Are the "T213-1" (1910 COUPON) cards really T206's ? ....I think so....What say you ?

[ullmandds]

Also of the t216's...one of the three is printed on thin paper...yet it's still a T216 Kotton?

[Luke]

I feel like they belong in a T206 collection. The thin paper is obviously a big difference, but so is the width of American Beautys. One thing that gives me pause is the limited checklist. There aren't any other T206 backs that were printed with 350 only series fronts but left so many poses off the checklist. The combination of Southern Leaguers, Super Prints and 350 Only poses is interesting given that the overall checklist only consists of 68 players.

Since threads are more fun with scans, here is my Engle-Willett ghost:

[insidethewrapper]

Three separate sets produced over a 10 year period and we call them all T213's ? Type 1, 2 & 3. I don't get it. This needs to be corrected first. Each should have it's designation. Then review all the data concerning if Type 1 is part of the T206 set.

As more data is collected and researched sometimes things need to be changed like: Columbus discovering America, Doubleday inventing baseball etc.

[Rhotchkiss]

Nice card Luke - too bad I can’t post my Tinker Bat Off no-print in this thread.

As I mentioned once before, I don’t know if they should be t206s, but any self respecting t206 back run should include t213-1, if such an example exists.

[Jersey City Giants]

Burdick clearly made mistakes with other issues so why can't we question his assumptions all these years later with better information? I collect T209 first series. They are labeled a 1910 set but are clearly from 1909 (only four of the 16 players in the set played for the team pictured in 1910). 15 out of 16 played for their teams pictured in 1909 (the lone exception is the mystery card that is less of a mystery now but won't get into that one). Just proving that he made mistakes and people just use his data. All major grading companies blindly call the T209 first series a 1910 card set.

[tedzan]

Hey guys

Illustrated here is my simulated uncut sheet of the Major Leaguers (48) in the 1910 COUPON set. My theory is that American Lithographic
printed up this COUPON set during an early print run of their 350 Series (circa Spring 1910). And, they used the same printing plates that
were in operation while printing up the 1000's of T206's.



1910 COUPON (T213-1) Major League (48) subjects








Shown here are the " Six Super Prints " which were just 350 Series subjects when the 1910 COUPON cards were produced. It was not
until later in the game that American Litho selected these 6 subjects to be Super-Prints when they started printing the SOVEREIGN 460
cards. Scot Reader accurately identified these six T206's in his book titled "Inside T206".

.



.













Major Leaguer's (48 subjects) checklist

Becker......Boston NL
Bender (trees)......A's
Byrne......St Louis NL
Campbell......Cincinnati
Chance (portrait-yellow)......Chicago NL
Charles......St Louis NL
Chase (blue portrait)......New York AL
Chase (dark cap)......New York AL
Cobb (red portrait).......Detroit
Cree......New York AL
Donovan (throwing)......Detroit
Doolan (fielding)......Phillies
Dubuc......Cincinnati
Dunn.......Brooklyn
Engle.......New York AL
Evers (bat-yellow sky)......Chicago NL
Fletcher.....New York NL
Hartsel......A's
Hoffman......St Louis AL
Howell (portrait)......St Louis AL

Huggins (portrait).....Cincinnati
Huggins (hands at mouth)......Cincinnati
Hunter......Brooklyn
Killian (portrait)......Detroit
Knabe......Phillies
LaPorte......New York AL
Lennox........Brooklyn
Marquard (portrait)......New York NL
Mathewson (dark cap)......New York NL
Marshall.......Brooklyn
McBride......Washington
McElveen......Brooklyn
McIntyre.......Detroit
Mitchell.......Cincinnati
Mowery.......Cincinnati
Myers (bat)......New York NL
Myers (fielding)......New York NL
Paskert.......Cincinnati
Rhodes......Cleveland
Rossman......Detroit

Schmidt (portrait)......Detroit
Starr......Boston NL
Street (portrait)......Washington
Summers......Detroit
Sweeney......Boston NL
Thomas......A's
Willett......Detroit
Wilson......Pittsburg


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[T205 GB]

I say yes the Coupon Type 1's are part of the T206 set. The Type 2&3's are part of a completely different company. I have explained below how I came up with this "crazy" notion.

