Ty Cobb with Ty Cobb back

[Vintagecatcher]

Over the years, the board has debated whether this card should be considered part of the T206 set or something unique onto itself.

I find it interesting that PSA has identified it as a T206 in the current REA Auction.

https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=71258


Any thoughts?

Patrick

[White Borders]

Not a T206, but a first cousin like a T213 Coupon Type 1 or a T215 Red Cross Type 1.

Leon, you can lock the thread now

[Ricky]

I don’t love this example, especially the out of register front.

[Rhotchkiss]

It is not uncommon for a Cobb/Cobb to be out of focus, many are.

I am not sure it’s a t206, although, in my opinion, no master t206 back run is complete without the Cobb back.

Anyway, regardless of what a Cobb/Cobb is classified as, it is a fact that they are 100% awesome!

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

It is not uncommon for a Cobb/Cobb to be out of focus, many are.

I am not sure it’s a t206, although, in my opinion, no master t206 back run is complete without the Cobb back.

Anyway, regardless of what a Cobb/Cobb is classified as, it is a fact that they are 100% awesome!

Ryan, is a master T206 back run complete without a Blue Old Mill?

[Rhotchkiss]

Great question Sean. I am starting to believe that one does not need a blue old mill and it’s not a different back. There are 3 known, two of them discovered in last 12 months. I think we need more before they are a recognizable back/back variation. Otherwise they are just oddities; not scrap bc they were certainly put in packs, but oddities like Scott’s blue sovereign. The blue old mill really confounds me- no clue what it is. But I do not think it’s a “back”, and SGC calling it such does not make it so

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Great question Sean. I am starting to believe that one does not need a blue old mill and it’s not a different back. There are 3 known, two of them discovered in last 12 months. I think we need more before they are a recognizable back/back variation. Otherwise they are just oddities; not scrap bc they were certainly put in packs, but oddities like Scott’s blue sovereign. The blue old mill really confounds me- no clue what it is. But I do not think it’s a “back”, and SGC calling it such does not make it so

Oh good, because I have a master back run, and I have no shot at a Blue Old Mill. Unless there is a 50 card find sometime soon.

[BRoberts]

If brown and black Lenoxes are considered two different backs, and if brown Old Mills (in addition to black Old Mills) are considered necessary for a back run, then the idea of excluding a blue Old Mill defies logic. I say this understanding that in our hobby, a card's importance often is understated until that card becomes part of a collection.

There are enough blue Old Mills in existence to warrant them being a legit back.

Obviously just an opinion, and there won't be a consensus reached at this time.

[oldeboo]

Originally Posted by BRoberts

If brown and black Lenoxes are considered two different backs, and if brown Old Mills (in addition to black Old Mills) are considered necessary for a back run, then the idea of excluding a blue Old Mill defies logic. I say this understanding that in our hobby, a card's importance often is understated until that card becomes part of a collection.

There are enough blue Old Mills in existence to warrant them being a legit back.

Obviously just an opinion, and there won't be a consensus won't be reached at this time.

Have to agree with this. If a card has a black back, it's a black back. If a card has a red back, it's a red back. If a card has a pink back, it's a pink back. There's not much confusion for me that one color is different from another color.

If we are going to recognize colors, I don't think we can pick and choose only a few. It's an all or none in my opinion. It matters once even 1 color variation is found if we are looking for colors. With that said, I'm sure there are plenty of unknown color variations out there with some being kept secret by those hunting them.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by oldeboo

Have to agree with this. If a card has a black back, it's a black back. If a card has a red back, it's a red back. If a card has a pink back, it's a pink back. There's not much confusion for me that one color is different from another color.

If we are going to recognize colors, I don't think we can pick and choose only a few. It's an all or none in my opinion. It matters once even 1 color variation is found if we are looking for colors. With that said, I'm sure there are plenty of unknown color variations out there with some being kept secret by those hunting them.

I don't think it's a matter of picking and choosing but more of a matter of
having sufficient evidence that it's legitimate. We can all draw our own
conclusion but frankly I was surprised at how many people think the
blue Sovereign is legitimate despite the tell tale signs that it isn't.

It has bubbling on the front
t206sovereignbluecampbell526.jpg

toning and staining on the back that indicates it was likely soaked from an album page
t206sovereignbluecampbell525.jpg

and a member posted a scan of his T59 where part of the green turned blue
from a chemical reaction.
T59.jpg

[oldeboo]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I don't think it's a matter of picking and choosing but more of a matter of
having sufficient evidence that it's legitimate. We can all draw our own
conclusion but frankly I was surprised at how many people think the
blue Sovereign is legitimate despite the tell tale signs that it isn't.

Thanks for posting those as that makes sense and I can understand that. The video I saw on the blue Old Mill that Uncle Nacki found seems legit, but I can see how people would be suspicious. I'm not an expert on ink or a scientist, however I believe ink color can be manipulated by chemical, light, heat, etc. I guess a big concern now would be if someone can change the colors of these overnight through some process that limits paper damage.