|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>It's now official, Bob Lemke has said that he will be adding the e90-3 Hofman variation with name spelled "Hofnlan" I have to the 2007 edition of the Standard Catalogue. <br /><br />Now all you guys that thought you had a complete set, have one more card to chase <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br /><img src="http://www.attic2cash.net/cards/hofnlan.jpg"><br /><br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Joe Jones</b><p>This conversation could be interesting <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Unlike say the "Nodgrass" which is caused by some ink missing when the name was printed, this is a completely different spelling of the name. It was not caused by a foreign substance in the grooves of the printing plate. No question it is different than a regular Hoffman, so I think it should be a 31st card. But not every set collector may feel he has to have one to complete a set. Some will, others won't. And most will never find it anyway. Very interesting.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>I don't collect E90-3 cards but this is interesting. Can anyone chime in and provide information on the availability of each of the cards (Hoffman vs Hofnlan)? I'm assuming that they use the same picture of Hoffman on both cards, is that correct?
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>zach</b><p>Jay, can you provide us with the high resolution scan of the name ? I have talked with you about this before many times, i'm convinced the M key somehow broke making the second part of the M turn into an L.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p><img src="http://www.attic2cash.net/cards/hofnlancut.jpg"><br /><br />Zach is correct with his assumption. Most everyone that has seen the card agrees that the "m" broke in such a way that it now looks like an "nl".<br /><br />I had the card with me at the National and it was viewed by a lot of dealers I respect and also by number of the respected members of this board. I always showed the card without offering my thoughts first so that I could get a clean, unbiased opinion. Most everyone's thoughts on this card were along this line if they looked at the card closely.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>identify7</b><p>So then, this variation is like the Nodgrass, in that it is attributable to a mechanical malfunction of the printing equipment.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Brian</b><p>The T212-3 Buck Weaver has a variation (one with just a comma, another with a comma and a period). All Obak collectors I have spoken to feel a set is complete with just one version.<br /><br />Just a random variation comment...
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>If the fourth letter in Hofman is a small "m" how could that letter that looks like an "l" be so tall? Only a capital "M" would be that tall. Does anyone have the regular one to post for comparison.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>Barry,<br /><br />I suppose that the curved part of the m broke and shifted upright making the "l". However, does the original, correct version of the card have one or two "fs". If it has two, how do you account for the missing "f" in Jay's version.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Solly Hofman's name is spelled with only one "f".<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>brett</b><p>that card looks a little fishy. <br /><br />looks like a "m" was there at one time, and looks like part of it was erased some how. that "l" looks pretty thick near the top, and its too tall.<br /><br />i don't know for sure, i could be wrong... :s
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Keith O'Leary</b><p><P>seems awfully coincidental that the broken part of the plate stood up perfectly straight. i would also think you'd be able to see breakage where the upright part is now straight. it was curved at one point if it was attached to the left side of the m and you should be able to see evidence of that. the "n" looks like an n to me and the broken part looks like an "l". i'd like to see another "m".</P><P> </P><P> </P><P> </P><P> </P>
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>robert a</b><p><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1138048973.JPG">
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>brett, there has been no alteration done to this card. It has been examined by many of the top dealers and collectors, including many board members at the National. Mr Lemke, who wanted to see the card personally before he added it to the Standard Catalogue and found nothing "fishy" about the card.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>The key letter seems to be that "l" which actually has a node at the top that makes it look more like a capital "I". This is a very strange variation and the more I look at it the tougher it becomes to figure it out.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Can someone post a scan of the Overall card or some other card from the set with an "l" in it, for comparision.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Bob Shannon</b><p>Here's one Barry-<br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1138049274.JPG"> <br /><br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1138049396.JPG">
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>t206King</b><p>I find it fishy. the circled part do u see there the M should connect to, is really white compared to the rest of the card. the arrow shows that the "L" is wayyyyy to high compared to the "f" in the name. is there any marks on the M or the name? only my opinion <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1138049218.JPG"> <br /><br /><br />here is another hofman card to compare<br /><br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1138049439.JPG">
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>robert a</b><p>First of all, I think the card's great and it's most likely one of a kind.<br />However, when Bob Lemke "adds it to the set", does that inform or misinform collectors? <br />It doesn't mean anything to me. In fact the SCD already includes the green tinker and the blue tinker, but most e90-3 collectors know that color variations are possible with many different players. <br /><br />Why not just note that an error has been found?<br />The set should include only the cards that the maker intended.<br />I'm sure one of you will have an argument that the maker of e90-3 intended for this variation to be included in the set.<br /><br />Robert<br />
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Bob Shannon</b><p><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1138049733.JPG">
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I would also say it is a printing error and not a new card....although I guess a printing error could be considered a new card to some... <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> Nice card Jay...