The ATC owned the rights to the Type 1 Coupons and were printed as part of the T206 set in mid 1910 approximately. The cards were made by the ATC as part of their advertising campaign in cigarettes, and they were printed with all the same inks and designs. Nothing we have can disprove this theory. The thin paper argument can be explained in part to moisture. The thinner paper stocks that were made in the southern areas was likely due to the decrease in mold or mildew issues due to high humidity. Many southern advertisements have been found with the thinner paper stocks from that time frame. Thinner paper stock holds way less moisture and therefore will not be destroyed a fast as heavier card stock that has the ability to absorb and hold moisture from the air.

The ATC was divide into several sections when it was split up on May 29, 1911 ; Liggett & Myers(LM) being the main focus of my post. LM was given control of the W. R. Irby, New Orleans factory #3. This factory more than likely was forced to change the designs of the subjects that they once printed under the ATC banner due to Copyrights. The change in design had to be significant enough to not violate those laws and thus we have the major changes such as paper stock, inks, colors, back designs, cropping, players, ect. I also believe the glossy coating was to help offset the moisture absorption of the cards. Seal the front side and it reduces the amount of surface that can breath and thus make the card more moisture resistant. This also can help explain the cracking of the coating from the card stock expanding and contracting over the many years from different moisture environments.

We all need to stop and take a step back to look at what we have compared to what Burdick was trying to piece together. The internet and research of thousands of guys creates a much more detailed map. Best guess is that Burdick decided to combine them all into one group most likely due to some backlash he would have feared to receive from the LM company. Back then the company name would have been much more respected than now over 100 years later. LM was an instant powerhouse right out of the gate and any man no matter the riches or stature would have been fearful of disrespecting them back then in any way, especially in a published book for the public to use. The laws were much different then especially knowing that LM's history would later reveal some shady dealings throughout their inception from the ATC dissolution. I am sure you can imagine judges and lawmaker taking kickbacks to obtain bias towards them. I mean that never happens now or anything You also wouldn't call a Dodge Hemi Cuda a Chrysler even though its owned by them. We respect the original company manufacture and it would be sacrilege to call it a Chrysler ___ ___.

The same should be done with the card sets. We should recognize them for what they are. ATC owned the Coupon T206's and LM had the Coupon's for 1914 and on under a different company and new branding campaign.

My research with fellow members has led us down several paths but realistically the simplest explanation seems to be the best:

"W. R. Irby, New Orleans factory #3 was owned by two different companies at two separate times. Due to this, cards produced before the ATC dissolution, mid 1910, were produced for distribution in the T206 advertising campaign. The cards produced between 1914-1919 were part of another brand and thus would be forced to change designs significantly enough as to not violate copyright laws of the time".

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by T205 GB

I say yes the Coupon Type 1's are part of the T206 set. The Type 2&3's are part of a completely different company. I have explained below how I came up with this "crazy" notion.
……………………………………
"W. R. Irby, New Orleans factory #3 was owned by two different companies at two separate times. Due to this, cards produced before the ATC dissolution, mid 1910, were produced for distribution in the T206 advertising campaign. The cards produced between 1914-1919 were part of another brand and thus would be forced to change designs significantly enough as to not violate copyright laws of the time".

Andrew

Great to hear from you. You have said a lot in your post; and, your last paragraph very succinctly summarizes the situation regarding the difference
between the 1910 COUPON cards vs. the T213-2 and T213-3 sets.

American Lithographic (ALC) printed all these white-bordered cards from 1909-1919, and it's apparent that after the ATC divesture (circa mid 1911),
ALC replaced the Brown ink captions with BLUE ink captions on the following T-cards...…

Liggett & Meyers……
COUPON Tobacco
T213-2 (1914-1916)
T213-3 (1916-1919)

VICTORY Tobacco
T214 (1915)


P. Lorillard…...RED CROSS
T215-2 (1912-1913)


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[barrysloate]

As I've said before, if the Coupons were issued only in a single series, it would have been an easy decision for Burdick to group them with T206. But because there were three series, he had to make a decision and chose to classify the three as T213.

I do think the Type 1's are in spirit T206's, but as Leon pointed out they have been catalogued as T213's since the beginning and we can't arbitrarily change the ACC. However, if we could somehow take a time machine back and converse with Burdick, he would surely say that his work isn't gospel and is subject to corrections and reappraisal.

If somebody wanted to take the entire ACC and reevaluate the classifications, I think that would make for an amazing project. I have to think collectively the current hobby knows everything that Burdick knew, plus a lot more.

[Leon]

Only around 10% - 12% of what Burdick did was sportscards. I don't think he thought this out as much as you think he did. My guess, from some studying, is that he saw the backs and made them T213s because seeing the 3 Coupon backs were unlike any other back brands of 206, in that there aren't other white bordered cards (I could be wrong but don't think so) with a 206 back brand that has another catalog number too.
So this is what is being suggested? There would be T206 Coupon and T213 Coupons? I can't think of another T206 brand like that.

