Regarding the SOVEREIGN "apple green" back phenomena....some interesting stuff

[tedzan]

The recognition of the SOVEREIGN 350 cards with the "apple green" backs is a recent phenomena to T206 collectors. It started with Art Martineau and Jim Rivera noting
the color difference of certain SOVEREIGN 350 cards. Rivera contacted me (circa 2008), since he was aware that I had a complete 402-card SOVEREIGN set.

I arrange the cards in all my T206 sets according to their Series (150, 350, 350/460, 460, etc.). Therefore....it became immediately evident to me, as I flipped thru the
pages of my album, that the apple green cards were exclusively associated with the 55 subjects in the 350/460 series. Furthermore, as I went thru the entire set scan-
ning the backs of all the cards, I discovered that the 6 Super-Prints (with SOVEREIGN 350 backs)....and the Joe Doyle, Red Kleinow (NY-catching), Simon Nichols (bat),
Bob Rhoades (right arm extended), and Frank Smith (white cap) were printed with apple green backs. Resulting in the grand total = 66 subjects.

I called Scot Reader regarding my observations. We arrived at the conclusion that this color change was American Lithographic's way of identifying the subjects from
their 350 Series, which they had intended to extend into their subsequent 460 Series. My point here is....that this discovery was quite a collaborative effort between
Net54er's.

For more info on this subject, check-out this Link to the thread posted Oct 2009, that first identifieded the apple green cards............
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...ht=apple+green


............... Joe Doyle......see note ...............






1st group of 15 subjects..... Ames - Doolan



In the forthcoming posts I will continue displaying the remaining 45 subjects with the apple-green SOVEREIGN 350 backs.....stay tuned.


Here is the complete list of the 66 cards from my SOVEREIGN set whose backs were printed with the apple green colored ink...........

Ames (hands over head)
Baker
Bender (no trees)
Berger
Bradley (bat)
M. Brown (Chicago)
Burch (fielding)
Chance (yellow portrait)
Chase (blue portrait)
Chase (dark cap)
Cobb (red portrait)
Cobb (bat off)
Conroy (bat)
Davis (A's)
Crawford (bat)
Donlin (bat)
Doolan (bat)
Dougherty (arm in air)
Downey (bat)
Joe Doyle (arms over head)
Larry Doyle (bat)
Elberfeld (Wash.-fielding)
Evers (bat-yellow sky)
Griffith (bat)
Jennings (one hand)
Jennings (two hands)
Johnson (pitching)
Jordan (bat)
Joss (pitching)
Kleinow (NY-catching)
Konetchy (glove low)
Lajoie (bat)
Lake (no ball)
Leach (cap)
Leifield (bat)
Magee (bat)
Manning (pitching)
Mathewson (dark cap)
McIntyre (Brooklyn & Chicago)
McQuillan (bat)
Mullin (bat)
Murphy (bat)
Nichols (bat)
O'Leary (hands/knees)
Overall (yellow sky)
Pelty (vertical)
Pfeister (throwing)
Reulbach (no glove)
Rhoades (arm extended)
Rucker (throwing)
Seymour (throwing)
F. Smith (Chicago-white cap)
Snodgrass (catching)
Stahl (glove)
Steinfeldt (bat)
Street (catching)
Sweeney (fielding)
Tinker (bat off)
Wagner (bat on right)
White (pitching)
Wilhelm (bat)
Willetts
Willis (bat)
Willis (throwing)
Wiltse (throwing)
CYoung (glove)


Note......The Joe Doyle is an interesting card in this mix. A forthcoming post here will focus on his cards.


Comments and/or inputs are welcome.


TED Z

[DerekMichael]

What an awesome discovery! You all did great work. Many Thanks.

Derek

[teetwoohsix]

That was fun reading back through that old thread.

Are there actually three different tones of green with the Sovereign backs? I remember Jim R. responded in that thread that my Chase Sov. 460 was forrest green-but to me it looked more like those apple greens,,,,,,,so, the reason I ask if there are three shades of this green is because of the 350 series backs, there's that one that looks VERY dark. Are those the ones that are forrest green? Or, does the scanner just make it appear that dark?

The reason I ask is because out of the three Sovereign backed cards I have (still have the Chase 460 in the old thread),,,, none have that really dark Sov. 350 back. Here's the other two (I hope I'm making sense):

Sincerely, Clayton

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by tedzan

I arrange the cards in all my T206 sets according to their Series (150, 350, 350/460, 460, etc.). It became immediately evident to me, as I flipped the pages of my album, that the apple green cards were exclusively associated with the 55 subjects in the 350/460 series.

