Comparison of checklists for T215-1 RED CROSS set vs "PIRATE" set

[tedzan]

Tim

OK, I was away.
Now, as I have stated in my initial post here, I expected some differences in my RED CROSS list, since it was an old one.
If we assume that your list is a valid representation of the RED CROSS set....it is still missing 4 subjects.
American Lithographic printed and issued 96 subjects for the RED CROSS set.

Given the "PIRATE" set list, any 4 of the following subjects should fill out your list of 92 subjects to bring us to a total of
96 subjects in the RED CROSS set........

M. Brown (Chicago)
Byrne (St Louis NL) .... ?
Dubuc
Evans
Groom
Herzog New York, NL
Kelley
Harry McIntyre (Brooklyn & Chicago NL)
Matty McIntyre (Chicago AL)
McLean
Mitchell
Mullin (bat)
Oldring (bat)
Purtell
Summers
Thomas

Thank you for sharing your RED CROSS list with us. We still have 4 subjects that have to be confirmed.


TED Z

[Runscott]

This is great stuff. It is especially cool to see both of you guys (Tim and Ted) sharing your information in this thread and slowly coming to a consensus. Keep it up.

[Abravefan11]

Ted - I have a couple of points to make about your last post and I will separate them to try and avoid any confusion.

Originally Posted by tedzan

If we assume that your list is a valid representation of the RED CROSS set....it is still missing 4 subjects.
American Lithographic printed and issued 96 subjects for the RED CROSS set.

I have not seen anything that would lead me to believe that the checklist for the Red Cross set would be complete at 96 subjects. According to the back of the cards the set was "100 Designs." There is no proof yet that all 100 were or were not printed, but with several previously unknown subjects being discovered in recent years, more are certainly a possibility.

Originally Posted by tedzan

Given the "PIRATE" set list, any 4 of the following subjects should fill out your list of 92 subjects to bring us to a total of
96 subjects in the RED CROSS set........

In this quote you're drawing conclusions about the Red Cross set based on information we know about the Pirate set. Due to the many differences in the sets and how I think they were printed, I wouldn't assume that one checklist would have anything to do with the other.

Lastly, like the Red Cross set, new confirmations of Pirate cards have been discovered in the not-so-distant past. So for now we can't be certain that the Pirate checklist is complete at 96 or 97.

[RCMcKenzie]

The lists that I am familiar with show 90 known examples. All of the ones Tim has up there except for a second Doolan and the Manning. I guess the Doolan and Manning are recent discoveries. I always have assumed the set has 100 designs like it says on the card.

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

I guess the Doolan and Manning are recent discoveries.

They were in "The Louisiana Find" from 2010. REA auctioned them in 2011.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

This is the T215-1 checklist I have and some additional information for the discussion.

32 Howard Chicago Nat'l
33 Huggins (Portrait) St. Louis Nat'l
34 Huggins (Hands at Mouth) St. Louis Nat'l <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< ?
35 Hummel Brooklyn

Tim

Huggins (Hands at Mouth) is actually Cincinnati....I have seen this card. Furthermore, a Net54 member that collects T215-1 RED CROSS cards (40% complete set)
has this Huggins (Cinci).

So, is the card you listed a variation, or what ?

I have never seen this Huggins with a St Louis caption. And, the above mentioned Net 54 collector has not either.


TED Z

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Tim

Huggins (Hands at Mouth) is actually Cincinnati....I have seen this card. Furthermore, a Net54 member that collects T215-1 RED CROSS cards (40% complete set)
has this Huggins (Cinci).

So, is the card you listed a variation, or what ?

I have never seen this Huggins with a St Louis caption. And, the above mentioned Net 54 collector has not either.


TED Z

It seems out of place for the Huggins team caption to be Cincinnati and goes against anything I have seen, but I guess anything is possible. If your friend owns the card with the Huggins Cincinnati caption, they should be able to answer this definitively for you. Nothing I could post would be more proof than the card itself.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

It seems out of place for the Huggins team caption to be Cincinnati and goes against anything I have seen, but I guess anything is possible. If your friend owns the card with the Huggins Cincinnati caption, they should be able to answer this definitively for you. Nothing I could post would be more proof than the card itself.

Tim

I stated that I have seen this card....but, in your usual self-centered attitude, you are obviously dismissing my input. And, I really resent this.

Furthermore, you are questioning the guy who actually owns this card in his T215 collection. He is a long-time, well-known guy on this forum;
and, lately he very seldom posts. As, he doesn't care for the immature confrontations that have transpired on this forum this past year (or so).


I don't find the difference in team identification on the two Huggins' cards at all going against anything I have noticed about the RED CROSS set.
One group of the cards were printed in 1910 and a 2nd series of cards were printed in the Spring of 1912.

But, if you are content to maintain an inaccurate list, that's your business. You claim to welcome new inputs in your data; but, when given you
choose not accept them !

C'est la vie


TED Z

[RCMcKenzie]

t215-2hugginsport.jpgt215hugginsb.jpg




Here is the T215-2 HUGGINS PORT I have. I mostly collect only series 2, but have handled 10-12 type 1 cards without seeing a type 1 Huggins. My checklist was the 15th edition scd which does not list team variations. Lipset's encyclopedia has teams, but does not mention the cincy.

I am assuming this is the type one collection listed on the SGC registry, which is an astounding collection of cards. These cards appear so infrequently that they are almost impossible to fully checklist.