And Burdick absolutely KNEW AND WANTED the ACC to be a work in progress. I am not against redoing some things but not sure this is one I would be in favor of (not that that matters). IT is a good little debate.

Originally Posted by T205 GB

I say yes the Coupon Type 1's are part of the T206 set. The Type 2&3's are part of a completely different company. I have explained below how I came up with this "crazy" notion.

The ATC owned the rights to the Type 1 Coupons and were printed as part of the T206 set in mid 1910 approximately. The cards were made by the ATC as part of their advertising campaign in cigarettes, and they were printed with all the same inks and designs. Nothing we have can disprove this theory. The thin paper argument can be explained in part to moisture. The thinner paper stocks that were made in the southern areas was likely due to the decrease in mold or mildew issues due to high humidity. Many southern advertisements have been found with the thinner paper stocks from that time frame. Thinner paper stock holds way less moisture and therefore will not be destroyed a fast as heavier card stock that has the ability to absorb and hold moisture from the air.

The ATC was divide into several sections when it was split up on May 29, 1911 ; Liggett & Myers(LM) being the main focus of my post. LM was given control of the W. R. Irby, New Orleans factory #3. This factory more than likely was forced to change the designs of the subjects that they once printed under the ATC banner due to Copyrights. The change in design had to be significant enough to not violate those laws and thus we have the major changes such as paper stock, inks, colors, back designs, cropping, players, ect. I also believe the glossy coating was to help offset the moisture absorption of the cards. Seal the front side and it reduces the amount of surface that can breath and thus make the card more moisture resistant. This also can help explain the cracking of the coating from the card stock expanding and contracting over the many years from different moisture environments.

We all need to stop and take a step back to look at what we have compared to what Burdick was trying to piece together. The internet and research of thousands of guys creates a much more detailed map. Best guess is that Burdick decided to combine them all into one group most likely due to some backlash he would have feared to receive from the LM company. Back then the company name would have been much more respected than now over 100 years later. LM was an instant powerhouse right out of the gate and any man no matter the riches or stature would have been fearful of disrespecting them back then in any way, especially in a published book for the public to use. The laws were much different then especially knowing that LM's history would later reveal some shady dealings throughout their inception from the ATC dissolution. I am sure you can imagine judges and lawmaker taking kickbacks to obtain bias towards them. I mean that never happens now or anything You also wouldn't call a Dodge Hemi Cuda a Chrysler even though its owned by them. We respect the original company manufacture and it would be sacrilege to call it a Chrysler ___ ___.

The same should be done with the card sets. We should recognize them for what they are. ATC owned the Coupon T206's and LM had the Coupon's for 1914 and on under a different company and new branding campaign.

My research with fellow members has led us down several paths but realistically the simplest explanation seems to be the best:

"W. R. Irby, New Orleans factory #3 was owned by two different companies at two separate times. Due to this, cards produced before the ATC dissolution, mid 1910, were produced for distribution in the T206 advertising campaign. The cards produced between 1914-1919 were part of another brand and thus would be forced to change designs significantly enough as to not violate copyright laws of the time".

[toppcat]

Would not the quotation marks also be a departure from T206? Coupon type 1's and Cobb/Cobbs both have 'em.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by Leon

there aren't other white bordered cards (I could be wrong but don't think so) with a 206 back brand that has another catalog number too.

Perhaps not but there are different ATC issued T sets from the era that share brands:

--Cycle (T205, T206, T207)
--Mecca (T201, T218, T220)
--Hassan (T202, T205, T218)
--Honest Long Cut (T205,T219, T227)
--Polar Bear (T205, T206)
--Sweet Caporal (T205, T206)
--Tolstoi (T206, T218)

Why not group by brands and then classify each as a separate subcategory? Because Burdick didn't. That's all. He made a decision based on the data he had. Andrew's explanation seems to be very well thought out and credible. The effect of the ATC breakup on card production is the best explanation for why the -2 and -3 types are so different from T206.

[Jobu]

I haven't yet replaced Mr. Evers - happy he is still enjoying his new home!

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Nice card Luke - too bad I can’t post my Tinker Bat Off no-print in this thread.

As I mentioned once before, I don’t know if they should be t206s, but any self respecting t206 back run should include t213-1, if such an example exists.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Nice card Luke - too bad I can’t post my Tinker Bat Off no-print in this thread.

