The T206 350-Only Series - Some Observations on Available Backs

[jimonym]

This is building off of Ted's comments in his Old Mill thread.

My numbers are a couple months old, but these back brands are pretty common and it’s unlikely there are too many front/back combinations still hiding out there that we haven’t confirmed.

There are 210 cards in the 350-only series:
Old Mill = 85 confirmed (40%)
EPDG = 102 confirmed (49%)

These 210 cards can be divided into four groups: those confirmed with both backs, those with neither, those with only Old Mill, and those with only EPDG:
Both = 73 confirmed out of 210 (35%)
Neither = 95 confirmed out of 210 (45%)
Old Mill and not confirmed with EPDG = 12 out of 210 (6%)
EPDG and not confirmed with Old Mill = 30 out of 210 (14%)

As you can see, it’s much more likely that a given 350-only card will either a) be found with both Old Mill and EPDG or b) will not be found with either back.

Here are the 12 cards in my notes that have been seen with Old Mill but have not been seen with EPDG:
Elberfeld (Portrait, Washington)
Hoffman (St. Louis)
Brown (Washington)
Dahlen (Brooklyn)
Hayden
Jones (Detroit)
Kleinow (Catching, NY)
Young (Minneapolis)
Fiene (Portrait)
Hoffman (Providence)
Hulswitt
McGlynn

I’d love to be proven wrong on any of these, so if you have one with an EPDG back please share it.


On the other side of things are the 30 cards that have been seen with EPDG but not with Old Mill:
Lundgren (Kansas City)
Demmitt (NY)
McAleese
Rhoades (Hands at Chest)
Doolan (Fielding)
Howard (Chicago)
Collins (Minneapolis)

Adkins
Barbeau
Barger
Brashear
Bresnahan (Batting)
Burchell
Davidson
Evans
Gray
Groom
Lattimore
Lord
Maddox
Mattern
McLean
Miller (Pittsburg)
Nattress
Phillippe
Puttman
Schlafly
Shannon
Sharpe
Snodgrass (Batting)

I’ve cut the list into two because a closer look at them reveals an interesting split. To see it though you have to add in two other back possibilities that we can be pretty sure we know all the front/back combinations for (Sovereign and Polar Bear). Again there are four possible groups: those confirmed with both Sovereign and Polar Bear, those with neither, those with only Sovereign, and those with only Polar Bear. I’ll break this out over the full 210 cards of the 350-only series so it’s a little easier to follow.

Group 1: 350-only cards confirmed with both Sovereign and Polar Bear = 93 cards (44% of all 350-only cards)
Within this group of 93 cards:
Confirmed with both Old Mill and EPDG = 48 out of 93 (52%)
Not confirmed with either = 37 out of 93 (40%)
Confirmed with Old Mill but not EDPG = 6 out of 93 (6%)
Confirmed with EPDG but not Old Mill = 2 out of 93 (2%) = Howard (Chicago) & Collins (Minneapolis)

Group 2: 350-only series cards not confirmed with either Sovereign or Polar Bear = 16 cards (just 8% of all 350-only cards)
Within this group of 16 cards:
Confirmed with both Old Mill and EPDG = 0 out of 16 (0%)
Not confirmed with either = 11 out of 16 (69%)
Confirmed with Old Mill but not EDPG = 2 out of 16 (13%)
Confirmed with EPDG but not Old Mill = 3 out of 16 (19%) = Lundgren (KC), Demmitt (NY), & McAleese

Group 3: 350-only series cards confirmed with Sovereign but not Polar Bear = 51 cards (24% of all 350-only cards)
Within this group of 51 cards:
Confirmed with both Old Mill and EPDG = 19 out of 51 (37%)
Not confirmed with either = 28 out of 51 (55%)
Confirmed with Old Mill but not EDPG = 2 out of 51 (4%)
Confirmed with EPDG but not Old Mill = 2 out of 51 (4%) = Rhoades (Hands at Chest) & Doolan (Fielding)

Group 4: 350-only series cards confirmed with Polar Bear but not Sovereign = 50 cards (24% of all 350-only cards)
Within this group of 50 cards:
Confirmed with both Old Mill and EPDG = 6 out of 50 (12%)
Not confirmed with either = 19 out of 50 (38%)
Confirmed with Old Mill but not EDPG = 2 out of 50 (4%)
Confirmed with EPDG but not Old Mill = 23 out of 50 (46%)

So 23 of that group of 30 cards that have been confirmed with EPDG but not with Old Mill fit into Group 4 (have Polar Bear but not Sovereign), leaving only 7 rule-breakers.