Comments and/or inputs are welcome.

TED Z

Ted - A quick read of this thread, posted earlier in 2009 than the link you included, shows that it became immediately evident to you to look specifically at the 350/460 cards after Jim pointed you there. Your first line of post #27 says it all, but I won't pull it out of context.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=112571

[tedzan]

JIM"S POST #20....5/24/2009

Originally Posted by cfc1909

thanks for all the kind words about the set.

Craig & Scot & Ted- more research needs to be done on the Sovereign 350 cards. We need to know what fronts come on the apple green and if the same front can be found with both colors.
It is kanda interesting to see if 350-460 cards are the ones with this back. maybe just an ink problem, but it will be fun researching. Maybe not an ink problem.

MY RESPONSE, POST #25....5/25/2009

Originally Posted by tedzan

As I said in my last post, I think you are on to some thing in your "apple green" observation....regarding the 55 Subjects
found in the 350/460 series of the other T-brands.

For now, I am going by memory; however, I may have a lot more than 8 apple green cards in my Sovereign set. When I
am home later today, I will check-out my set and provide you with a more definitive accounting of my apple green cards.


TED Z

Tim

I was away on 5/24/2009 when Jim contacted me (as noted in the two POSTS cited here from that thread).

When I returned home that evening I went through my SOVEREIGN set. And, as I have stated......"It became immediately evident to me (that the cards with apple green
backs were the 350/460 subjects).

Until that point in this discussion this fact was not certain, as it was based on just a sampling of SOVEREIGN cards. Furthermore, the thinking was that these cards were
either printed with the apple green color and/or the darker green color....or, they were simply faded backs. It was just a guessing game at that point.

We might still be conjecturing over the significance of the apple green cards, if it I had not completed the SOVEREIGN set....which confirmed the connection between the
apple green cards and the 350/460 series subjects. Furthermore, my set revealed 11 more apple green cards, namely the 6 super-prints with their SOVEREIGN 350 backs;
and, the Joe Doyle, Red Kleinow (NY), Simon Nichols, Bob Rhoades, and Frank Smith (white cap) cards.



This continuing effort of yours (grasping at any thing) to discredit me has become tiresome.

Part of the reason that I posted this thread is to show members on this forum that when we combine expertise, we can solve any "mystery" in this hobby.


TED Z

[tedzan]

For comparison

Apple green backs of 350/460 series cards

Green back 350-only series cards



TED Z

[g_vezina_c55]

Thanks ted to share your knowledge !

[DerekMichael]

When I was younger, I had never actually seen a T206 before, but I saw a green Cobb in the Beckett magazine one month. I did not know about the size, or the tobacco backs or anything, all I knew was that one day I wanted a green Cobb, and BADLY! Never in my wildest dreams could I have imagined all of the things that go into this particular set, and it is truly mind blowing, but it soooooo interesting, and so unique to any other hobby I have ever had. Collecting these cards has actually brought me closer to my Dad believe it or not.

I think you all do really great work, and I just want to thank all of you for opening my eyes to something so cool. You all do a really great job, and a true service to our hobby in general.

Thank you so much to all of you!

Derek

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by tedzan

For comparison

Apple green backs of 350/460 series cards

Green back 350-only series cards



TED Z

OK, I'm sure I didn't explain myself right.......The bottom card in this picture, the Green back 350-only series (the one at the bottom),,,,looks darker than what I usually consider the "normal Sov. Green", which I consider the two cards I posted in my first post.

Then, you have the "Apple Green",,,,so, is that darker one a "third color of green" or is it just the scan? I have limited experience with Soveriegn backed cards, I only have three and have never had one of those "really dark" ones.

I'm just looking for a little clarification, and would appreciate the help. Thanks.

Sincerely, Clayton

[tedzan]

Clayton

There are varying degrees of the green color on the SOVEREIGN cards. Typically, the cards in the 350-only series appear to have a deeper green back.

The "apple green" (350/460 series subjects) is a distinctive shade of yellow-green, that is un-mistakeable.

The 150 backs can vary in their shades of green.

The 460-only cards usually appear to have a lighter shade of green; however, other 460 backs are a darker shade of green.........









TED Z

[teetwoohsix]

Thanks Ted.

The apple green do seem to almost "flouresce"(sp?) way more than the other shades. It's interesting that this particular back has more than two "shades" of green. I know Piedmont has two shades of blue, and I've seen lighter and darker Sweet Caporals (I'm not sure the Sweet Caporals have two different shades of red, but rather some are faded and some are still solid).

