On the Psychology of Collecting

These are some of the cards from my first try at collecting the entire T206 set

I’ve had a really busy last couple weeks with family stuff and haven’t been able to devote the amount of time that I normally do to the site.  I don’t have a new article ready to go for today, so I figured I would write a little blog post.  A recent post on net54baseball.com caught my attention.  Titled “Collecting: The Journey or the Destination?”,  it examined our motivations as collectors (click here to read it).  It’s a topic that I have thought a lot about and find quite fascinating.

About 7 years ago, when I got back into collecting, I asked myself a lot of questions about what I wanted to collect, and why.  I found a handful of T206 that I had acquired as a teenager and pretty much fell in love with them immediately.  I spent a lot of time researching the set online.  As I scrolled through posts on net54, I kept seeing incredible cards and collections posted by the members of the site.  I felt some jealousy, but mainly I felt discouraged.  I remember thinking, “Why should I even start collecting these cards, when I have no chance of ever having a collection like xxxxxxx on net54?”

As I was thinking about how I should proceed, I realized that I was feeling jealous and deflated just because of looking at some scans of cards online.  Then it occurred to me, “Do I even need to own the cards?  Why?  Could I just collect scans?”  If scans could make me jealous, maybe I could just assemble the greatest scan collection of all-time?  After some more thought, I decided that it really wasn’t about scans or what cards other people owned.  It’s about the connection to the game I love, and a bygone era.  The scan collecting idea was a little bit tongue-in-cheek, but I am an analytical person by nature, and I’m used to trying to look at something from all angles in order to understand it.  When you do that, collecting sure seems like an odd activity (especially when you look at it from the perspective of someone who doesn’t collect).  There is a lot of joking amongst collectors that we all have a touch OCD, and there is probably some truth to it.

It seems that most collectors are all about the hunt.  In other words, searching for the cards they want is what brings the most happiness and satisfaction.  It’s very common for someone to spend a long time putting together a set, only to sell it soon after in order to work on a new project.  A smaller percentage of collectors enjoy owning their cards more than searching for the cards they need.

When I first started collecting, I was all about the hunt.  I was working on a lower grade T206 set and was trying to complete it as quick as I could.  One day, I realized that approach was not working for me.  I was searching ebay for new cards every evening after work and placing some bids.  The problem was that on my desk, about a foot away from my mouse, were two bubble mailers.  I knew that the mailers contained a John McGraw finger in air in Fair condition and a Bob Groom in similar condition.  In the two weeks they had been sitting there, I hadn’t felt the inclination to open up the packages and look at them.  At that point I knew my priorities were not in line with what would actually make me happy.  I sold off the majority of the lower grade cards I had acquired just to check a card off my checklist and took a break.  I still loved T206, but I wanted to find a new focus that I would enjoy more.

This is one of my favorite cards in my current collection

 

For me, back collecting ended up being what I was I really passionate about.  Over time, as I built my new collection (I sold all but about 10 cards from that first collection, keeping the ones with sentimental value) I began to enjoy the actual owning of my cards more and more.  Now, I enjoy looking at my cards much more than searching for new ones (though I still enjoy that too).  In my opinion the reason for the change is threefold.  First, I made a point of trying to align my collecting focus with what actually appeals to me, rather than trying to collect the set in a way that may work for other people, but didn’t for me.  Second, I made a conscious effort to find ways to enjoy my collection more.  I researched the players, I dove into all the old threads on net54 to learn as much as I could about the set.  And most importantly, I spent more time enjoying the cards I already owned than I had in the past.  The third reason inevitably follows the first.  Over time, my collection improved and as it did, it was more fun to look through and enjoy.  I imagine this occurs with all new collectors.  It takes a little while before your collection feels substantial and exciting.  I imagine that advanced collectors with huge, impressive collections spend a lot more time enjoying the fruits of their labor than searching for new items.  That’s just a guess though.  Maybe some day I’ll find out.

The T206 Wildfire Schulte front view “Chicago” Proof

Color scan courtesy of t206resource.com

The Schulte Chicago Proof is one of my favorite cards.  I referenced this card in an earlier post titled “Examining the T206 Joe Tinker Hands on Knees “Chicago” Variation”.  That article is worth a read, but the gist of it is that a few copies of Tinker hands on knees have been found with “CHICAGO” printed across his chest, and “CUBS” printed over “CHICAGO”.  When the Tinker was discovered, the Schulte Chicago Proof was already known to the hobby.