As a last point, on T213-1s. There are 42 T213-1 cards of major leaguers from the 350-only series. Here’s how they fall into the four groups I outlined above:
Group 1 = 1 card = Howell (Portrait)
Group 2 = 10 cards
Group 3 = 28 cards
Group 4 = 3 cards = Willett, Laporte, & Engle

Apologies for all the numbers. I guess my overall conclusions are these, and I’d love feedback/discussion on them:
1. There’s a general rule that a given 350-only card will either a) be found with both Old Mill and EPDG or b) will not be found with either back. 80% of the 210 350-only series cards fit this rule. And this rule holds whether or not the card was printed with Sovereign or Polar Bear or neither or both.
2. There’s a general rule that cards printed with EPDG backs but not printed with Old Mill backs can be found with Polar Bear but do not exist with Sovereign. 75% of the 30 cards in this group fit this rule.
3. T213-1 cards of major leaguers overwhelmingly were not printed as T206s with Polar Bear backs. 90% of the 42 cards in this group fit the rule. That could be coincidence, but to me it is another piece of evidence that Coupons series 1 cards are really T206 cards.
4. No common denominator of 6 or 8 or 12 or 16 or 48, etc., is going to help those who care figure out too many answers as to how sheets of T206s were printed.

[tedzan]

Your cross-referencing analysis here is a nice start in providing us some insight and understanding of American Lithographic's
scheme for why various subjects were printed with certain T-brand backs....with respect to the cards in the 350-only series.

While I need some time to consider all this data and get back to you, I do have one comment......I think that American Litho-
graphic initially designed the 350-only series to consist of 216 subjects. I realize that you haven't included the 6 super-prints.
But, I think you'll agree that these 6 subjects were first printed as 350-only cards (as their American Beauty 350-frame back
indicates).
And of course, American Litho. extended these 6 subjects into the 460 series. And subsequently, they printed these 6 in the
T213, T214 and T215 issues.

Having said all that, more importantly, I really want to thank you for some really fine analysis here.


TED Z

[srs1a]

The coupling between EPDG and OldMill is very odd. In the 150_350 series, if there is a confirmed EPDG, in general, there is not an OldMill example. In the 350-only series, it goes the other way as noted above. I spent a while trying to figure this out, but ended up more confused then when I started!

I've got a spreadsheet with the SGC pop report data for backs for a bunch of "single pose" T206 examples if someone wants to play around with it. There are a number of odd correlations among the various backs across the various series.

My list of confirmed EPDG backs includes Fiene (portrait) and Hulswitt -- 2 of the ones you were asking about above.

[cfc1909]

I don't think Adkins can be found with EPDG. At least I have never seen it. I would love to ad it to my list though. Do you have a scan of this card?

Very interesting comparisons.

In my Baltimore collection-I have Slagle and Strang with every possible back except Old Mill and EPDG. Actually I only have 2 of the 9 players with these backs. Dunn and Jackson are the only 2 Baltimore players I have ever seen with Old Mill and EPDG and I have seen plenty of each. Baltimore players coe with 13 possible backs and are 350 only cards. I can't confirm Adkins with Old Mill, EPDG or Sovereign but I do have him with Polar bear.