Another interesting thing is the difference in the brown color in the brown OM and the brown Lenox,,, sorry, I'm getting off track.

Sincerely, Clayton

[RCMcKenzie]

I have always thought that T206 Sovereign's had a green back. It's amazing that y'all made this discovery...Here are two cards that I bought from a guy in England on ebay a few months ago....


t206doolansovf.jpgt206doolansovb.jpg

t206devoresovf.jpgt206devoresovb.jpg

[RCMcKenzie]

..

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

Thanks Ted.

The apple green do seem to almost "flouresce"(sp?) way more than the other shades. It's interesting that this particular back has more than two "shades" of green. I know Piedmont has two shades of blue, and I've seen lighter and darker Sweet Caporals (I'm not sure the Sweet Caporals have two different shades of red, but rather some are faded and some are still solid).

Another interesting thing is the difference in the brown color in the brown OM and the brown Lenox,,, sorry, I'm getting off track.

Sincerely, Clayton

Clayton

Check-out my two UZIT cards....light blue vs. dark blue. Quite similar to the PIEDMONT Factory 42 vs. Factory 25 cards.






........


TED Z

[DerekMichael]

whooooooa!

Mr. Zanidakis,

Do you actually think there are different variations of Uzit backs too, or is one just faded?

That would be seriously wild. Do you think there would be a premium in pricing based on the different shade of blue?

The T206 set seriously blows my mind on a fairly regular basis. Oh, how I love it!

Derek

PS

I miss my Walter Johnson! But I am glad you get to enjoy it

[tedzan]

SOVEREIGN apple green cards...........


2nd of 4 groups (15 subjects per sheet)....... Dougherty >> Leifield






TED Z

[tedzan]

3rd of 4 groups (15 subjects per sheet)....... Magee >> Rucker







.






TED Z

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

Ted - A quick read of this thread, posted earlier in 2009 than the link you included, shows that it became immediately evident to you to look specifically at the 350/460 cards after Jim pointed you there. Your first line of post #27 says it all, but I won't pull it out of context.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=112571

Come on Tim. A lot of us know you and Jim used info Ted researched as your own but he don't bring that up every time you post more info. Just drop it already and stop stirring the pot. WE all are constantly solving the great hobby mysteries. Why can't it just be a conjoined effort on your guys behalf?

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by T205 GB

Come on Tim. A lot of us know you and Jim used info Ted researched as your own but he don't bring that up every time you post more info. Just drop it already and stop stirring the pot. WE all are constantly solving the great hobby mysteries. Why can't it just be a conjoined effort on your guys behalf?

Andrew-The line in your post I put in bold is absolutely false and shows how misinformed you are. Anyone paying attention to this forum for years knows that Ted and I disagree about a great number of things regarding the T206 set. This coupled with his objectionable actions leading to misinformation, makes the idea that I would hang my reputation on any work of his preposterous. If you can't see that, think what you will, as I'll never convince you otherwise.

It absolutely can be a collaborative effort and it IS. Just take a few seconds to look at the About Us page on our website and see how collaborative it is.

I will agree that my pointing out the thread where the Sovereign apple green was first attributed to the correct subjects was petty. The reason I did it was to show one example of how the collaborative effort over the years keeps slowly being rewritten to be the work of one person. I make no apologies for finding that bothersome but moving forward I'll keep it to myself.

[tedzan]

This group of cards completes the display of the 66 subjects in the SOVEREIGN set that were printed with the apple green backs


4th of 4 groups (15 subjects per sheet)....... Seymour >> Wiltse






TED Z

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by DerekMichael

whooooooa!

Mr. Zanidakis,

Do you actually think there are different variations of Uzit backs too, or is one just faded?

That would be seriously wild. Do you think there would be a premium in pricing based on the different shade of blue?

The T206 set seriously blows my mind on a fairly regular basis. Oh, how I love it!

Derek

PS

I miss my Walter Johnson! But I am glad you get to enjoy it

Derek

The UZIT back on the Herzog card is not faded. I have had (or seen) seen other UZIT cards with that lighter shade of blue ink.

I would not think the price of a UZIT card would be a function of dark blue or lighter blue ink. UZIT's are expensive, regardless.

TED Z

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by tedzan

This group of cards completes the display of the 66 subjects in the SOVEREIGN set that were printed with the apple green backs


[B]


TED Z

The Doc White appears to be 'road apple' green.