In 1997, Keith Olbermann wrote an article for the Vintage & Classic Baseball Collector magazine entitled “How Many Cards in the T206 Set?”. The article included a scan of the Schulte Proof, which Mr. Olbermann owns. The article is available online courtesy of t206resource.com.  You can read it here.   The existence of the Schulte lent legitimacy to the Tinker when collectors were initially skeptical of it.

This is the first Tinker “Chicago” that was discovered in 2011

Schulte front view has always been a favorite of T206 collectors, as evidenced by the premium paid for it over other “commons”.  I use quotations around that word because Schulte was an incredible ballplayer.  He was one of the elite sluggers of the era and his 1911 season is the stuff of legend.  He scored 105 runs to go along with 30 doubles, 21 triples, 21 home runs.  He knocked in 107 runs and posted an OPS of .918.

To me, Schulte front view has quite a bit of mystique due to the fact that there are two different 1-of-1s featuring Schulte.  The proof is the only one in existence, but it may not even be the most famous Schulte front view front/back combo.  One of the biggest mysteries of the T206 set is the Piedmont 350 Schulte Front View.  For a long time, it was assumed that Schulte was a 150-Only Subject.  When the lone Piedmont 350 was found, it threw that idea out the window.  That card is probably the biggest head-scratcher in the entire set in my opinion.  It doesn’t fit any pattern, and it’s crazy that only one survived.  I wrote an article about that card, titled “T206 Wildfire Schulte Front View Piedmont 350 – Is It a 1 of 1?” which can be read here.

The proof and Piedmont 350 are out of reach for most of us, but we can settle for trying to find a Schulte front view with Hindu or Sovereign 150 backs.  Both are quite tough to find, but by no means impossible.

Black and White scan from Lew Lipset’s Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards

T206 Old Mill Back With Interesting “Print Jump”

I recently picked up this Claude Ritchey Old Mill.  I bought it based on a very small scan, so all I could tell was that the card looked to be in pretty good condition and the background was quite dark.  When it arrived in the mail, I immediately noticed the right side of the back.  At first I thought the little black lines were some sort of transfer from another card, or possibly foreign ink.  Upon closer inspection, it became pretty clear that it was printed at the same time as the rest of the black ink on the back.

I knew exactly who to contact to find out more.  I sent an email to my friend Steve Birmingham, who is an expert on printing processes.  His reply was so interesting that I wanted to use the info for an article.  Steve graciously agreed, so here is our correspondence.  I hope you find it as fascinating as I did!

Me:  “Have you ever seen this strange “print jump” (for lack of a better term) that happened on the right border of the back of this card?”

Steve:

I haven’t seen that exact thing on Ritchey, but I’m pretty sure I know what it is. I’ve seen another card that’s similar, on Criger there are some Piedmont backs that show the right upper curl of the back duplicated.

There are only a few possibilities for that with lithography.  The two I can think of are equally likely.

First option:
The plates were probably laid out using transfers. Like ruboffs only a bit more involved. If the transfer got set down in the wrong spot and they didn’t totally erase it OR if the transfer didn’t adhere properly and they didn’t erase it completely before putting down the replacement, there would be remnants of it that would print.

Second option:
The plates did wear over time, after a certain number of impressions the stone would need to be resurfaced and new transfers laid down. Again, an incomplete resurfacing would leave remnants of the earlier image, and those would print.

At first I thought it was very thin areas that peeled during a soak and got pressed down out of place. But the back only scan shows no sign of it at all.

The stamp guys look to see a second identical copy, as proof that it’s a plate fault and not some printing quirk. There should be another one out there somewhere.

There are ways it could happen as a one time printing error, but they’re all a bit of a reach in the likely/not likely equation.

After receiving this email from Steve, I looked at the other Ritchey Old Mill that I own, and a scan of one I owned previously.  Neither had a similar “print jump”.  I didn’t find exactly what I was looking for, but I found some interesting marks including three players from the 150-350 series with identical marking on the back in the exact same spot.  That may be another topic for a different day.

This next email from Steve is really cool in that he lays out a systematic approach to looking at print marks and oddities.  I completely missed most of the marks he references, but they were clear as day when I went back to take a closer look.

Nice pickup, I haven’t seen one before except for the Criger Piedmont.

Finding a second copy is always more difficult on tougher cards, and finding progressive varieties tougher still.

By progressive, I mean something like that Ritchey showing a repaired flaw. The press operator can fix small stuff like that by stoning it off, which is basically using a limestone stick like a crayon to remove the oil attracting image area. That’s probably how the really rare Doyle was created, the error was spotted and the stone fixed during production.

