T206 Print Groups-A Quick Overview

White Borders · #1 01-30-2013, 09:51 PM

This is confusing:

First Drew asks why Jennings and Ludgren were printed with a P150 back, but not SC150 or Sov150 .

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drew

Tim
Any theories why Jennings and Lundgren were only printed with a P150 back?
No SC150 or Sov 150 backs.
drew

Ted replies that ALC initially printed Lundgren with P150 back "since American Lithographic printed the PIEDMONT backs first." That is correct. But what Ted doesn't state is the possibility of additional P150 print runs later in the 150 series printings. I believe P150 was the first print run for the T206, but Lundgren Chi was not in this run. SC150s, Hindus, Sov150s were then printed. Then another run of P150's was printed to finish off the 150 series, and this run included Lundgren Chi. The final part of Ted's reply about starting the 350 series printing with Piedmont 350 and EPDG backs I also believe is correct and included the Lundgren Chi. Lundgren Chi was soon pulled, which is why it is difficult to find with these two backs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hi Drew......long time, no see ?
Carl Lungren's Major League career ended April 23, 1909. Therefore, his Cubs card was initially printed with the PIEDMONT 150 back.....since American
Lithographic printed the PIEDMONT backs first.
Furthermore, they included Lundgren (Cubs) when they started printing the PIEDMONT 350 backs. At the same time they also printed the EPDG backs
on certain cards. Both these two backs are quite rare on this Lundgren card.
Best regards,
TED Z

Then Tim's statement implies that Sov 150 was most likely printed after several othe backs were printed in the 150 series. Because Lundgren Chi and Jennings Port are not found with Sov150, then they would not have been printed in the first P150 run or SC150 run. That only leaves the possiblity that they were printed in a final P150 run at the end of the 150 series.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

We believe they were added to the set during the last of the 150 Series printings. Their absence from the first printings of Piedmont and Sweet Caporal are supported by their not being printed with a Sovereign 150 back.
One popular misconception is that there were only single printings of backs like Piedmont and Sweet Caporal. However this doesn't seem to be the case. Piedmont and Sweet Caporal cards are believed to have been printed multiple times during the different series and print groups productions.
The Lundgren (Chicago) cards late entry and early exit from the set accounts for this card being printed with so few backs.
Jennings (Portrait) was added late like the Lundgren (Chicago), but wasn't pulled early and can be found with more of the PG1 350 Series backs.

From all this, I'm not sure how Ted interpreted Tim's post to mean that Sov backs were printed first in the process - Probably just misread Tim's post. No where that I'm aware of has Tim ever stated Sovereigns were printed first. Piedmont 150's have long been assumed to be printed first in the 150 series and Piedmont 350's have long been assumed to be printed first in the 350 series. What Tim is trying to show is that there were most likely 2 or more Piedmont print runs while the series was being printed, with the Piedmont runs being separated with other backs' print runs, and some subjects added and some deleted.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tedzan

Tim

Your conjecture that SOVEREIGN backs were printed first in the process does not wash.
This LUNDGREN card, along with the MAGIE error card, the PLANK card, the WAGNER card, and the JOE DOYLE (Nat'l) error card.....and,
even the JOE DOYLE (remnant) printer's mark card.....all disprove your contention.
American Lithographic's (ALC) initial press runs for the 150 and 350 Series printed the PIEDMONT backs first on the T206's. Followed by
the SWEET CAPORAL backs and the brown HINDU backs. In between the latter two press runs ALC printed the SOVEREIGN backs.
The above mentioned 6 subjects are the closest evidence we have that is consistent with my "PIEDMONT first" theory.
And, how do you explain the PIEDMONT 350 backs on the T206's that I refer to as the "Elite Eight" ? According to your thinking, these
8 cards should have been printed with SOVEREIGN 350 backs ?
There is NO evidence whatsoever to support your conjecture that SOVEREIGN was printed first. SOVEREIGN was at best a 3rd tier brand
in the ATC tobacco hierarchy.
TED Z

Hope this clarifies a few things.

Best Regards and Happy Collecting

Craig

Abravefan11 · #2 01-31-2013, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Borders

What Tim is trying to show is that there were most likely 2 or more Piedmont print runs while the series was being printed, with the Piedmont runs being separated with other backs' print runs, and some subjects added and some deleted.