Here is my break down with the four backs

Old Mill-only Dunn and Jackson
EPDG-only Dunn and Jackson
Polar Bear-Adkins,Dessau,Jackson,Slagle and Strang
Sovereign-Cassidy, Dunn,Hall,Jackson,Poland, Slagle and Strang

Adkins and Dessau are Sovereign no prints

Jackson is the only player I can confirm with 12 backs-I have never seen him with Tolstoi but I think it does exist because Dunn exist with Tolstoi. I think Dunn and Jackson were on the same sheet. I can confirm Dunn with all except Drum and Polar Bear. I am pretty sure at some point they will turn up and Dunn and Jackson will be the only 2 with all 13 backs. I could be wrong though.

other backs with only a few confirmed

Carolina Brights-Dunn,Jackson,Slagle and Strang
Drum-Jackson,Slagle and Strang
Tolstoi-Dunn,Slagle and Strang

[sreader3]

Jamie,

Thanks for the analysis. Like Ted I want to mull it over before commenting.

Scot

[jimonym]

Jim,
I don't have a scan of Adkins+EPDG, just the entry in my notes that I've seen it at some point.

SRS,
I'm glad I'm not the only one who's gotten a headache from trying to figure this stuff out.

I think in general there are two drivers for front/back combinations.

One is timing. It's clear that some cards were pulled from production (e.g. Lundgren (Kansas City), Cross, Rossman, etc.) because the player changed teams. It's clear that other cards were late additions (e.g. Demmitt (St. Louis), Elberfeld (Portrait, Washington), Dahlen (Brooklyn), etc.) for the same reason. Given the wide variations across the 350-series I also have a very hard time envisioning that it was released all in one batch at one point in time. I think a much more likely explanation is a rolling release of several groupings, over many months. Then add to that different brands coming in and out of the process as distribution vehicles. I would suspect that most of these Old Mill backed cards were released early in the 350 series, before the T210s got started. Then after a hiatus from T206s, Old Mills were used to distribute them again nearer to the time of the release of the 350-460 cards. Hence, late release cards like Dahlen and Elberfeld being found with Old Mill backs.

A second is the way the printing was done. There were millions and millions of these cards printed, and certainly many thousands of each of the 350-only cards. I find it hard to believe that every example of a given card came from one printing plate, simply due to the volumes they were producing. As soon as you allow for more than one plate as the source of a given card all the neat groupings that might, based on back patterns alone, tell us which cards were produced together slip away. And several headaches later I can attest that there isn't much that's neat in the 350-only series.

[cfc1909]

I have seen Adkins on this list a few times and always questioned it and always thought whoever reported was mistaken. Now that I see it is coming from you, I will mark it on my list as confirmed.

[tedzan]

Jamie

Yes, "timing" is the key to understanding the front/back combos of the entire T206 set. Consider the Demmitt and O'Hara
cards, their respective New York variations were NOT printed with POLAR BEAR backs. Yet, we know that their respective
St. Louis cards only exist as Polar Bear cards. From this dichotomy, we can conclude that the initial printing of the POLAR
BEAR (PB) cards can be accurately dated to the Spring of 1910. The St Louis variations of Demmitt & O'Hara were printed
in the initial PB press run. Subsequent PB press runs did not include these St Louis cards of Demmitt & O'Hara because.....

After playing just 10 games with St Louis in 1910, Demmitt was sent down to Montreal (Eastern League) May 1910.

After playing just 9 games with St Louis in 1910, O'Hara's Major League career ends on May 8, 1910. He continues
playing baseball with his hometown team, Toronto (Eastern League).







2nd..American Litho's production process first printed the PIEDMONT brand (all throughout the various series), followed by
the SWEET CAPORAL brand, and then the other 14 brands. We can arrive at some idea of the sequencing of the OLD MILL,
POLAR BEAR, SOVEREIGN and TOLSTOI brands in the 350 series press runs by examining this survey of the Joe Doyle card
"printer's mark". The Joe Doyle card is a fairly accurate measuring Subject, since we know it was printed in the very first
press run of the 350-only series.....this fact is firmly established by the Doyle N.Y. Nat'l variation.