A Ritchey OM that has border gaps where the extra bits of border are would be a probable repair, especially if it had some identical identifier on the front showing it was the same position. There aren’t any of the layout marks at the halfway points of the front border, but there are a couple possible marks that would identify the position as the same one. At the upper left there’s a dark blue heart shaped mark, at the left side of the lower border there’s another blue mark, and there’s a brown spot on the pants at about mid thigh. It’s hard to tell if they’re printed or just random ink spots, but another OM from the same spot on the sheet would probably have at least one of those marks.

A couple bonuses- There are a bunch of other marks on the back that are less obvious, but are spaced as far right from a line as the obvious ones.

And there’s a faint group of marks that don’t fit the OM back that I think are remnants of the P150 scratch. I’ll have to look at the scans I have, but the marks show as lines in the lower left ornament, through the L in large, the top of the B in Base ball, and possibly very faintly in the G above that.

It’s either leftover from the P150 scratch, or is its own damage.

The gray on the front is printed very heavily too. None of the scans on Ebay are good enough for me to tell if it’s a different gray layer than the 150’s, but the sky with the dark blue pattern is almost always a 350 back. (There’s a P150 with that sky on ebay now, but graded A by SGC so it may be rebacked. )

A different Ritchey Old Mill back without the “print jump”

Well, I’m off to go examine all of my 150-350 series Old Mill backs.  If I find anything interesting, I’ll be sure to let you know.  I want to give a big thanks to Steve for providing the content for this impromptu post.  Thanks Steve!

The Rebuilt T206 Howe McCormick Collection Part 2: Q & A with Ed McCollum

Howe McCormick on the right holding trombone

I want to thank Ed McCollum again for sharing the story of his collection.  If you haven’t read his article, The Rebuilt T206 Howe McCormick Collection, which I published last weekend, you can read it here.  After reading his article, I had a few additional questions I wanted to ask him.  Here they are, along with Ed’s answers:

Do you have any speculation as to how Howe’s cards came to market?

My current guess is that the collection came to the market sometime around 1969 – seven years before his death. I’ve recently purchased a group of nine cards from a collector that had Howe’s stamp on them. He remembers buying them from Wirt Gammon of Florida in 1969. I’m told Wirt was one of the hobby giants in those days and I would speculate that he is the one who bought Howe’s collection. Previously, I had purchased a few cards from collectors who had complete or near complete T206 collections, and both of those gentlemen told me they had started their collections in the mid-70s. That sort of made sense, since Howe died in 76, but finding out about the cards purchased in 1969 makes me wonder exactly when Howe decided to part with the cards.

Has this stamp only appeared on T206’s?

No, I have heard from two collectors who have E96 cards with the same stamp. But from these two individuals, I only know of a total of six of those cards. The first gentleman wanted to sell me his four, so I could have “the complete Howe McCormick collection,” then about three years later the second gentleman told me he had E96s with the stamp on his cards, and wondered if I had ever run across any more. He and I still exchange emails about our cards and he is quick to let me know when he spots a T206 with the stamp.

Did it appear that Howe had a collection strategy?

It would appear his only collecting strategy was getting as many cards as he possibly could, no matter what. Of the 311 I have, there are 238 that I have one card of the player/pose, 59 I have two copies of the player in that pose, 12 cards that I have three of in the same player/pose, and two cards I have four copies of the same player/pose. Duplicate cards didn’t seem to bother him.

Something of an oddity is that I have three copies of Lundgren/Chicago, which is considered a tougher card to find, and while I only own two of them, there is a third copy of Ed Foster with a Hindu back that has traded hands several times in the last several years (I don’t know the current owner of that card). There are many more common cards I haven’t seen, one example being Cobb/red portrait. Yet there are two green portraits and an absolutely beautiful Cobb bat off shoulder with the stamp. I don’t own any of those, but do know the owners of two out of the three.

Vaughn Monroe’s Moonmaids – Betty is second from the left

Were you able to find anything out about Howe’s children?

Yes, he and his wife Thelma had a daughter, named Betty McCormick. From what I’ve heard from Howe’s cousin, and what I’ve found online, she had a beautiful singing voice, and made her career in show business. She was a member of singer Vaughn Monroe’s Moonmaids, a big band era group. (Vaughn Monroe is singing “Let it Snow” during the closing credits of one of my favorite Christmas movies, Die Hard.) Sometime after leaving the Moonmaids, she added an “e” to her name, becoming Bettye McCormick, and went on to sing with others including Burt Bacharach, whom she appeared on Broadway with in a short-lived musical. After the late 70s, she sort of disappears, until an obituary in 2005 that lists her cause of death as dementia.

Does Howe’s store/home still exist?

