rehashing the same topic every 3 weeks will not likely reveal any earth shattering new evidence here...it will only irritate most people!

Debating whether t213-1's should be in t206 is much more compelling than cobb/cobb...but I control myself!

What proof would be needed to change the Cobb/Cobb from a T206 classification or keep it in the same classification as T206 ?

Would we need uncut sheets ? What evidence would need to be provided ? Then we need to see if such information exists. I love research.

Over the course of three years and millions of cards printed American Lithograph did not change the printing specifications for the cards. They didn't change card stock, add gloss, change the color of the player identification, etc.

Why if the Cobb/Cobb was part of the same issue would they stray from their specifications for just this one card and not any others before or after?

This is what leads me to believe that ATC did not consider this card to be part of the same project, or someone else like F.R. Penn was responsible for the cards issue.

I agree, except for the perplexingly narrow American Beauty's.

Did any other t206s come out of factory 33? Does that matter?

This was a cutting issue, the last process for the cards. This had no effect on how the cards were printed. The American Beauty's were printed just like all the other cards.

Maybe, maybe not.

Dave -

I think I see where this could be headed and it's a whole other topic of discussion. What I meant by the AB's were printed just like all the other cards I was referring to paper stock, images, caption color, no gloss, etc. Same as the other cards.

Gotcha