That's exactly right.

There also appears to have been two or more Piedmont 350 printings of the group 1 subjects. Dahlen (Boston) was printed during the first Piedmont 350 print run and the updated Dahlen (Brooklyn) during a later Piedmont 350 print run. The same is true for Elberfeld (New York) and the updated Elberfeld (Washington).

I think these multiple printings for Piedmont and Sweet Caporal happened throughout the set.

White Borders · #3 01-31-2013, 06:15 PM

If anybody reading this post is able to time travel someday, then you must agree to travel back to American Lithographic Company in 1909 - 1910 and take photos of uncut sheets of T206 and the equipment they were printed with. You must then travel to a point in time of 6:16 pm Central Time, Jan 31, 2013 and post your photos so we will know definitively the size of the T206 sheets.

PS, pick up a couple of Wagners for me while you are there.

Best Regards and Good Luck,
Craig

White Borders · #4 01-31-2013, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Borders

If anybody reading this post is able to time travel someday, then you must agree to travel back to American Lithographic Company in 1909 - 1910 and take photos of uncut sheets of T206 and the equipment they were printed with. You must then travel to a point in time of 6:16 pm Central Time, Jan 31, 2013 and post your photos so we will know definitively the size of the T206 sheets.

PS, pick up a couple of Wagners for me while you are there.

Best Regards and Good Luck,
Craig

Well, it is now 6:22 and I'm very disappointed

sreader3 · #5 01-31-2013, 08:43 PM

I have been away from this thread for a couple of days to deal with pending business but would like to offer a couple of hypotheticals on the topic of whether the SLers should be characterized as (a) one print group of 48 or (b) two print groups—a 150/350 print group of 34 subjects and a 350-only print group of 14 subjects.

First, I think we all agree that Brown Hindu is a 150 series back. If you do not agree with that, please exit the station here.

Now, for those of you who are still on the train, let’s imagine a universe where the Brown Hindu back reads “150 Subjects” akin to the Piedmont 150 back. In that event, would anyone still be arguing that the 14 SL subjects who are only printed with Piedmont 350 and Old Mill Southern are part of the same print group as the 34 subjects who are printed with Hindu 150, Piedmont 350 and Old Mill Southern?

And if your answer to the first question is “yes,” then why do you consider the 150-only major league subjects a separate print group from the 150/350 subjects? Aren’t the former just 150/350 major league subjects that were discontinued early (akin to the 14 350-only SL subjects that were added late)?

And where the heck is Jamie Hull on this?

Scot

Abravefan11 · #6 01-31-2013, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sreader3

And if your answer to the first question is “yes,” then why do you consider the 150-only major league subjects a separate print group from the 150/350 subjects? Aren’t the former just 150/350 major league subjects that were discontinued early?

Scot

I do not consider the 150 Only subjects to be a separate print group. I do believe they were print group 1 subjects. They were part of the original 150 subjects and printed like other print group 1 subjects. The only difference was they were discontinued early.

So back to the original question, I do not believe that the absence of the 14 from the Hindu printing is reason to categorize them separately. I believe they were printed as the same supplemental group.

I hope that is easy to follow, but let me know if something isn't clear and I'll be happy to answer a follow up.

sreader3 · #7 01-31-2013, 09:10 PM

Tim,

I guess we just have a fundamentally different understanding of what constitutes a print group. My sense is that if Subject A is printed in Series 1 and Series 2 and Subject B is printed in Series 2 but NOT printed in Series 1 then Subject A and Subject B are in different print groups. You must have a different understanding--and that is fine. We can agree to disagree.

Scot

t206hound · #8 01-31-2013, 09:12 PM

moved to a new thread

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FS: t206 groups, HOF w/ tostois too	trobba	Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T	1	10-23-2012 02:06 PM
Looking for Groups of PSA T206's	longstreet766	Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T	0	06-21-2009 09:38 PM
Topps Baseball Stamps - An Overview	Archive	Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)	18	09-06-2008 11:59 AM
WTB Raw T206/T205 Lots/Groups	Archive	Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T	1	04-06-2007 08:51 AM
Grading Companies (Overview & Opinions)	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	22	09-27-2004 09:37 AM