Sadly, no. Net54 board member David Polakoff, who is from the Gainesville area, did a lot of research on my behalf when he heard about the collection, and was able to trace/correct the original address of 300 W. Main Street to 300 W. Main Street S. (I had once called the mayor’s office in Gainesville asking about the address and had been told that Main Street ran North/South, not East/West. I kind of gave up after that.) David’s research pinpointed the location to what is now a parking lot for several city/state buildings. However, the store/home was located just a block away from a McCormick Street, which we are guessing was named after Howe’s grandfather, who started a church in the early days of Gainesville.

Have you made trades with other collectors to get Howe-stamped cards from their collections?

I have, although that is not as easy as it sounds. With the exception of seven cards from my first run at a T206 collection (given to me by the wife for a first anniversary, a 10th anniversary and several cards my son picked out for me when his mom would take him to a card shop), the only cards I have are Howe-stamped cards. So it doesn’t make much sense to trade a Howe-stamped card for a Howe-stamped card, when honestly, I’d want them both. So trades have taken up to six months to pull off, when looking for a certain card with a back in at least as good condition, but that doesn’t have a stamp on the back. But it has always been worth it.

 

Are there any that you weren’t able to obtain initially, but then years later were able to find?

Back in 2009, Mastro Auctions had a near complete T206 set (520 cards) at auction, with many of the cards listed as MK. I contacted them, just out of curiosity, and 50 of the 520 cards had Howe’s stamp. Trust me, one, it was a shock, and two, there is no way I would ever be able to afford to bid on a near complete set of cards. So Mastro was nice enough to pass along a message to the winner of the lot, where I explained I was trying to rebuild Howe’s collection, and ask them to work with me of at least several of the cards. Over the next year-and-a-half, as the winner broke up the lot and sold it on eBay, I was able to win 39 of those auctions. In the five years following that, I was able to acquire six more of those cards as they continued to change hands at other auctions (I always download the images of cards as they come up on eBay, so in case I don’t win the lot, I have a record of what it looked like, exactly where the stamp is located on the card, any other card damage, etc.). Four of the five cards still missing are Southern League players, all with a Hindu back on the card. Over time, those four cards all ended up in the hands of the same collector, who just last year, auctioned off his entire Southern-Leaguer-with-Hindu-back collection. I believe the lot had 48 cards, if memory serves correctly. Again, I wouldn’t be able to afford a lot of rare backs like that, and unfortunately, although REA was kind enough to pass a message on the to the winner, they have never reached out.

It seems that you value each card in the collection the same as any other.  Would you say that’s accurate? 

There are some cards that I would say are more favorite than others, but that would be because of the story behind them (who told me about it, what trade I had to make to pull this off, the three Saturday Evening Post cards that use the different stamp). Honestly, it is not about the player on the front, or the tobacco brand on the back, its more the thrill of finding the card, and doing what I can to reunite it with the others. Sadly, I’ve never run across a card in “real life,” meaning I’m at a show and see one and start the process of buying. Every card so far has been found through the online auctions and websites. There is enough of an “Oh my gosh, there’s one!” moment when I find them online, don’t know what would happen if I just happened to be sorting through a stack at a show and found one.

Just a final thought …

Probably the greatest thing to come from this project or quest or whatever you would call it has been meeting all the collectors who have been so willing to help with a collection that isn’t even theirs. Any given week, I hear from between 10 and 20 people who have seen one of these cards on an auction site, were looking through their or a friend’s collection and found one, even people who hear about it and just want to know more about why in the world am I doing it. More than likely, I’ll never meet most of these people, even though I consider them friends (sort of like Facebook, but on a whole different level). One of these years, I hope to be able to attend the National again (I’ve only been once, back in 1994 while working on my first collection) and be able to put a face to, and give a handshake to all the friend I’ve made through this collection.

Saturday Evening Post stamps

A Tale of Two T206 Rule-breakers: Crawford Throwing and Jennings Portrait

Two cards that play by their own rules are Sam Crawford’s throwing pose and Hughie Jennings’ portrait.  Each were late additions to the 150-350 Series.  Neither was printed with Hindu or Sovereign 150 backs.  However, they were included in Piedmont and Sweet Caporal 150 Series print runs and most of the other 150-350 series backs.  Here is the complete checklist of backs that Crawford throwing and Jennings portrait were printed with:

Piedmont 150
Sweet Caporal 150 factory 30*

Old Mill
Piedmont 350
Sovereign 350
Sweet Caporal 350 factory 25
Sweet Caporal 350 factory 30

Jennings Portrait was also printed with El Principe De Gales, but Crawford Throwing was not.