Printer's Mark....................................../\


Joe Doyle Printer's Mark survey......UPDATED..Sept 23, 2007


T-brand.............Mark....No-Mark

Piedmont 350........7.........28 ................ Winter 1909

Sweet Cap 350......4.........37 ................ Spring 1910

Polar Bear.............2.........17 ................ Spring 1910

Old Mill..................1..........5 ................ Spring 1910

Sovereign 350........0...........2 ............... Summer 1910

Tolstoi..................0...........1 ............... Summer 1910
____________________________

Totals.................14..........90




3rd.....Furthermore, there is a relationship between the POLAR BEAR (PB) No-Prints and the aforementioned "Quintuplicate"
back design (illustrated here). At least 42 Subjects were not printed with PB backs that were printed with at least four (if
not all 5) AMERICAN BEAUTY, BROAD LEAF, COUPON, CYCLE, and DRUM backs.


"QUINTUPLICATE" back design



Updated (12/22/08)....POLAR BEAR Major League NO-PRINTS with annotated 1910 COUPON cards.

Abstein
* Becker
* Bender (trees)
Geo. Brown (Washington)
Burns
* Byrne
* Campbell
* Charles
Collins (A's)
* Cree
Dahlen (Brooklyn)
Demmitt (New York)
Dineen
* Donovan (throwing)
* Doolan (fielding)
* Dubuc
* Dunn (Brooklyn)
Elberfeld (portrait-Wash)
Fiene (throwing)
* Fletcher
* Hartsel
* Hoffman (St Louis)
* Howell (portrait)
* Huggins (portrait)
* Huggins (hands/mouth)
* Hunter
* Killian (portrait)
* Knabe
* Lennox
* Marquard (portrait)
* Marshall
McAleese
* McBride
McCormick
* McElveen
* McIntyre (Detroit)
* Mitchell (Cinci)
* Mowery
* Myers (bat)
* Myers (fielding
O'Hara (New York)
* Paskert
* Rhoades (hands/chest)
* Rossman
* Schmidt (portrait)
* Starr
Stephens
* Street (portrait)
* Summers
* Sweeney (Boston)
* Thomas
* Wilson
Zimmerman

NOTE....* PB No-Print Subjects that are in the 1910 COUPON set = 39

Confirmed PB Subjects that are in the 1910 COUPON set = 9

Chance (yellow portrait)
Chase (blue portrait)
Chase (dark cap)
Cobb (red portrait)
Engle
Evers (bat-yellow sky)
LaPorte
Mathewson (dark cap)
Willett


Given that the AMERICAN BEAUTY, BROAD LEAF, CYCLE, and DRUM backs were issued in the Summer/Fall of 1910, what
can we conclude regarding their linkage to the PB No-Prints with respect to a timeline ?



TED Z

[Matt]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Consider the Demmitt and O'Hara
cards, their respective New York variations were NOT printed with POLAR BEAR backs. Yet, we know that their respective
St. Louis cards only exist as Polar Bear cards. From this dichotomy, we can conclude that the initial printing of the POLAR
BEAR (PB) cards can be accurately dated to the Spring of 1910. The St Louis variations of Demmitt & O'Hara were printed
in the initial PB press run. Subsequent PB press runs did not include these St Louis cards of Demmitt & O'Hara because.....

After playing just 10 games with St Louis in 1910, Demmitt was sent down to Montreal (Eastern League) May 1910.

After playing just 9 games with St Louis in 1910, O'Hara's Major League career ends on May 8, 1910. He continues
playing baseball with his hometown team, Toronto (Eastern League).

Ted - how do you know that subsequent PB runs didn't include the St Louis Demitt and O'Hara? I understand they weren't major leaguers anymore, but how do we know their cards were pulled from the runs?

[tedzan]

1st....I didn't say that the St Louis variations of Demmitt and O'Hara were "pulled".

It's my understanding that there was only one PB press run of the 350-only series. The timing of it was coincident
with Demmitt and O'Hara briefly playing for their respective St Louis clubs. The supporting evidence for this single
press run is the fact that approx. 50% of the 216 Subjects in the 350 series were printed with the PB backs. And,
that PB cards in this series are not as available as the two subsequent series.

