T205 American Beauty Back Question

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by tedzan

This phenomena falls back to my "Factory #649 theory" regarding no T205 or T206 Cobb's inserted in packs from this Rochester, NY plant.


Joshua

Have you ever seen a HASSAN (Factory #649) Cobb ?

I would bet that they are all Factory #30 HASSAN Cobb's.


TED Z

This conspiracy theory continues to be perpetuated which shows in the case of T206's a basic misunderstanding of how the cards were printed and distributed.

I can't speak directly to the T205 Hassan backs as I admittedly don't know a lot about them but I do know that T202's were printed with Cobb on both the center and end panels with Hassan backs and distributed out of Factory 649.

In fact Cobb was literally the poster boy for Hassan cigarettes.

[wonkaticket]

Tim, great point.

[tedzan]

Why are you comparing "apples with oranges" ?

I have NEVER stated that the two subsequent issues (T201's and T202's) to the T206's and T205's did not have Cobb's out
of Factory 649.
Indeed, I have a complete T201 set with both MECCA (Factory 30 & 649) Cobb's. Furthermore, I have a T202 Cobb with a
HASSAN (Factory 649) back. So, this is nothing new.

Can you please stick the the subject which pertains only to the T206's and T205's, as I have theorized......

Show us any of the four Cobb's in the T206 set with a HINDU (Factory 649) back ?

Or, show us a T205 Cobb with a HINDU or a HASSAN (Factory 649) back ? ?

I don't think you can....Tim !

It is you, who apparently has a basic misunderstanding of how certain cards were printed and distributed.


TED Z

[Abravefan11]

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/.../2009/169.html

[tedzan]

Come on now....even you have stated your doubts regarding the authenticity of that card in a thread a few months ago.

Are you recanting you previous belief ?

The history of that Cobb card starts approx. 10 years ago when there was a rash of re-fronted T206 star cards with red HINDU
backs. Most of which were so professionally done that they were graded by both PSA and SGC.


TED Z

[Abravefan11]

I have stated that I can understand why some people would question the particular card in the REA auction but the Red Cobb/Red Hindu is definitely a possible front back combination in the T206 set. I base that on factual data and sound research, not wild speculation. If you prefer to weave a tall tale of Cobb being slighted by Factory 649 then by all means don't let me get in the way of a good story, I just want those that are interested to know that it's just that...a story.

[Abravefan11]

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=130340

Post # 7

"I realize the Cobb Red Hindu that was sold not to long ago had a great deal of doubt surrounding it and I won't argue one way or the other for it's being good. I will just say I believe a Cobb (Red Portrait) Red Hindu is a possible front back combination."

[wonkaticket]

Ted,

I have to ask you something and I’m not going to get into a fight with you on this as I’m done but I will still ask with all due respect.

A theory by its definition since we have very little hard facts to show why any card was not printed with a certain back or from a certain factory falls under the speculative definition of a theory. Or an unproven assumption or conjecture because there is no real smoking gun here with hard facts to back up, no true firsthand knowledge etc.

Let’s be real here it’s 100 years later. We can speculate and make educated guesses? Sure we can and some real and new evidence does come to light on occasion allowing us a brief window into our hobby’s past. But most often all we have is our educated speculations.

So why is it anytime you present any kind of theory or educated speculative guess it’s presented as fact, and all others are set and defined by you as unqualified dullards who need to do their homework?

Would it not be fair to take the stance that the evidence Tim has presented could also lead him to a different speculative theory that may not 100% match with your speculative thoughts? Does that make Tim or anyone else’s ideas less credible because they don’t agree with yours?

Fact is you have no known firsthand knowledge of any of these things you constantly speak of.

Having collected cards in the 1980’s only brings you 31 years closer to being totally removed from firsthand knowledge of how and these premiums were distributed and produced the way they were.

You have a very bad habit of stating something or insinuating/eluding something as fact or definitive but the only true constant is you really don’t know and are making nothing more than an educated guess. Many folks respect your thoughts perhaps you should do the same for others.

I will provide you with an example of this…from the recent T213 thread Leon started with his wonderful trade newsletters and checklists from the past.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=137300

In this thread you present your speculative theory on how Coupon Type 1 cards were distributed etc. But then you make the following comments.

“Do we really know if these cards were actually inserted into packs? Perhaps these cards may have been distributed like the Ty Cobb/Ty Cobb card......not as inserts.”

The comment above insinuates or alludes to the fact that you have firsthand knowledge that Ty Cobb branded cards were not distributed as inserts with the tobacco. The facts are that we have no idea if they were or were not distributed with the product or how they even came to be within the marketplace.

We can speculate given things we do know, but one person’s thoughts as long as presented in a reasonable fashion are as valid as anyone else’s.

Just my take, I’m sure you will disagree and you know what that’s ok.

Cheers,

John

P.S. I will leave you guys to it I have some happy hour drink special cards to price in the BST area.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

I have stated that I can understand why some people would question the particular card in the REA auction but the Red Cobb/Red Hindu is definitely a possible front back combination in the T206 set. I base that on factual data and sound research, not wild speculation. If you prefer to weave a tall tale of Cobb being slighted by Factory 649 then by all means don't let me get in the way of a good story, I just want those that are interested to know that it's just that...a story.

"Wild speculation" ! ?

Was this my wild speculation when I hypothesized that T206 BROAD LEAF 460 cards are "matched twins" with Red HINDU cards last year in this thread
that I posted ........ ?
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...+460+red+hindu

And, that T206 AMERICAN BEAUTY 460 and UZIT cards are also "matched twins".

Furthermore, I hypothesized that these two groups of T206's are mutually exclusive with respect to each other.

Again, I ask you....was all this the result of my "wild speculation" ? ?


So, given these so-called "story's" of mine that have been proven to be true......since a red Cobb exists with a BROAD LEAF 460, it should have been printed
with a Red HINDU back.

But, in all these years of collecting T206's....NO one has seen a legitimate Red Cobb with a Red HINDU back. It is apparently a rule-breaker.


TED Z

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by tedzan

It is apparently a rule-breaker.

TED Z

There are no "rule-breaker" cards in the T206 set, only bad rules.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by tedzan

But, in all these years of collecting T206's....NO one has seen a legitimate Red Cobb with a Red HINDU back. It is apparently a rule-breaker.


TED Z

First of all these threads are learning experiences for me....even if I have been told before , I tend to forget so appreciate the information being thrown out again. Ok, so if a T205 Cobby/Drum won't exist then I will be happy with a Johnson w/Hindu. I will spare ya'll showing it again. Maybe the next thread .

However, as someone that almost owned the red Cobby/red Hindu card I think it's real. I haven't held it in my hand but I know who consigned it to REA and respect their judgement as well as REA's judgement.....and as well as the grading company who put it in a holder, that it is in fact real. Just my thought on that....but I have no empirical evidence other than what everyone else has...To me it's real.

John, Tim, Ted- I appreciate ya'll keeping the debate civil. It seems to me anything that is not proven 100% means there is still a chance that things can be proven differently...in other words I hope everyone making theories understands they are just that (as John said in a few more words than that). regards