When I first learned that these two poses were added to late additions, the following theory came to mind:  Since Honus Wagner and Eddie Plank were also not printed with Hindu or Sovereign 150 backs, perhaps Crawford Throwing and Jennings Portrait were added to the set in order to replace those two.  It makes sense that the American Tobacco Company would have wanted to replace Wagner and Plank, two huge stars, with players who had achieved a similar level of stardom.

This theory sounds pretty good until you realize that Plank was printed (albeit very briefly) with a Sweet Caporal 350 factory 30 back.  At that point the theory kind of falls apart.  It’s still a possible explanation for why Jennings and Crawford were added in the middle of the 150 Series, but it requires a bit of mental gymnastics.

Whatever the reason for their delayed inclusion in the set, these two poses are notable in that they don’t follow the same rules as other 150-350 subjects.  When I first started to collect T206, it took me awhile to learn this.  I even found a Hindu checklist online that listed Crawford throwing.  For a couple weeks (until I asked a friend about it) I really wanted to find a Crawford throwing with Hindu back.  Sadly, no such card exists, so don’t waste any time looking for one.

*Crawford has been confirmed with SC 150 factory 25 on t206resource.com but Jennings is listed as a “no-print”, meaning they do not believe it was part of the SC 150/25 print run.

The Rebuilt T206 Howe McCormick Collection

 

I am thrilled to present a new guest-article, written by Ed McCollum.  I have been wanting to tell this story since back before I started this website.  I brainstormed a list of 50 or so ideas for articles and this was right at the top of the list.  Ed’s rebuilt Howe McCormick Collection is my favorite T206 project.  It’s an incredibly unique labor of love.  Initially, I figured I would write the story, but after chatting with Ed about the project, I thought it would be really cool if Ed wrote the story himself, assuming he was willing.  Luckily for us, he was.  Enjoy!  – Luke

My first card with a Howe McCormick stamp on it came as quite a disappointment.

It was 1991, and I was in the process of building a complete set of T206s, while along the way trying to find as many of the different tobacco brand backs as I could afford. When a Hindu-backed George Davis, listed in VG-EX condition showed up in the classifieds of Sports Collectors Digest, and at a very reasonable price, I jumped on it. Three weeks later, when the card finally arrived, it had this huge, ugly stamp across the back with someone’s name and address. A call to the dealer convinced me that you couldn’t get an otherwise VG-E condition rare-backed card at that price, unless it had some flaw. So in the binder it went with all the others.

Jump to 2007. I was still working on that complete set, but the realization that I would never finish it had set in. Still, every night I’d look online for cards I didn’t have that might fit my budget.  A George Hunter card with a Piedmont back and what looked like the same stamp caught my attention. I hadn’t thought about that stamped card in years, but pulled out the binder, and yes, it was the same. So why not bid on this one, and have two cards with the same stamp? I bid and won.

Within a matter of days, a post appeared on the net54baseball.com website asking people to show their cards that had either unusual marks or stamps on them. I posted my two, telling of the gap in years between finding them, and soon had several emails from other members, stating they had one too, and would I want to trade or purchase from them? After all, why not find out how many we could find? And that started my project in earnest.

By the 100-year anniversary of the issue of the T206 set in 2009, I had 132 cards with Howe’s stamp on the back. I’d sold my original set of almost 200 cards and used the funds from their sale to fund my new set. And since the mark on the back was a qualifier for a lower grade from any grading company, the new cards I was acquiring came at a lower cost than many I would have needed to complete a real set of T206s.

Curiosity had also gotten the better of me, as I tried to figure out exactly who was Howe McCormick? Through the years, and with the help of other collectors, I’ve been able to piece together that Howe was born on July 31, 1895 in Gainesville, Florida to parents who owned a market. The market, which was both the family business and home, did a booming business in tobacco. Hopefully that explains how a 14-year old would have so many cards. Draft records show he enlisted in the Army in 1919, was discharged two years later to the same address, but by the 1930 census, he was a married father of one, and he had a different home address.

It wasn’t until 2013 that I finally found a photo of Howe online. Listed as a sophomore, he was shown in the Alachuan year book for 1913 (Gainesville High School), both in the class photo and as part of the school band. Finally, photographic proof of the man whose cards I was still continuing to find with great regularity.

In 2015, I was finally able to make contact with a second cousin of Howe’s who still lives in Florida. Howe’s grandfather was a rather important minister in the early days of Gainesville, and the family and the church he founded have stayed in close contact. With the help of a net54baseball.com board member, I was able to contact the church, who connected me with the cousin. He was able to verify some of my information, such as Howe’s death in 1976, his wife’s death four years later and the identity of their child, who had changed the spelling of her name during a show business career. I later found that she died just two years before I started to collect nothing but her father’s cards.

