T206 carolina brights or brown hindu, which is tougher?

[judsonhamlin]

I think that I would rank the CB's up there with Broadleafs as being more difficult than Hindu

[mrvster]

I was just talking about this today ironically.....cb way tuffer than hindu...close to broadleaf in scarcity.....

[Ronnie73]

I keep track of all T206 rare backs on ebay and here is an exact breakdown starting from a year ago today. Cards listed multiple times were only counted as one card. Numbers are for cards that sold and didn't sell.

American Beauty 460 - 23 cards
Broadleaf 350 - 19 cards
Carolina Brights - 22 cards
Hindu Brown - 70 cards

[DixieBaseball]

Originally Posted by Ronnie73

I keep track of all T206 rare backs on ebay and here is an exact breakdown starting from a year ago today. Cards listed multiple times were only counted as one card. Numbers are for cards that sold and didn't sell.

American Beauty 460 - 23 cards
Broadleaf 350 - 19 cards
Carolina Brights - 22 cards
Hindu Brown - 70 cards

Ronnie - Do you have a break down on the Hindu's with respect to Southern Leaguer's vs non SL Brown Hindu's ? I would think the SL Hindu would be tougher than a regular Hindu to find...

[FrankWakefield]

Hard numbers, Ron. The low number of AB 460s surprises me slightly. Thanks for posting that. Seems most of us recognize that CB's are tougher to come by than Hindu's.

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by Ronnie73

I keep track of all T206 rare backs on ebay and here is an exact breakdown starting from a year ago today. Cards listed multiple times were only counted as one card. Numbers are for cards that sold and didn't sell.

American Beauty 460 - 23 cards
Broadleaf 350 - 19 cards
Carolina Brights - 22 cards
Hindu Brown - 70 cards

Ron those are great numbers and thanks for sharing them. I would expect the brown Hindu numbers to be more than normal as at least one nice size collection of them was sold over several months this year.

[Ronnie73]

Tim is right. There was a couple times that 10+ Hindu's were listed and that can make it seem like the Hindu's are not that rare compared to other backs based on the numbers only. Jeremy, I counted the SL's on the list and it works out to 47 Regulars and 23 SL's. I didn't list it before but the Red Hindu count is 6 for the past year.

[Ronnie73]

Just wanted to add these numbers from the population reports. SGC as of 12/21/2011 - Hindu 639 cards, Carolina Brights 180 cards. PSA as of last update - Hindu 477 cards, Carolina Brights 123 cards.

[Blitzu]

It's always been of interest to me, and this has probably been discussed here at length, but I wonder what the population reports would be like if the 30,000 plus graded PSA cards we're designated by back. There's potentially room for an entire rethinking of rariety with those numbers.

[steve B]

My collection is odd as usual.

American Beauty 460 - 1
Broadleaf 350 - 1
Carolina Brights - 3
Hindu Brown - 2

Steve B

[FrankWakefield]

Blitzu, I think the population report information would be about worthless. First, rarer backed cards are more likely to be graded than common backed cards. Next, lots of the cards have been broken out, and some of those have been resubmitted. Another factor is that the graders had a difficult time in accurately assessing the card, some more than others; and by that I'm not talking about a number grade, but actually identifying the card.

Similarly, to look at a collection, someone might have tried and tried to get one Uzit, one Carolina Brights, one Broadleaf... to then see about 500 white border cards, one of which is a CB and one of which is BL and think that 0.2% of the collection is CB, so it must be that 0.2% of all cards out there are CB... there's the trap. When I started collecting these, I gathered about half a dozen Hindu's without any awareness or conscious effort, it was mainly about the fronts then. That wasn't true for CB or BL...

[Ronnie73]

Frank, I too believe the population numbers are way off due to the reasons you explained but I feel that looking at the overall numbers of graded backs gives an idea of what backs are more rare. We all probably have a good idea on whats more rare anyways but its nice to see some numbers back up our ideas even if the numbers are not that reliable. I have a feeling that the margin of error is about an equal percentage across all card backs and if thats true, the numbers based on percentage only, would be close to accurate. I'm not trying to start a debate with anyone since I do agree the population reports are flawed but I do believe they are somewhat useful.