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>If it's a printing error how do you explain the small "m" in the regular Hofman cards and the elongated serif in the new variation? I can see ink missing from a card, but this letter "m" has an extra tail. Unless it was added to deceive, which does not seem the case, create a scenario where this could happen.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I won't rattle of the list of respected dealers and collectors that have examined this card, but not a single one has found any evidence that this card has been tampered with in any way.<br /><br />I bought the card on eBay 5 or 6 years ago. It was part of a of cards from that era that included other e90-3s, e97s, e93s and c56s. The seller claimed that the cards had always been in the family. Given the cards that were offered, there was no reason to dount that claim. If the card had been tampered with, this would mean that the original owner or myself tampered with the card.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Peter Thomas</b><p>Raised portion of the m snaps at the middle of the m, bends up on the lead base of the typebase to look like an l with a small nubbin on the top. A few are printed this way and the piece breaks off and the type is reset with a new m.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Sean</b><p>If you blow it up there does seem to be part of the "n" missing and a different color white (see red circle), also the "l" looks a bit taller than the "H" or "f" (see red line and the brown that is above the red line in the "l" and not in the "H" or "f"), and also has a larger top than the "Overall" card posted above. <br /><br />It's just what I see...<br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1138051323.JPG">
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>The scan isn't the clearest, but if you look at the card under a loupe, it's much more apparent that it looks like the "m" broke and the broken piece swung up. I can't produce a better scan than what is here because of the RAM limitations of my computer.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Sean</b><p>Here is the top of the "l" cut and rotated, it looks like it could have been a broken "m." The spacing between the "n" and "l" are consistent with the letter "m"...<br /> <br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1138052399.JPG">
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>If it is the case that part of the "m" broke off and rotated up, as seems to be the case, then it would be more like a Nodgrass than a Magie - a cool card, but not necessary for the set. Just my opinion.<br />JimB
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>tbob</b><p>For those who think this might be an alteration (I don't)- why in the world would Jay or the previous owner screw around with the card and come up with such a strange "variation" as Hofnlan? It just doesn't make any sense. On the other hand, I don't think this is a 31st card in the set, maybe just 14b (or whatever number it is in the set), at most. There are Obaks variations of color and uniforms, etc.which have never been listed.<br />Is the T206 Sharpe/Shappe or whatever that variation is, listed in the SCD guide? I'm too lazy to look....
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Brian C Daniels</b><p>It is the Shroud of Turin!<br /><br /><img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Brian McQueen</b><p>Jay and I have discussed this one at length as well. I'm pretty convinced that this is a printing screw up due to the second curved part of the "m" breaking off and sticking straight up. I think that scan of the Overall, which displays a normal "l" which is different in appearence from the one on Jay's card and the fact that on Jay's Hofman, the supposed "l" is larger than the "H" gives me a strong reason to believe that this is a printing error. <br /><br />In my opinion, printing errors don't justify adding an extra card to the catalogued set. Where would it end if we started cataloguing the errors? Would the t206 Young that had the caption on the top from the 19th Century auction qualify as a new card? Would "ghost prints" count as new cards added to their respective sets? I feel that printing mishaps that are just that...mistakes....don't qualify as an extra card in the set but that's just me. They weren't intended for the set so theres no need to add them to the checklist. <br /><br />A team variation or a different player pose qualifies are examples of things that should count as a "variation" - not something like this. I feel it would be way too difficult to start cataloguing every single error that pops up.<br /><br />I guess I'd count as one of those set collector's who's not going to like this decision.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>fkw</b><p>IMO I wouldnt consider it a new variation unless more than one exists. has anyone or does anyone have another???<br /><br />If it is unique it would be a printing flaw and not a variation.<br /><br />Just my opinion.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>t206King</b><p>everyone has to think here. the part of the M missing is whiter than the paper around it. now if the printing flaw was original that spot would be the same color as the card paper. but it stands out perfectly clear white. now we arent saying you tampered with it, it just seems fishy that the exact part of the M is missing has a vary white area there. Also look closer, looks like alittle bit of ink is there also from the closer scan you provided.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>pete ullman</b><p>nice card jay...definitely an unusual printing errror. i also agree that it should not be added to the checklist as an additional card one must obtain to complete the set...but certAINLY SHOULD BE MENTIONED.<br /><br />now back to work all you skeptical detectives out there!<br /><br />pete in st paul
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I wouldn't use the scan as guide for the color. All you have to do is look at the neon blue that is in the scan and obviously isn't on the card. Can't explain the whiteness otherwise than as scanner fluke since it doesn't appear in that way in person.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>frankly, to me, the scan does not appear any whiter where part of the m is missing. I think the notch missing in the m that matches the serif on the "l" is a clear indication as to how this card came to be.
|
new e90-3 added to the set
Posted By: <b>pete ullman</b><p>yea...sean's handiwork makes me believe the type broke and rotated vertically...kinda wierd though!<br /><br />pete in st paul
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:00 AM. |