The cousin was also kind enough to share the only three photos his family had of Howe, including a photo of the store interior, showing the uncle that Howe was named after, and lots of tobacco products seen sitting on the shelves.

Through the years, I’ve also discovered Howe had two different stamps he used to mark his cards. Found on almost all the cards is a two-line stamp, with his name in all capital letters, followed by the address of the store/home. But on three of the cards, a stamp appears using his first name (Ulrich), H as his middle initial, his last name, followed by the word Agent. The second line reads Saturday Evening Post, and the third line gives the home address. Apparently, Howe was an entrepreneur, selling magazines while a youth. Perhaps one evening he used the rubber stamp from his business on the back of the cards, instead of his personal stamp. Interestingly enough, those three are all in green, while all the others are in some shade of faded black.


As of now, early March 2017, I have 311 cards in my rebuilt collect collection of Howe’s cards. 273 are Piedmont, 16 are Hindu, and 22 are Old Mill. There are another 30 that I know exist, either in the collections of others the cards have significant meaning to, or that have been lost in auctions where I couldn’t manage the high bid. And about once a month, a new one surfaces, meaning I still need to check the Internet and auction sites daily.

If you happen to have any cards with Howe’s stamp on the back, I’d really like to hear from you, whether you are interested in selling or just letting me know so I can add your card to my data. Please contact Luke on this site.

Written by Ed McCollum

Why I Prefer My T206 in Graded Holders

Among T206 collectors, grading can be a polarizing topic.  There are some who would never buy an ungraded card, and others who can’t wait to crack out their newly acquired graded cards and put them into their binders.  Then of course there is a large group of people who fall somewhere in the middle.

The reason that some prefer graded cards is the security of knowing both that the card is authentic, and a general price range for the card.  Less experienced collectors wisely gravitate towards graded cards for the security and peace of mind they provide.  I know a number of more experienced collectors who prefer their cards ungraded, either in a binder or card savers/top loaders.

I’ve seen many long-time collectors state that they choose to keep their cards raw because that is the way they kept their cards when they first collected cards as a kid.  The way I collected cards as a kid I believe contributes to my fondness for graded cards.  When I was a kid, I placed a lot of importance on the presentation of my cards.  I routinely paid $2 a pop for those thick lucite screw-downs to house my favorite cards.

I liked the way they looked in the thick holders and I liked the protection the holder provided.  The last reason is a little silly, but I’ll confess it here, among friends.  I felt like my best cards deserved to be displayed in a grandiose way, and by putting them in a thick lucite holder, I was showing them the respect they deserved.

As ridiculous as that sounds when I say it out loud (or write it), 34 year-old me still treats my cards the same way 14 year-old me did.  If I could have created my own custom card holders back then, they very well might have looked like PSA holders do now.  Putting my cards into a graded holder that provides protection and notes the player’s name and back advertisement is definitely something I would have done as a kid if I had collected T206s instead of 1991 Score.

An additional reason I prefer my cards to be graded is that, as a back collector, I enjoy being able to look at the front of a graded card and see the back written on the label.  It’s nice when thumbing through my own cards, but it also saves me a ton of time when scrolling through sale listings online.  Another thing that graded cards have going for them is ease of sale.  I have a small card budget, so when I buy a new card, I almost always need to sell something to offset the cost.  Having the majority of my collection graded already graded makes it easy to list a few cards for sale and sell them quickly.

Is the George Davis Sovereign 350 a Hoax?

For awhile now, I’ve been keeping an eye out for a George Davis Sovereign 350.  It’s a front/back combo that has been thought to exist, but to have printed in very limited quantities.  The SGC Pop Report lists one Sovereign 350 back for Davis (an SGC 80) and PSA’s Pop Report shows zero copies.  In addition, a collector has been actively searching for this card via the Buy/Sell/Trade on net54baseball.com for a few years, with no success.

This recent post by Jon Weil on the net54 forum brought up an interesting question:

I looked through the population reports and found eight cards from the T206 Resource list that both PSA and SGC show no record of having graded. We previously had mentioned the Fred Clarke, Frank Chance red portrait, and Jack Chesbro. Here’s the list of the eight “pop zero” Print Group 1 Sov 350 (forest green) cards that T206 Resource classifies as “confirmed.”

Frank Chance Red Portrait Chi Cubs
Jack Chesbro Portrait NY Highlanders
Fred Clarke Portrait Pittsburgh
Tim Jordan Portrait Brooklyn
Ed Killian Pitching Detroit
Ed Konetchy Glove High StL Cardinals
Tommy Leach Portrait Pittsburgh
Jim Pastorius Ready to Throw Brooklyn

Can anyone out there confirm independently that any of these eight cards exists?

