Mistaken Print Group 3 designation - Kleinow and Smith

[greco827]

So when I read your original post, it makes perfect sense .... I think. Basically the inclusion of Kleinow in Group A of 350/460 is based upon it holding a pattern with other known 350/460 cards based on the mutually exclusive sets it's part of. Same for Smith in Group B, just the opposite sets.

One other notable difference between the rest of the Group A and Group B cards for 350/460, is the Kleinow and Smith were not in any 350 only series. Neither subject is in SOV, AB, Bl, CY, or Drum 350 sets.

In addition, every card in Group A and B, aside from Kleinow and Smith, has a SOV350AG back. Kleinow is the only one in Group A without one, although his predecessor (Catching - New York) card is represented, and Smith is the only one in B without one, although the predecessor pre-trade card (Chicago - White Cap) does.

Somewhat separately, t206resource.com checklists add to confusion in regards to the A/B groupings which you have laid out, and seem to have withstood the test of time. It lists Ames (Hands Over Head) as confirmed for both AB460 and Uzit, as well as SC460/25, which flies in the face of the groupings. However, when looking at PSA and SGC pop reports, no AB or Uzit cards have been graded, so I assume you are correct, and they need to fix the checklist.


Just as a sidenote, as tone and intent can be misconstrued in type ... I am not challenging any of your knowledge or expertise, I'm just asking questions and making inquiries to better educate myself on this stuff. I appreciate all the replies thus far!

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by greco827

Somewhat separately, t206resource.com checklists add to confusion in regards to the A/B groupings which you have laid out, and seem to have withstood the test of time. It lists Ames (Hands Over Head) as confirmed for both AB460 and Uzit, as well as SC460/25, which flies in the face of the groupings. However, when looking at PSA and SGC pop reports, no AB or Uzit cards have been graded, so I assume you are correct, and they need to fix the checklist.

Hi Jason

Regarding the Ames card....I could go into some heavy "nitty-gritty" why I know this card was NOT printed with an AB 460 back,
nor a UZIT back.
Instead, I'll refer you to this thread which I posted this past Summer. I think you'll get a "kick" out of it ......
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=240984


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[greco827]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hi Jason

Regarding the Ames card....I could go into some heavy "nitty-gritty" why I know this card was NOT printed with an AB 460 back,
nor a UZIT back.
Instead, I'll refer you to this thread which I posted this past Summer. I think you'll get a "kick" out of it ......
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=240984


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

That's a hell of a good post. So not only do they have the Ames marked wrong (I mean, at least list it as Possible, rather than confirmed) for AB460 and Uzit, they also have the Hindu Red marked as a flat out "no", where clearly it should be at least marked as a "possible". Learning as I go!

Now, since I read that post, in which Steve B. posted a link to an article questioning the validity of the existence of the SOV350 George Davis, I have to inquire and get your thoughts. It certainly seems on paper that it would/could exist, but with none having been graded, and only very few SOV150, and relatively few PD350's. This seems to mirror one of the originally suspected "Elite 11" (as they were known at the time), Jim Pastorius. They are in all of the exact same sets, including the lightly distributed SC150-649OP, and Pastorius was NOT included in Sovereign 350. Seems more than possible that George Davis was in the same boat .... perhaps even on some of the same original sheets used for distribution. Thoughts on this?