brown's Super Set and after being called out I rechecked my scans and found that I was wrong. Ted was even one that brought to question a couple of the cards.

Once again, I think what everyone wants is accurate information,

Lee

wonkaticket · #4 05-08-2011, 11:27 AM

Lee well said.

Abravefan11 · #5 05-08-2011, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tedzan

P.S. Jim is attempting to rationalize his skepticism. But, he has no proof that this Nicholls entry is NOT valid.
TED Z

No, Jim does not have “proof” that the Nicholls entry is not valid but beyond anyone’s ability to produce an auction listing, scan, or other proof that this card does exist, there is additional information that should cause skepticism.

There are indicators that point to the SC 150 649 subjects being printed at the same time as the brown Hindu. If this is true a subject that can be found with SC 649 should be found with brown Hindu as well. All 34 subjects in the SC 649 subset have been confirmed with brown Hindu but Simon Nicholls was not printed with this back.

The brown Hindu printing excluded 1/3 of the available major-league subjects at the time and Simon Nicholls was one. In addition Simon Nicholls was incorrectly added to the brown Hindu list on this site but that entry was removed when shown to be bad.

This isn’t a case of doubting Ted just for the sake of trying to make him look bad as the initial quote implies. A tremendous amount of time has and continues to be invested researching this set and at this point the data shows this card more than likely isn’t a good front/back combo. I believe most people can understand our position and that in the end we only want the information being presented to collectors to be accurate.

wonkaticket · #6 05-08-2011, 10:19 PM

Proof or not, we�re looking at a guy who has not made a few clerical mistakes but an absolute attempt to lie and prove false cards to inflate his ego.

That�s way more than an innocent mistake of opps I made a typo Ted needs to put up or shut up if you will, but all Ted will do is cry the blues and play the victim here and drag innocent collectors into his fantasy land period.

As said before he can't show what he has never owned but never stopped hi from telling anyone what he has done in the hobby and how great he is etc.

If you're new to this board dont go taking Ted Z posts as gospel, they are like fruit some are good and others are rotten and stink.

Cheers,

John

tedzan · #7 05-08-2011, 10:29 PM

Your citing my original research (posted on this forum two years ago) regarding the correlation between the SWEET CAPORAL 150,
Factory 649 (overprint) subjects and their Brown HINDU counterparts. And, I realized at that time that the Nicholls card was the
exception to this correlation. As, Brian Weisner convinced me that a Brown HINDU card of Nicholls will not be found.

So, does a Nicholls card with the SWEET CAPORAL 150, Factory 649 (overprint) back exist ?

At this point, I cannot say it exists or it does not exist. Perhaps, I imagined it several years ago when I put together this sub-set.
Or, perhaps it was an invalid data point in an independent 14,000 card survey. I can say from my experience, though, that several
subjects (e.g. McIntyre, Schlei, Spencer, Wagner, etc.) in this sub-set are considerably more difficult to find than the majority of
the other subjects.

In any event, I've labelled Nicholls as UNCERTAIN on my SWEET CAPORAL 150, Factory 649 list. At the Chicago National this Summer,
I am getting together with an old buddy of mine on a deal, who is bringing his stock of 6,000+ T206's. Many of which are cards with
tougher backs. If this Nicholls card does exist, I expect that he may have one.

TED Z

wonkaticket · #8 05-08-2011, 10:58 PM

"So, does a Nicholls card with the SWEET CAPORAL 150, Factory 649 (overprint) back exist ?At this point, I cannot say it exists or it does not exist."

LOL went from Mission Accomplished and in your collection to not so sure...

"I am getting together with an old buddy of mine on a deal, who is bringing his stock of 6,000+ T206's. Many of which are cards with tougher backs. If this Nicholls card does exist, I expect that he may have one."

Same buddy you sold the mythical AB460's with Cobb too in Oaks...keep digging deeper at this point its more entertainment than anything Ted 6000+ T206's LOL, how about you call him and ask him if he has one? If he does have him send it on I'll pay for grading and give him $500 for the effort and return the card....but wait right he just got rid of his phone this month so you can't call..oh darn the luck.

Once again lots of talk from you with very little substance or images, but please don’t let that stop more story time with Uncle Ted I want to hear how you will get my head spinning or make me “dizzy” with all of your awesomeness.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...ght=green+cobb

"Am I making you "dizzy" Dan ?"

Cheers,

John

cfc1909 · #9 05-09-2011, 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tedzan

Your citing my original research (posted on this forum two years ago) regarding the correlation between the SWEET CAPORAL 150,
Factory 649 (overprint) subjects and their Brown HINDU counterparts. And, I realized at that time that the Nicholls card was the
exception to this correlation. As, Brian Weisner convinced me that a Brown HINDU card of Nicholls will not be found.

So, does a Nicholls card with the SWEET CAPORAL 150, Factory 649 (overprint) back exist ?

At this point, I cannot say it exists or it does not exist. Perhaps, I imagined it several years ago when I put together this sub-set.
Or, perhaps it was an invalid data point in an independent 14,000 card survey. I can say from my experience, though, that several
subjects (e.g. McIntyre, Schlei, Spencer, Wagner, etc.) in this sub-set are considerably more difficult to find than the majority of
the other subjects.

In any event, I've labelled Nicholls as UNCERTAIN on my SWEET CAPORAL 150, Factory 649 list. At the Chicago National this Summer,
I am getting together with an old buddy of mine on a deal, who is bringing his stock of 6,000+ T206's. Many of which are cards with
tougher backs. If this Nicholls card does exist, I expect that he may have one.

TED Z

Ted

First the work is not yours. The SC 649 34 card set is common knowledge, the Nicholls is a Reader confirmation and the Hindu parallel is also common knowledge. You add Nicholls to both lists and your contribution results in an inaccurate list.

We have to continue to listen to what you have accomplished which tells me how insecure you are about the set.
How can the Nicholls go from a card you own to UNCERTAIN on your SC 649 list?

Why wait until the National to see if your buddy has Nicholls 649? Look now and you will see he does not have it.

These backs lists were kept and added to by a group of t206 collectors. The lists were shared with you privately. You started posting them, to see if any could be added to, which is good until you started claiming the work as your own and boasting Mission Accomplished with adding cards on lists that do not exist. Also taking email confirmations with no proof which made most lists inaccurate.

You never state the lists were shared with you.I needed to post about this when collectors started posting they are trying to complete subsets and they are using your lists.

It is necessary for collectors to know your work is separate from any other work done at this point and has been for the past year or so. You have been pleaded with to change lists you are posting, with no results.

I had tried to keep this private but with lists continuing to be inaccurate, I saw no other option.

I'm sure this may look to some people like I'm making a big deal over one confirmation, but anyone that knows all the facts understands that it is a lot more than that. Some of these checklist took collectors years to put together and Ted was shared them, posted them, and claimed them as his own. No one spoke up as this was happening until now because he's ruining that work with confirmations like the Nicholls. It's not just the 649 list but many others as well.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
1888 KIMBALL's (Factory # 649)....show us your N184 cards	tedzan	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	23	12-25-2010 01:31 PM
The rare Brown OLD MILL cards with Factory #649 overprint(s)	tedzan	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	10	09-20-2010 12:53 PM
FS T206 McQuillan Sweet Cap 150 Factory 649 (SOLD)	B O'Brien	Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T	0	09-06-2010 04:02 PM
The rarest..Brown OLD MILL/Factory #649 red overprint	tedzan	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	16	03-04-2010 08:26 AM
Was Plank the 36th card in the Sweet Cap 150 Fac 649 set ?	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	15	01-24-2009 09:11 PM