I realized that Adam and that is why I phrased what I said the way I did.
I agree, Andrew's research concerning the ATC breakup is possibly the answer why the Coupons were made the way they were. But as I said, and no one contradicts based on what I have read so far, is that no other T206 brand would have another white bordered, baseball series except Coupon? I am not saying there can't be an exception but that is what it would be to me. It wouldn't be like any other listed t206 series.
There is a 100% chance we could do better writing the ACC today with all of the info gleaned in the last 59 years (the date of the last ACC).
If we are going to reclassify stuff there is a ton more to do based on what we now know. Someone should go for it. I nominate you, Adam
>
I re-learned something new doing this research too, there are no W-unc cards as Burdick actually gave all that weren't classified a W500 number
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exhibitman
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.
|