Whereas, the subsequent PB press runs of the 350/460 and 460-only series include 100% of the 109 Subjects in
those series. And, the abundance of PB cards from these two latter series is indicative of multiple PB press runs.


TED Z

[Matt]

Originally Posted by tedzan

It's my understanding that there was only one PB press run of the 350-only series. The timing of it was coincident
with Demmitt and O'Hara briefly playing for their respective St Louis clubs. The supporting evidence for this single
press run is the fact that only approx. 42% of the 216 Subjects in the 350 series were printed with the PB backs.

Whereas, the subsequent PB press runs of the 350/460 and 460-only series include over 90% of the Subjects in
those series. And, the abundance of PB cards from these two latter series is indicative of multiple PB press runs.

I'm still not understanding something. Polar Bear backs don't have 350-only or 350/460 designations on them (right?) That being the case, how do you know that Demitt St Louis and OHara St Louis were 350-only cards and therefore only in the first run and not the later PB runs?

[tedzan]

" That being the case, how do you know that Demitt St Louis and OHara St Louis were 350-only cards and therefore
only in the first run and not the later PB runs? "

Matt....that is a good question. Scot Reader and I discussed this possibility some years ago; and, we concluded that
the St Louis variations of Demmitt and O'Hara were printed and issued during the 350-only series run.

The timeline in Scot's book for the 350/460 series release is Summer/Fall 1910. This timing is confirmed by the status
of certain Subjects in this series. And by this time period, both Demmitt and O'Hara were 5 months gone from their re-
spective St Louis teams.


TED Z

[Matt]

Originally Posted by tedzan

The timeline in Scot's book for the 350/460 series release is Summer/Fall 1910. This timing is confirmed by the status
of certain Subjects in this series. And by this time period, both Demmitt and O'Hara were 5 months gone from their re-spective St Louis teams.

While theoretically, I understand why more cards of them as players wouldn't be produced after they were out of the majors, in my humble opinion, I'm not sure that's enough to conclude that they weren't included in the 350/460 series. It's entirely possible that their cards were still produced after they were done in the majors.

thanks for the discussion and for the other excellent points you made.

[tedzan]

Matt

At the risk of be-laboring this subject, here are some real numbers for you to consider......

A recent survey of 20,000 randomly sampled T206's over a 4 year period yielded 4 Demmitt's and 4 O'Hara's (St Louis vari-
ations). Similar (but scaled down) surveys in the early '90s and in the 1980's produced very similar results.

For argument sake, let us assume this 20K survey is representative of what is out there on these two very rare variations.
Experts (not I) have guesstimated that approx. 1-2 Million T206's have survived over the past 99 years. If we extrapolate
the results of this survey with respect to the 1-2 Million figure, then we get 200-400 Demmitt cards and 200-400 O'Hara
cards. I think this certainly makes the case for a "single printing" of these two cards. Especially, when you compare these
numbers to the guesstimated population of say a Red Cobb....which is 5000.

If I cannot convince you that these two cards are 350-only subjects, then perhaps someone else here can. But again, the
greatest numbers of POLAR BEAR cards are found with the 61 subjects in the 350/460 series. Trust me, the St Louis cards
of Demmitt and O'Hara were never printed in this run.



TED Z

[Matt]

Originally Posted by tedzan

For argument sake, let us assume this 20K survey is representative of what is out there on these two very rare variations.
Experts (not I) have guesstimated that approx. 1-2 Million T206's have survived over the past 99 years. If we extrapolate
the results of this survey with respect to the 1-2 Million figure, then we get 200-400 Demmitt cards and 200-400 O'Hara
cards. I think this certainly makes the case for a "single printing" of these two cards. Especially, when you compare these
numbers to the guesstimated population of say a Red Cobb....which is 5000.

Ted - in order for your argument to hold, you'd have to compare the number of St Louis Demitts/Oharas with other Polar Bear cards; if your sampling showed 20 of card X with the Polar Bear back and that card is a known 350 and 350/460 subject, and only 4 Demitts, then I agree the Demitt was most likely run for only the 350 subject run. Comparing it to a Red Cobb doesn't do us much good considering all the backs the red Cobby was printed with. All it proves is that the PB Demitt was run for less printing then a red Cobb, which we can all agree on.