[ScottFandango]

can you clear some of your old messages to make room for new ones?

thanks Ted

[tedzan]

Scott Forrest

Not Doc White....that rough back is Harry Steinfeldt. The backs are depicted in reverse.

I simply flipped my 15-pocket plastics to scan the backs of the cards.

Best regards, buddy.


TED Z

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by ScottFandango

can you clear some of your old messages to make room for new ones?

thanks Ted

Scott

If you are referring to PM's....I don't care for them.

You can always email me via............

tedzan11@comcast.net

Thanks,

TED Z

[Leon]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Scott

If you are referring to PM's....I don't care for them.

You can always email me via............

tedzan11@comcast.net

Thanks,

TED Z

He (hi Ted) has had 100 PMs for a long time. Love Ted but some things ain't gonna change

[tedzan]

That's correct....you can't teach an "old dinosaur new tricks"

I prefer direct contact via the good old email system......

tedzan11@comcast.net


TED Z

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

This coupled with his objectionable actions leading to misinformation, makes the idea that I would hang my reputation on any work of his preposterous.

What "objectionable actions leading to misinformation" are you talking about, Tim ? I may have made a mistake concerning the Nicholls card. But, I will remind
you that, the existence of this "SWEET CAP 150, factory 649" card was identified by others before I had mentioned it. That controversy was argued 2 years ago.
Yet, you still allude to it. This obsession of your's to continue to make this subject a "federal case" is very sad....if not laughable.

Hey people.....here is a guy (Tim), who just stated....."the idea that would hang my (Tim's) reputation on any work of his (Ted's) preposterous."

But DAMN it, he took my SOVEREIGN 350-only NO-PRINT list and included it into his website and did not have the professional courtesy to credit me. It was very
obvious because my original list (posted June 2010) "FYI..T206 SOVEREIGN front/back...." was missing Bresnahan (bat) and Downey (fielding). My inadvertent
omission.
Tim's "T206Resource" site (posted 1 1/2 years later) included these two mistakes in his SOVEREIGN checklist.

Now, I ask anyone on this forum. What is the probability of these two identical mistakes occuring....if as Tim claims....that he independently did the research ?
THE PROBABILITY OF THIS OCCURRING IS GREATER THAN A MILLION-TO-ONE.

When I saw this error in Tim's checklist, I simply informed him of it. He corrected it. Do you think he thanked me.... HECK NO ! ....if he had thanked me, it would
have been tantamount to admitting that he "stole" my research.
You can bet that he realized that he was caught in a BIG LIE.

Strictly put, Tim is a PLAGIARIZER. And, in recent years he has posted stuff that he has gleaned from other Net54 members; and, has failed to give them credit.

There are other examples regarding T206 info that I (and others) have posted on this forum the past 8 years that Tim included in his T206 site. But, Tim didn't
have the common sense decency to acknowledge.

For the better part of this past year (or more), I've tried to take the "high road" and not speak out. However, Tim's continuing negative comments (unsolicited)
towards me everytime I post something on T206's has to cease & desist.
So, here I am finally responding to them. Some of you will not like this, but it had to be said. Because it is unnecessary for this type of incessant harassment by
Tim (or anyone else) on this forum.



Look guys,

I have generously shared my expertise on many BB card issues from the 1888 Goodwin Champions (N162) to T206's to Goudey's to Play Balls to post-war cards (1947
Bond Bread, 1949 Leaf, 1948 - 1955 Bowman's, and 1952 - 1967 Topps) the past 8 years on Net54. In this process, I have helped collector's resolve their questions;
and, for the most part in a cordial and positive manner.

However, at this point in time, I will tell everyone that I am fed-up with Tim's "BULL-CRAP"......he should seek help, because this incessant obsession of his is troubling.


TED Z

[teetwoohsix]

Originally Posted by T205 GB

Come on Tim. A lot of us know you and Jim used info Ted researched as your own but he don't bring that up every time you post more info. Just drop it already and stop stirring the pot. WE all are constantly solving the great hobby mysteries. Why can't it just be a conjoined effort on your guys behalf?

I don't think this accusation is accurate Andrew, because I for one can clearly see that Tim and Ted have quite a few different views when it comes to T206's. Also, Tim and Jim's webiste has an extensive contributor list, their information came from many different places. I think you'd have to explain exactly what information you are refering to, which I don't think you can.

I agree with your last statement, it would be nice if everyone got along (and agreed to disagree) but that's out of my hands, I mentioned in a thread a long time ago that I felt an apology was owed but after that I've just stayed out of it all.