As I mentioned once before, I don’t know if they should be t206s....but any self respecting t206 back run should include t213-1….if such an example exists.

Hey Ryan

I like the way you think

I also like your 1910 COUPON Evers better than mine....it looks better in SGC plastic than my PSA does.








TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[tedzan]

In the 150 series press runs, American Lithographic (ALC) printed 34 different Southern Leaguers (SL).....16 of which represent the Southern Association.
In the 350 series press runs, ALC expanded the SL sub-set to 48 subjects.....20 of which represent the Southern Association. The four additional Southern
Association subjects are Bill Hart, "Hub" Hart, Lentz & Rockenfeld. This is important, as it clearly sets a Spring/Summer 1910 timeline for T213-1 cards.





Southern Association (20 subjects)

Bay......………...Nashville
Bernhard...…...Nashville
Breitenstein…..New Orleans
Carey.........…..Memphis
Cranston...……..Memphis
Ellam......………..Nashville
Fritz......………….New Orleans
Greminger...…..Montgomery
Hart......………...Montgomery
Hart...……………..Little Rock
Hickman...……...Mobile
Jordan...………...Atlanta
Lentz......………..Little Rock
Molesworth.......Birmingham
Perdue...………….Nashville
Persons...………..Montgomery
Reagan...………...New Orleans
Rockenfeld........New Orleans
Smith...……….....Atlanta
Thornton...……...Mobile


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Luke

I feel like they belong in a T206 collection. The thin paper is obviously a big difference, but so is the width of American Beautys. One thing that gives me pause is the limited checklist. There aren't any other T206 backs that were printed with 350 only series fronts but left so many poses off the checklist. The combination of Southern Leaguers, Super Prints and 350 Only poses is interesting given that the overall checklist only consists of 68 players.

Since threads are more fun with scans, here is my Engle-Willett ghost:

Cool Engle/Willett ghost Luke. I don't recall seeing any other Coupon ghosts.

[DeanH3]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Also of the t216's...one of the three is printed on thin paper...yet it's still a T216 Kotton?

Very good point Peter.

[Exhibitman]

That's kind of my point: the ACC designation T206 reflects a series of decisions based on information available at the time to a group of collectors like us. There is nothing inherently right or wrong with the decision to canonize certain cards as T206 and make others different. The type 1 Coupons seem indistinguishable from T206 from a design standpoint, other than the paper, but we have the Kotton cards as the 'rule' governing paper differences. As for the other white series T213s, well, as has been pointed out already they had the artwork and basically redid the captions and finishes to issue the cards. What company hasn't re-used artwork whenever it could get away with it? T202 was a repurposing of T205 cards with white borders. And how much artwork is shared across T sets?

Don't forget, Camel started its advertising in the teens by deriding companies that spent money on premiums instead of the product itself. In that atmosphere a cut rate re-issue of T206 might have made sense: type 2. Then you have the Federal League and a chance to re-do some captions and issue type 3.

[Leon]

T214 and T215 have similar designs and T215 has a brown captioned one too. I guess we make those T206 also?

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

That's kind of my point: the ACC designation T206 reflects a series of decisions based on information available at the time to a group of collectors like us. There is nothing inherently right or wrong with the decision to canonize certain cards as T206 and make others different. The type 1 Coupons seem indistinguishable from T206 from a design standpoint, other than the paper, but we have the Kotton cards as the 'rule' governing paper differences. As for the other white series T213s, well, as has been pointed out already they had the artwork and basically redid the captions and finishes to issue the cards. What company hasn't re-used artwork whenever it could get away with it? T202 was a repurposing of T205 cards with white borders. And how much artwork is shared across T sets?

Don't forget, Camel started its advertising in the teens by deriding companies that spent money on premiums instead of the product itself. In that atmosphere a cut rate re-issue of T206 might have made sense: type 2. Then you have the Federal League and a chance to re-do some captions and issue type 3.

[Exhibitman]

I think T214 was issued a few years after the end of the T206 run, so no.

T215 type 1 might be considered, since the time frame seems right, but I don't know enough about the issue to do more than guess at it. Red Cross was in T207 and T219, so who the heck knows.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Leon

T214 and T215 have similar designs and T215 has a brown captioned one too. I guess we make those T206 also?

And while we're at it, what should we do with T215 Pirates? Same artwork, brown captions, and perhaps some of them were printed in the same time frame.

[ullmandds]

Add em!

[Leon]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Add em!

troublemaker

[Sean]

Delete, unnecessary.