On a related note, SGC’s pop report shows a single graded copy of George Davis, while PSA shows no graded copies. I’m wondering if SGC might have made an error. Has anyone else ever seen a George Davis with a Sov 350 back?

He brings up a lot of good questions here.  The theory that the Davis Sovereign 350 could just be a data entry error makes a lot of sense.  As a general rule, poses from Print Group 1 that were printed with both Sovereign 150 and Sovereign 350 backs are much more plentiful with the Sovereign 350 back.  This has made the Davis somewhat of a curiosity.  If it does exist, it’s the only Sovereign 350 back that is a true rarity.  Yesterday, Jon was able to ask a representative for SGC if there is any way to double-check their records to make sure the SGC 80 Davis Sovereign 350 was indeed a 350 back.  He was told that unfortunately, they do not scan cards they grade and they have no way of going back and looking at the card.

The other cards listed above are also very questionable inclusions in the Sovereign 350 checklist.  Since we know that Sovereign 350 tends to be more plentiful than Sovereign 150 for Print Group 1 poses, all of those poses above should be relatively easy to find with a Sovereign 350 back.  That is, if they exist at all.  So far, no one has come forward in the net54 thread with proof of the existence of any of the above cards with Sovereign 350 backs.  We know that T206resource.com has these cards listed as confirmed, with the exception of Fred Clarke portrait.  They have Clarke portrait listed as a “Probable No Print” in the Sovereign 350 checklist, but in the T206 Master Checklist, it is confirmed to exist.  Hopefully, a deeper look into all nine of these subjects will help us get to the bottom of this.  T206resource.com is an invaluable tool for back collectors, and I’m not trying to nit-pick their work.  Their checklists are extremely reliable, and they allow collectors to have conversations like this using a common rubric.  However, in this case I think it’s fair to wonder if these Sovereign 350s with zero Pops might be data entry errors on their part.  The SGC Pop Report below for Art Devlin shows a typical distribution of Sov150 v.s. Sov350:

Personally, I’d be surprised if Davis or the other 8 poses listed above exist with Sovereign 350 backs.  I am about 99% sure I’ve not seen any of them, but to be fair I’ve only been actively looking for a few years.  If evidence that any of these cards do exist surfaces, I will be sure to write an article with an update.  I hope they do show up, so that we have some more scarce cards to hunt after.

If you own any of these cards, or have scans of any, please send me an email at luke@thatt206life.com

Did T206 Artists Cut Some Corners in the 350 Series?

T206 350 series solid backgrounds
350 Series (Print Group 2) Solid Backgrounds

Many collectors organize their T206s alphabetically by the player’s last name.  Others group them by teams.  I tend to think about the set and organize my cards according to print group.  When you look at the set in this way, some patterns emerge.  Throughout the set, the portraits have varying degrees of background shading.  The 150-350 series has the highest percentage of portraits with shading in the background, but there are still plenty that have a single color background.  Most of the portraits in the 350 series utilize only a single, solid color, but there are some with a more nuanced, shaded background.  Because each Print Group includes multiple examples of portrait cards with solid backgrounds, I will not focus on portrait for this article.

In the 150-350 series (Print Group 1), every color imaginable was used.  The action shots all have some variety to the backgrounds, and are often quite stunning.  There is a feeling of cohesiveness throughout.  Print Group 1 clearly exhibits more attention to detail than than the 350 series (Print Group 2).  Print Groups 1, 3, and 4 are quite similar in style and appearance.  Many cards in Print Group 2 have a single, solid color as the background.  Print Group 1 only has a single card like that (Donlin seated).  The Conroy below comes close, but the artist took a little extra time to add texture so you know he is fielding a ball on the grass.  The solid backgrounds of the 350 series always made me feel like they rushed the artistic process, and maybe they did.  The solid backgrounds still make for some beautiful cards, but I prefer a little more detail.

T206 150 series action shots
Print Group 1 Action Shots

My theory is the American Tobacco Company was surprised by the success of their baseball card promotion (they weren’t referred to as T206 back then).  I think they decided to keep it going, and needed a large number of cards, quickly.  The 350 series consists of 208 cards, more than any other series.  It stands to reason that the artwork was put together in a short period of time.  Whereas the 150-350 series has one card with a solid color background, there are dozens in the 350 series.  These cards still look great, but it’s also clear that they took less time to create than a similar card with a more nuanced background.  Although many cards in the 350 series have plain backgrounds, there are also some of the most beautiful cards in the set in this series.  Donovan, Campbell, and Dinneen all come to mind as some of the most visually appealing cards in the set.  It’s possible some cards didn’t make the 150-350 series cut but were ready to be included when ATC decided to expand the set.  It’s also possible certain artists just used the same style and attention to detail in all their work, and others may have cut some corners to churn out the pieces needed for the 350 series.