But, I don't agree with your accustaion. If that were the case, wouldn't Tim and Ted agree on everything?

Sincerely, Clayton

*edit to add , was writing this before the post above mine ^^^^, not that it changes anything I've said.

[g_vezina_c55]

I am relatively a new member on this forum and until now i don t know anything about your different etc.

But i want to tell 1 thing to you Ted, i appreciate all your post and your research, each time you post a T206 thread i read it and follow it with all my atention. I learn many thing in the hobby with your contribution here.
Thanks.

[tedzan]

Nelson

Thanks for your very kind words.

Best regards,

TED Z

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

I don't think this accusation is accurate Andrew, because I for one can clearly see that Tim and Ted have quite a few different views when it comes to T206's. Also, Tim and Jim's webiste has an extensive contributor list, their information came from many different places. I think you'd have to explain exactly what information you are refering to, which I don't think you can.

I agree with your last statement, it would be nice if everyone got along (and agreed to disagree) but that's out of my hands, I mentioned in a thread a long time ago that I felt an apology was owed but after that I've just stayed out of it all.

But, I don't agree with your accustaion. If that were the case, wouldn't Tim and Ted agree on everything?

Sincerely, Clayton

*edit to add , was writing this before the post above mine ^^^^, not that it changes anything I've said.

Get the past history between these guys and it will make good sense.

[cfc1909]

Ted

All information on T206Resource is credited on an "About Us " page, its not Tim's site.

We all shared info privately and you were included in that info and some how it turns out to be your research and posted publicly on 54.

I myself did the sovereign list and I did make a mistake and it was fixed, I didn't fake scans to make myself correct. Its how you handle the mistakes that has separated us. I didn't copy your list or I would have had 151 Sovereign 150s. Remember the Crawford you claimed to own is another front back combo that does not exist.

If you are called on something it is called an attempt to discredit, just the other day when you realized Russell was a life long bachelor we need to here a story how he was a "ladies man" and each time you tell the story the number of cards that you acquired from a great grand daughter that does not exist.

A friendship has turned sour over bad info being challenged. We shared the new information on the composition of the set with you and everyone. It is on the site if you wish to know it but it is clear by your posts you have not read it or do not understand it.


You have a collection to be proud of you don't need to make it sound better by creating stories. You don't need to claim to have all 75 American Beauty 460s, 40 or 50 is pretty special.

Your desire to be looked at as the know it all about baseball cards has ruined your reputation. You alone have done this, no one else.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by cfc1909

Your desire to be looked at as the know it all about baseball cards has ruined your reputation. You alone have done this, no one else.

Jim, none of what you stated above is true.

It is not easy forgetting past problems, and quite obviously it isn't going to happen by one person making the effort - it's going to take that entire group, and perhaps that really is too much to ask. But I can assure you, regardless of whose fault any of it was, all the other T206 collectors on the board would like to see it happen.

I have apologized to some real idiots before, when I didn't feel I was as much to blame (or even at all). 9 out of 10 times, everything was great afterward, so it was worth it. Seriously, if all the people you think are dicks, were all of a sudden your friends and caused you no angst, wouldn't that be better?

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by tedzan

What "objectionable actions leading to misinformation" are you talking about, Tim ?

I’m not dredging up the Nicholls that occurred two years ago. Similar situations have played out more than once since then, with the last as recent as the 2012 National. I can go into these in greater detail if you prefer, but my suggestion is that it would be to your benefit to move on rather than really drag this out.

Originally Posted by tedzan

But DAMN it, he took my SOVEREIGN 350-only NO-PRINT list and included it into his website and did not have the professional courtesy to credit me.

Anyone comparing the checklists that you have posted on Net54 to those on our website will find that they are very different. We have a number of confirmed cards that you don’t, but most important we have a large number unconfirmed that you have confirmed. The checklists do not match. If me, or anyone else involved in the site were going to copy your work, why would we leave so much out? Why didn’t we confirm a Sovereign 350 until August of 2012 that you have had on your list since at least 2011.

Long before T206Resource.com was in the works, I spent a great deal of time looking at your checklists, adding to them and removing mistakes. This was not done for the purpose of using your work (nor was that done) but rather to help you. I passed along this information to you in the interest of collaboration.

You previously listed Doc White (Portrait) Sovereign 350 as a no-print until I advised you that it existed and shared a scan with you. I also posted a John Frill scan of an AB460 when you listed it as a no-print. When you needed 11 additional subjects to complete the Sweet Caporal 350/460 No.42OP list, I provided you scans of all eleven. I most importantly helped to remove numerous bad confirmations from your lists. Does this sound like a plagiarist? If I was copying your lists and not working on my own, how would I know about your many mistakes?

