"Is the George Davis Sovereign 350 a Hoax?"

[HobokenJon]

The esteemed Luke Lyon of "That T206 Life" has now weighed in on the hottest T206 debate on the planet.

http://www.thatt206life.com/2017/03/...gn-350-a-hoax/

Dearest T206 Resource, please respond.

[Leon]

Pretty good analysis. Nice one, Luke.

[Rich Falvo]

Enjoyed reading that. I've learned a lot reading through that site.

[rebelsart]

I have been reading these T206 Sovereign threads and feel the need to respond.

First and foremost, just because a grading company has not graded a confirmed T206 front/back combination doesn't mean its unconfirmed.

According to Scot Readers "Inside T206" book he estimates that T206 production was approximately 370 million cards.



As of today PSA has graded 200,660 T206 cards, some identifying the backs and many others without a back designation.

This represents ONLY 5.42% of the estimated T206 population.

Furthermore, SGC has already graded a T206 George Davis with Sovereign 350 back according to their population report.

So to suggest that SGC has made an error just because certain collector/collectors cannot locate one is simply idiotic. Eventually other T206 George Davis with Sovereign 350 backs will appear. Just be patient.

The T206 resource checklists were a labor of love by myself and others for over 35 years. While I cannot specifically remember where every front/back combination first appeared I feel very confident with my research.

Enjoy these cards.
Art Martineau

[sreader3]

I will agree with Art that patience is a virtue when it comes to T206. For years I thought that Schulte (Front View) did not exist with Piedmont 350. Then, lo and behold, a single copy pops-up. Same with Tinker (Bat Off) Piedmont 42. Nowhere to be seen after 10 years of looking, then TWO examples show-up. As I wrote 11 years ago, when it comes to T206, mystery is pervasive and mastery is illusive.

That said, I thank Luke for carrying the research forward and identifying potential problems. Let's wait and see.

[Sean]

Hello Art, always great to hear from you again.

[Luke]

Art,

First, thanks for reading and for taking the time to comment here.

I don't disagree with your overall point, but this specific situation is a little more nuanced than "me and a few other people haven't seen this card, so SGC must have made an error." PG1 subjects are generally pretty easy to find with Sov350 backs. I know that patterns like that don't always hold, but they are a good starting point for a conversation.

The 9 cards I talk about in the article have a combined POP of 1 between SGC and PSA (the George Davis). The average POP of every other PG1 Sov350 is somewhere in the 8-14 range.

I think it's very fair to look at that data and wonder if it's possible that the 9 cards I talk about might not actually exist. They just don't fit the pattern.

Ultimately, it's just a theory and I presented it as such. All of the research that we now accept as fact started out as a theory that was talked about amongst collectors. That type of discussion is what this site is for, and it's why I started my site.

I get that you've been collecting and keeping tabs on these cards for a lot longer than I have. I also get that by wondering if these 9 cards actually exist, I am questioning those entries in your research. It's definitely not my intention to ruffle any feathers. The checklists on t206resource.com are incredibly accurate and valuable and I don't think questioning a handful of entries should bother anyone, but if it does I apologize. I don't expect perfection of anyone and regardless of whether my theory holds water or not, the checklists are still better than 99.9% perfect.

In the same vein, I don't really have an ego about my theory either. I believe in it enough to put it out there, but I won't be shocked or embarrassed if I'm wrong.

If anyone has a scan of these 9 cards with Sovereign 350 back, I'd love to see them.

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

Originally Posted by rebelsart

I have been reading these T206 Sovereign threads and feel the need to respond.

First and foremost, just because a grading company has not graded a confirmed T206 front/back combination doesn't mean its unconfirmed.

According to Scot Readers "Inside T206" book he estimates that T206 production was approximately 370 million cards.



As of today PSA has graded 200,660 T206 cards, some identifying the backs and many others without a back designation.

This represents ONLY 5.42% of the estimated T206 population.

Furthermore, SGC has already graded a T206 George Davis with Sovereign 350 back according to their population report.

So to suggest that SGC has made an error just because certain collector/collectors cannot locate one is simply idiotic. Eventually other T206 George Davis with Sovereign 350 backs will appear. Just be patient.

The T206 resource checklists were a labor of love by myself and others for over 35 years. While I cannot specifically remember where every front/back combination first appeared I feel very confident with my research.

Enjoy these cards.
Art Martineau

[HobokenJon]

Hi, Art. Per your comment: "First and foremost, just because a grading company has not graded a confirmed T206 front/back combination doesn't mean its unconfirmed."

You're missing the point, wittingly or otherwise. In the matter of the occasionally rumored forest green Sovereign 350 George Davis (a.k.a. the Loch Ness Monster...pun intended), the issue at hand is whether T206 Resource and SGC can back up their claims of its existence with proof or, short of that, a mere scintilla of evidence. I have asked them both. SGC told me at this month's Philly Show that it cannot, and that the entry could be a data error. The mandarins at T206 Resource haven't replied to my e-mails, or to the pointed (but unfailingly polite) questions put to them on this board.

It is well known there are glaring inaccuracies in SGC's and PSA's population reports. So this wouldn't be the first time. Here are two examples, to illustrate.

Go to the SGC pop report, type T206 for the set name and Spike Shannon for the player name. Hit the search key. You'll see a lone Piedmont 150 listed there, graded SGC 70. Under set name it says: "1909 Piedmont Cigarettes." Except, as most of us know, that's impossible, because Shannon is part of the 350-only series. Or go look up the lone Molly Miller with the Sweet Cap back that's listed in PSA's pop report. For those who don't recognize his name, Miller is a Southern Leaguer, and Southern Leaguers weren't printed with Sweet Cap backs.

Absent facts that provide evidence of confirmation, it seems to me far more likely that T206 Resource and SGC both erred on this occasion. So, for the time being, I'll continue to classify the putative forest green Sovereign 350 George Davis on my own checklist as "unconfirmed." (Thank you for your concern, Art.) The same goes for the other cards Luke listed in his fine, well-researched article, which I again encourage everyone to read here: http://www.thatt206life.com/2017/03/...gn-350-a-hoax/

Regards,
Jon