T205 Doc White No Quotes not correct

After receiving another one in the mail I noticed some faint quote marks on the right side of Doc. I pulled the others I have and noticed all of them have the same similar marks. So the Doc White PB was printed with quotes on the plate but somehow just like my HLC backed Latham's it was scrubbed out or set to far in to hit the card correctly. So the PB White is just an error card and didn't have the typeset removed as believed. Looks as though it is printers error and shouldn't be labeled as "No Quotes Var." Maybe a better suiting is "Quotes around Doc error". Either way this should not affect the value to much since it is still an error card and has become very scarce on the market. The price is not to far ahead of the normal Doc White cards but it still carries a small premium and will surely expand once the TPG's label the card as a set variation.

Would like to see scans and hear some feedback from my T205 guys.

[marcdelpercio]

Andrew,
I have three of these and have looked at them with a loupe. I see nothing on mine that suggest that the quotes were printed, even faintly. On one of them, there is a bit of staining in the area, so I can't say conclusively on that one, but I also have a SGC 30 and SGC 50 that are very clear and show no signs of the marks.

To assume that this was just a "print error", you would have to say that there was only one printing of this card, as it would be extremely unlikely that the same "error" would have been made on multiple, independent print runs. It would seem very strange to have one separate print run with only the "error" Polar Bear back and then several other runs with the other backs, in which all of the typesetting would have been replaced to show the quote marks. This would be especially difficult to accept as this is not a short printed card, such as the Wilhelm variation, for example, for which a much lower number of cards were printed overall.

I do agree that regardless of whether it is considered a true variation, print error, or none of the above, the market has dictated that there is a modest premium for it and it does seem to be a scarce card to run across over the past couple of years. I don't expect that this will ever have more than a small premium attached, but the fact that it is different than the others, for whatever reason, I think will always give it a bit of added interest and value.

[Wite3]

What Marc said...

Mine has no faint trace...nice clean back with no quotes.

Joshua

So this means I am lucky enough to get 3 that have remnants of the quotes on the right side. I will be bringing them to nationals so if anyone wants to verify in person and compare examples I'm game. Very neat stuff to find on these cards.

[Tcards-Please]

Andrew,

I wasn't going to bring this up because I hadn't found another like it, but since you have the same thing, I will chime in. I have one PB White without the quotes around Doc, but my other PB definitely has a faint quote mark on the right side of Doc, but nothing on the left.

I would tend to lean somewhat with your theory that the typeset was initially there, but maybe to far in and made the partial strike early on, but later in the run didn't make contact with the card which resulted in the no quote.

r/

Frank

Frank I am glad to hear that. So looks like there is definitely a printers error and not just a no quotes print run


I think the same thing happened with the HLC backed Lathams. They were supposed to have the W.A but the W seems to have been inserted upside down and to far in. All the examples I have have a period or faint remnants of the W or M before it. Very neat finds imo

[marcdelpercio]

I am curious what the theory would be as to why this print error would not show on any other back. There are countless examples of cards that show print spots or flaws that are consistent throughout most if not all backs. This would lead me to conclude that the back-specific advertising was the only part of the typeset that was changed between most of these runs. To accept that this was merely a misstrike of some sort would suggest that there was an entirely separate single print run for all Polar Bear backs that was independent from all printings with any other back. I suppose that is certainly possible but it does seem odd to me, especially for a card that is not a short print.

[steve B]

I believe the T205s were lithographed from plates laid out with at least partially typeset transfers. And the plates were all one back.

It's possible the transfers were two parts, brand specific frames and player specific text.

In any event, I think that on some plates or perhaps just portions of the plate the transfers didn't transfer completely for some reason.

Steve B

[Tcards-Please]

Here is a picture of mine although it is difficult to see the quote marks, they are definitely present ONLY on the right side of DOC which is what Andrew has pointed out. The left side is perfectly clear and doesn't show any markings of a quote strike.

Mark, we know that there were different print runs with each specific tobacco brand, which explains why the Hoblitzell "no stats" only appears on Hassan backs and why the Mathewson Cycle only has 1 loss as opposed to 11 which are on all other advertised tobacco backs. It is entirely possible that the Polar Bear run had the typeset in place and the partial strikes occurred either at the beginning of the print run or the end.

Just my two cents and an educated guess on this theory.

r/
Frank

[T205Guy]

I just picked up my first one and I also have a faint quote mark on the right side. Also, has anyone else noticed that the letter "T" in "White" is shortened at the bottom??

Originally Posted by T205Guy

I just picked up my first one and I also have a faint quote mark on the right side. Also, has anyone else noticed that the letter "T" in "White" is shortened at the bottom??

I have seen it but in comparison I have seen it on other white backs as well so no significance to me