If I were going to plagiarize anyone, Ted would literally be the last person in the hobby I would consider. Beyond the known made up cards that would make me take pause, there is work like this example. In a Sweet Caporal 350/460 No.42 No OP survey I did in 2010 he confirmed 26 cards in the survey and 21 turned out to be no good. Again, why would I have any faith, to place my name, on work like that?

A big portion of the information on our site is based on the idea of print groups. This is a concept Ted has either ignored, or doesn’t understand. He’s never addressed them and his posts still reflect the concepts of the set prior to us learning about them. They are the foundation for the set and explaining its order. Whether he doesn’t understand them, doesn’t know about them or doesn’t believe they are correct, there is no way we could have copied this from him based on any premise.

Originally Posted by tedzan

Strictly put, Tim is a PLAGIARIZER. And, in recent years he has posted stuff that he has gleaned from other Net54 members; and, has failed to give them credit.

Ted, like many of the things you post, simply putting it out there does not make it true. Anyone that has worked with me or contacted the website can attest that I go out of my way to give people credit. Every person on our contributors list can back me up on that. I have never had a Net54 member contact me and say that I took credit for their work.

Originally Posted by tedzan

For the better part of this past year (or more), I've tried to take the "high road" and not speak out. However, Tim's continuing negative comments (unsolicited)towards me everytime I post something on T206's has to cease & desist.

Ted-A majority of the time we butt heads over baseball card issues. We are both passionate about the same baseball card set and have very different opinions about a lot of it. When you post something that I believe to be inaccurate, I respond with what I believe is correct. You don’t see this as a baseball card discussion; you see it as a personal attack. Due to the amount of bad information you put out there, it seems like I am “attacking” you personally a lot. Nothing could be further from the truth. The way you handle people taking a different position than yours ruins the discussion. Anyone who has been paying attention over the years knows that I’ve been on the high road looking down at you for a long time. So please don't play that card now. You're not a victim. I do not respond to untruths or bad information until you post it.

I acknowledged earlier in this thread that my pointing out Jim’s discovering the correlation between the Sovereign 350 apple green and the subjects they were printed with was a tad petty. But it was accurate.

I have informed you in a private email and will reiterate it here publicly. Plagiarism is a very strong accusation and something that I am not guilty of. I am warning you for the last time to cease saying that about me.

Ideally everyone would get a long and work for the greater good. I've tried moving on several times but the lies just keep on coming. They eventually get the best of me and I speak out. I'll keep them to myself moving forward and stick strictly to the card information. If that isn't accurate, I will post about it for the knowledge of other collectors.

[DerekMichael]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zn_ZdX6nQvw

[RCMcKenzie]

So, would the t206 Harry Steinfeldt road apple green sovereign card command a premium?

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by g_vezina_c55

I am relatively a new member on this forum and until now i don t know anything about your different etc.

But i want to tell 1 thing to you Ted, i appreciate all your post and your research, each time you post a T206 thread i read it and follow it with all my atention. I learn many thing in the hobby with your contribution here.
Thanks.

BIG plus one

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

So, would the t206 Harry Steinfeldt road apple green sovereign card command a premium?

This Steinfeldt is the roughest card in my SOVEREIGN set. Some one of these days I will replace it.


Incidently, check-out my complete uncut 1948 LEAF Boxing sheet in your current Boxing thread.

Best regards,

TED Z

[Leon]

Originally Posted by DerekMichael

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zn_ZdX6nQvw

Two minutes and twelve seconds of "well worth it" watching of history. Kids today just won't ever see it, I am afraid, but I digress.

I do hope, as Rodney King said, "can't we all get along?" And then as the Beatles said, "We can work it out." We have discussed things that happened a long time ago over and over. In that regard Any misinformation put forth to the public isn't good for the hobby, whatever source it comes from and whenever it came out, or comes out.
If someone puts bad info out in our forum, I hope others will politely correct that person, each and every time. Definitely, if I ever say anything that is incorrect, I want to be corrected. (politely please).
Hopefully we can continue to have friendly and professional debates on printing and characteristics of the Monster. I do agree too, that just because anyone disagrees with someone else, doesn't make them a bad person. As long as everything gets said in a respectful manner then there should be no problem.