The 350-460 series (Print Group 3), which consists of only 63 cards, was a return to the attention to detail of Print Group 1.  There are four cards in the series that have a solid color background:  Joe Doyle, Kleinow catching, Wagner bat on right shoulder, and White pitching.  However, the first three have blue backgrounds which look like the sky.  White, which has a yellow background, is the only card in the 350-460 series that resembles the solid backgrounds of the 350 series.

The 460 series (Print Group 4) was smaller still than Print Group 3, clocking in at just 46 cards.  The artwork has a similar look and feel to Print Groups 1 and 3.  Howell hand at waist is the only non-portrait with a solid color background.

460 Series (Print Group 4) Action Poses

 

T206 and the Dreaded PSA (MC) Qualifier

Although individual tastes vary, T206 collectors as a whole tend to dislike graded cards with qualifiers.  PSA is the only grading company that uses qualifiers in their grades, however SGC takes the same card attributes into consideration for the most part.  The different qualifiers that PSA may assign to a card are MC, OC, MK and ST.  For the purposes of this article, I am just going to talk about the (MC) qualifier.  (MC) stands for “mis-cut” and is given to any card that has some portion of printed area that is either cut off or right up against the edge of the card.  The Schmidt portrait above received the qualifier not because the front is slightly off-center, but because a tiny portion of the ornate scroll on the adjacent card is showing on the left edge of the back of Schmidt.

Looking at prices realized, it’s often pretty clear that collectors look down their nose at cards with the MC qualifier.  The general rule of thumb I’ve heard is that a qualifier knocks the card’s value down two full grades.  So, if you have a card in a PSA 4 (MC) holder, you might expect it to sell for a the price of a PSA 2, or at least in the vicinity.

A recent post on net54baseball.com got me thinking about this topic.  There were some vehement anti-qualifier posts that I thought were interesting.  Among them:

“Honestly severely off centered/miscut cards bug me the most…I avoid those like the plague!”

“I avoid cards with qualifiers…currently have none in my collection.”

“You could not pay me to take a card with qualifier on it, if I can find any other card that doesn’t have a qualifier…”

I have to admit I was a little surprised by the passionate disdain evident in these comments.  I’ve never felt too strongly one way or another about the (MC) qualifier, but it is clear that many do.  One reason someone might feel this way is that cards with qualifiers sell for quite a bit less than a similar card of the same grade without the qualifier.  I can understand people not wanting to spend money on a card that they will lose money on, but in this case I don’t really understand passing up a card with a qualifier for monetary reasons.  Since they sell for less, that means you can buy them for less as well.  There’s no need to lose money on resale if you paid a fair price to begin with.

I would assume there is also a bit of herd mentality going on here as well.  If the majority of collectors avoid cards with qualifiers, maybe it’s less fun to show them off to friends who don’t appreciate them, they’re tougher to sell, etc.

The third reason is that the cards themselves turn people off.  This is of course the main reason, evidenced by lower prices of qualified cards across the board.  The thing is: all qualifiers are not created equal.  The Schmidt and Lobert cards above are not nearly as off-center as the Graham below.

In my opinion, if people focused more on the card than the flip*, you would see more love for cards with qualifiers.  In many cases, the reason for the qualifier does not affect eye appeal much at all, but many collectors will still shy away from those cards.  Of course, many cards with qualifiers have substantial “flaws” or attributes that negatively affect their eye appeal.  For collectors who only enjoy a perfectly centered card, the (MC) qualifier is useful, because it tells them they will probably not like the card.  Although they are not the topic of this post, I can also understand collectors who don’t like writing or marks on their cards (cards like this would receive the MK qualifier.  If you collect low or mid-grade T206s with common backs, there are plenty of well-centered cards out there, so there’s no reason to buy a card with centering issues.  However, if you collect some tougher backs, you don’t usually have the same options.  I was thrilled to add the Schmidt and Graham to my collection at great prices.  I’m glad the qualifier doesn’t bother me, because I could be waiting years before I find a nicer copy of either front/back combo.

Although the negativity towards cards with the (MC) qualifier mystifies me a bit, I’m happy to keep buying the ones I like at great prices.

*flip is a slang term used by collectors to refer to the PSA label