[tedzan]

I simply used the Red Cobb as a reference number. This Cobb was Double-Printed and if you reduce its 5000 figure by a 1/2,
you get a typical population number (2000) of any typical T206 card. That still leaves the Demmitt and O'Hara populations at
approximately 1/10 th of a typical T206.

If I had more time today, I would dig up my records comparing the Demmitt and O'Hara numbers to other 350-only PB cards.
However, we are leaving soon for a vacation and this study will have to wait. Maybe, Scot Reader or Jamie Hull will chime in
here, in the meantime, and provide further proof of these Demmitt and O'Hara cards being 350-only Subjects.


Regards,

TED Z

[sreader3]

Some thoughts on the 12 350-only subjects that have been seen with OM but not EPDG:

1. Of the 12, three, namely, Brown (Wash.), Dahlen (Brooklyn), Elberfeld (Wash. Portrait), are really bifurcated 150/350 subjects that experienced the 350 portion of the 150/350 print run, their predecessors G. Brown (Chicago), Dahlen (Boston) and Elberfeld (N.Y.) having undergone the 150 portion of the 150/350 print run. Moreover, Dahlen (Boston) and Elberfeld (N.Y.) were even extended nominally into the 350 portion before being replaced by their successors Dahlen (Brooklyn) and Elberfeld (Wash. Portrait). Accordingly, we know that these "three amigos" Brown (Wash.), Dahlen (Brooklyn) and Elberfeld (Wash. Portrait) were not introduced until the END of the 350 portion of the 150/350 print run.

2. Meanwhile, the EPDG print occurred at the BEGINNING of the 350 portion of the 150/350 print run. We know this because Ted has identified the "elite eight" 150/350 subjects that were removed from print before the other 150/350 subjects and appear with only two 350 series backs--Piedmont 350 and EPDG (and in very small quantities with these backs).

3. Based on 1 and 2, it is unsurprising that these "three amigos" appear with OM but not with EPDG. Indeed, it would be surprising if the situation were otherwise.

4. I cannot explain why there are nine other 350-only subjects that appear with OM but not EPDG. Could it be that time will reveal these nine subjects with EPDG, or that they were printed with EPDG but all examples have been lost to time?

Scot

[jimonym]

Matt,

As Scot mentions, there's pretty solid evidence that Piedmont-brand cards were the first or coincident with the first T206 cards printed in each series. If Demmitt and O'Hara were 350-460 cards we'd expect to find at least some Piedmont-backed examples.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by jimonym

Matt,

As Scot mentions, there's pretty solid evidence that Piedmont-brand cards were the first or coincident with the first T206 cards printed in each series. If Demmitt and O'Hara were 350-460 cards we'd expect to find at least some Piedmont-backed examples.

Jamie - that's interesting. I'd still be interested in the comparative PB back numbers I requested as that would seem to me to be more concrete then an assumption that PBs in the 350-460 series were printed after Piedmont backs from the same series, but I do understand your logic.

[tedzan]

Hey guys, I'm on vacation, but I have to respond to the "doubting thomas" here.

Scot, please check-out your 14,000 card survey in the 350-only section. If I recall correctly,
the average quantity of the PB cards in that column are very comparable to the quantity of
the St Louis Demmitt and O'Hara cards.

Whereas, the average quantity of PB cards in your 350/460 section is approx. double the ave-
rage quantity that is in the 350-only section.

If this doesn't settle this debate, then I give up !


TED Z

[Matt]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hey guys, I'm on vacation, but I have to respond to the "doubting thomas" here.

I'm not doubting, just trying to understand.

[sreader3]

Ted,

Interesting point on the PB survey data re Demmitt and O'Hara (St. Louis).

Scot

[Kingcobb]

I have the Kleinlow N.Y. catching with EL PRICIPE DE GALES back PSA 4 cert# 15874142. Hopes this helps. Regards Daryl