[sdkammeyer]

Regardless of who gets or wants credit ..... Thanks to everyone for this thread.
I just picked up my first apple green sovereign and I was glad to find this thread to shed some light, and have the opportunity to educate myself a little on the subject.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by tedzan

I arrange the cards in all my T206 sets according to their Series (150, 350, 350/460, 460, etc.). Therefore, it became immediately evident to me, as I flipped thru
the pages of my album, that the apple green cards were exclusively associated with the 55 subjects in the 350/460 series. Furthermore, as I went thru the entire
set scanning the backs of all the cards, I discovered that the six Super-Prints (with SOVEREIGN 350 backs)....and, the Joe Doyle, Red Kleinow (NY-catching), Simon
Nichols (bat), Bob Rhoades (right arm extended), and Frank Smith (white cap) were printed with apple green backs. Resulting in the grand total = 66 subjects.


............... Joe Doyle......see note ...............

NOTE

Pictured here are the three printing phases of the Joe Doyle card. The Nat'l error card (only 8 have been confirmed) exists only with the PIEDMONT 350 back. American
Lithographic (ALC) first printed the PIEDMONT backs; and, an observant employee at ALC spotted the Nat'l mistake on the Doyle caption. So, ALC quickly stopped print-
ing of this card. And probabably discarded most of them. However, a few of these cards did get into circulation. How many, we may never know.

The card in the center is an interim version which has a "printer's mark" exactly aligned with the leftmost serif of the N of the error card. This printer's mark is apparently
the result of a hasty attempt to remove the Nat'l lettering from the printing plate. A survey was originated back in June 2007 (and has been updated since). It indicates
that 7.3 % of the Doyle cards are found with this printer's mark. Most of these cards are PIEDMONT's. To a lesser extent, this printer's mark is found on SWEET CAPORAL
cards. And, 1 (or 2) OLD MILL and POLAR BEAR Joe Doyle cards have been found with this printer's mark. No EPDG or TOLSTOI Joe Doyle cards have yet been found with
this printer's mark. For the original thread on this printer's mark, check-out..... http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...slow+joe+doyle


........................ PIEDMONT 350 (only) ............................................... PIEDMONT 350 .......................................... SOVEREIGN 350

............................................../\................................................. ......................./\




I have 4 - SOVEREIGN Joe Doyle cards; and, I have seen 8 other ones. None have been found with the printer's mark. And, I do not expect that any will be found.
The SOVEREIGN apple green press runs occurred in a later phase of the printing runs (circa Summer/Fall 1910).





.................................................. .................................................. ..........................



TED Z

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by tedzan

NOTE

Pictured here are the three printing phases of the Joe Doyle card. The Nat'l error card (only 8 have been confirmed) exists only with the PIEDMONT 350 back. American
Lithographic (ALC) first printed the PIEDMONT backs; and, an observant employee at ALC spotted the Nat'l mistake on the Doyle caption. So, ALC quickly stopped print-
ing of this card. And probabably discarded most of them. However, a few of these cards did get into circulation. How many, we may never know.

The card in the center is an interim version which has a "printer's mark" exactly aligned with the leftmost serif of the N of the error card. This printer's mark is apparently
the result of a hasty attempt to remove the Nat'l lettering from the printing plate. A survey was originated back in June 2007 (and has been updated since). It indicates
that 7.3 % of the Doyle cards are found with this printer's mark. Most of these cards are PIEDMONT's. To a lesser extent, this printer's mark is found on SWEET CAPORAL
cards. And, 1 (or 2) OLD MILL and POLAR BEAR Joe Doyle cards have been found with this printer's mark. No EPDG or TOLSTOI Joe Doyle cards have yet been found with
this printer's mark. For the original thread on this printer's mark, check-out..... http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...slow+joe+doyle


........................ PIEDMONT 350 (only) ............................................... PIEDMONT 350 .......................................... SOVEREIGN 350

............................................../\................................................. ......................./\




I have 4 - SOVEREIGN Joe Doyle cards; and, I have seen 8 other ones. None have been found with the printer's mark. And, I do not expect that any will be found.
The SOVEREIGN apple green press runs occurred in a later phase of the printing runs (circa Summer/Fall 1910).





.................................................. .................................................. ..........................



TED Z

The following is an UPDATE of the survey I started regarding the Joe Doyle printer's mark in June 2007. The current numbers reflect that 7.3 % of the Joe Doyle cards
sampled have this printer's mark.

UPDATED as of Jan 23, 2013


T-brand.............Mark.....No-Mark

Piedmont 350........10...........84

Sweet Cap 350.......6..........115

Polar Bear..............2............17

Old Mill..................1.............6

Sovereign 350.........0...........12

Tolstoi...................0.............4

EPDG.....................0.............1
.
Unknown back.........0.............2
____________________________

Totals................. 19 ........ 241


If anyone on this forum has not previously reported their Joe Doyle card with/without this printer's mark, we would like to hear from you.

And, please identify the T-brand back of your card.
The survey continues.


Thanks,

TED Z

[tedzan]

PRINTER's MARK................/\


UPDATED as of Jan 24, 2013

T-brand.............Mark.....No-Mark

Piedmont 350........10............85

Sweet Cap 350.......6...........116

Polar Bear..............2............17

Old Mill..................1.............6

Sovereign 350.........0...........12

Tolstoi...................0.............4

EPDG.....................0.............1
.
Unknown back.........0.............2
____________________________

Totals................. 19 ........ 243


Two new inputs......a PIEDMONT and a SWEET CAPORAL......neither with Mark.

19/262 = 7.2 % Joe Doyle cards with printer's mark


If anyone on this forum has not previously reported their Joe Doyle card with (or without) this printer's mark,
we would like to hear from you.

And, please identify the T-brand back of your card.
This survey continues.

Thanks,

TED Z

[cobblove]

Very cool thread. I enjoyed all this info.
I only have 1 Sovereign back and I bought it because it was so dang bright on the back. Just love it. But now seeing those apple greens, its making me want to find one like that or make a run of the different shades. Very cool.
Well here is mine. Its so green it looks blue to me but its not I know.
Its a bender with trees.

Thanks for posting this info!

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by cobblove

Very cool thread. I enjoyed all this info.
I only have 1 Sovereign back and I bought it because it was so dang bright on the back. Just love it. But now seeing those apple greens,
its making me want to find one like that or make a run of the different shades. Very cool. Well here is mine. Its so green it looks blue to
me but its not I know. Its a bender with trees.



Thanks for posting this info!

It's been my experience that the deeper green backs are mostly found on the 350-only Series subjects. Like your Bender (trees) card. Very nice find.

If you are interested in acquiring an apple green SOVEREIGN, a 150 Series, and 460 Series backs....email me and I will see what I have to offer.

tedzan11@comcast.net


Thanks for the compliment.

TED Z

[Jantz]

Hi Ted

I posted in your 2009 thread, but that was about the colors of the Sovereign backs and whether I had any examples to add to your list.

Since then I've acquired two Doyles to add to your survey.

T206 Doyle (Hands above head) Sovereign 350 No-Mark

T206 Doyle (Hands above head) Sweet Caporal 350 f#30 Mark

Hope this helps


Jantz

[tedzan]

Jantz......Each and every input helps. Thank you very much for your two inputs.




PRINTER's MARK................/\


UPDATED as of Jan 25, 2013

T-brand.............Mark.....No-Mark

Piedmont 350........10............85

Sweet Cap 350.......7...........116

Polar Bear..............2............17

Old Mill..................1.............6

Sovereign 350.........0...........13

Tolstoi...................0.............4

EPDG.....................0.............1
.
Unknown back.........0.............2
____________________________

Totals................. 20 ........ 244


Joe Doyle cards with this printer's mark = 20/264 = 7.6 %


If anyone on this forum has not previously reported their Joe Doyle card with (or without) this printer's mark,
your input to this survey would be really appreciated.

And, please identify the T-brand back of your card.


Thanks,

TED Z

[tedzan]

Six new inputs have been reported from Net54er's.....a PIEDMONT, OLD MILL, POLAR BEAR, TOLSTOI, and SWEET CAPORAL (2 cards)

There ia a printer's mark on the POLAR BEAR card. There is no printer's mark on the other 5 cards.




PRINTER's MARK................/\



UPDATED as of Jan 28, 2013

T-brand.............Mark.....No-Mark

Piedmont 350........10............86

Sweet Cap 350.......7...........118

Polar Bear..............3............17

Old Mill..................1.............7

Sovereign 350.........0...........13

Tolstoi...................0.............5

EPDG.....................0.............1

Unknown back.........0.............2
____________________________

Totals................. 21 ........ 249


Joe Doyle cards with this printer's mark = 21/270 = 7.8 %


If anyone on this forum has not previously reported their Joe Doyle card with (or without) this printer's mark,
your input to this survey would be really appreciated.

And, please identify the T-brand back of your card.

Thanks,

TED Z

[lharri3600]

Poor guys doyle natl:d