Are the "T213-1" (1910 COUPON) cards really T206's ? ....I think so....What say you ?

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Post #59 in this thread has a 1908 newspaper clipping from the New Orleans Times Picayune
that mentions Coupon cigarettes but it doesn't say anything about baseball pictures.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...light=Picayune

That's the 1908 Times Picayune article which I referred to regarding the "COUPON" Cigarettes brand. I knew you would find it.

Come on Pat, this is silly...."but it doesn't say anything about baseball pictures.".

T206's were not issued until approx. a year later (circa Spring/Summer 1909).

Anyway, thanks for finding this Newspaper article.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Pat R]

That's my point Ted I asked where the 1910 dating of the T213-1's came from and
you said a newspaper clipping if that's not the case then where did that information
come from?

[Leon]

Maybe, Like many other things, it came from conjecture not fact. When I started quoting Burdick all I got in response was some old hobbyists said "this and that." I say if we are going to have a good debate we should base it on facts not what someone might have said a long time ago.

Originally Posted by Pat R

That's my point Ted I asked where the 1910 dating of the T213-1's came from and
you said a newspaper clipping if that's not the case then where did that information
come from?

[AGuinness]

I have no horse in this race, but it does make me wonder: how would T213-1s being reclassified as T206s change how you collect, if it happened?

For me, it wouldn't change my T206 goal (Red Sox team set with all different backs), as none of the Sox players appeared in the T213-1s, but rather later Coupons.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Leon

Maybe, Like many other things, it came from conjecture not fact. When I started quoting Burdick all I got in response was some old hobbyists said "this and that."
I say if we are going to have a good debate we should base it on facts not what someone might have said a long time ago.

Leon

Does your last comment also apply to Jefferson Burdick ?

As, I am sure you know, when he became aware (circa 1940's) that there were several white-bordered sets of tobacco cards issued in the Louisiana area (T213, T214, T215),
he originally considered the "T213-1" set as an extension of the T206 set.

I could give you a lengthy dissertation on all the factors with these Major League (48) subjects and their relevance to the other T206 brands, that results in a narrow timeline.
And, this research convinces me that the 1910 COUPON cards were indeed printed (and issued) in 1910.

And to a less complicated degree, the Southern Association (20) subjects fit into this narrow timeline. However, I will spare you all the nitty-gritty details.


1910 COUPON ("T213-1") Major League (48) subjects





Southern Association (20) subjects





In my opinion....these cards (and the red Ty Cobb card with the TY COBB back) were advertising premiums, rather than insert cards (into tobacco products).

The bottom line is....you say nay and I say yea....to the "T213-1" (1910 COUPON) cards as just another T-brand in the T206 set. And that is fine with me.
For I will just keep on rolling along including 1910 COUPON cards in my T206 runs of my favorite subjects.

Happy New Year to you, Leon.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Leon]

Hey Ted
I will try to do some more research for our next slugfest. Until then I hope this year is better than your last!! Happy collecting.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Leon

Does your last comment also apply to Jefferson Burdick ?

As, I am sure you know, when he became aware (circa 1940's) that there were several white-bordered sets of tobacco cards issued in the Louisiana area (T213, T214, T215),
he originally considered the "T213-1" set as an extension of the T206 set.

I could give you a lengthy dissertation on all the factors with these Major League (48) subjects and their relevance to the other T206 brands, that results in a narrow timeline.
And, this research convinces me that the 1910 COUPON cards were indeed printed (and issued) in 1910.
And to a less complicated degree, the Southern Association (20) subjects fit into this narrow timeline. However, I will spare you all the nitty-gritty details.


1910 COUPON ("T213-1") Major League (48) subjects





Southern Association (20) subjects





In my opinion....these cards (and the red Ty Cobb card with the TY COBB back) were advertising premiums, rather than insert cards (into tobacco products).

The bottom line is....you say nay and I say yea....to the "T213-1" (1910 COUPON) cards as just another T-brand in the T206 set. And that is fine with me.
For I will just keep on rolling along including 1910 COUPON cards in my T206 runs of my favorite subjects.

Happy New Year to you, Leon.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Ted, I think the 1910 timeline is important in this discussion as several people have stated that it's the main the reason they think the T213-1's should be included in the T206 set. I have been searching here and other places and everything I found about the 1910 date is based on the fact that they're all 350 only subjects which isn't true and I will explain this and provide evidence tomorrow because it will require a lengthy post.

In the meantime I have a question for you.

There isn't a single minor league player in the T213-1 set does any other back with 350 only subjects exclude all of the minor league players?

Also you say the super prints were supposed to be 350 only but ALC
changed their mind on them which I disagree with but either way
the fact is they're not a 350 only subject.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Ted, I think the 1910 timeline is important in this discussion as several people have stated that it's the main the reason they think the T213-1's should be included in the T206 set.

I have been searching here and other places and everything I found about the 1910 date is based on the fact that they're all 350 only subjects which isn't true

and I will explain this and provide evidence tomorrow because it will require a lengthy post.

In the meantime I have a question for you.

There isn't a single minor league player in the T213-1 set does any other back with 350 only subjects exclude all of the minor league players?

Also you say the super prints were supposed to be 350 only but ALC
changed their mind on them which I disagree with but either way
the fact is they're not a 350 only subject.

Pat

1st..the 48 card arrangement of the Major Leaguers in the "T213-1" set were printed during an American Litho's early press run of the 350-only series T206's.
The timeline of this printing is in the Spring of 1910. This timeline is reinforced by the fact that 40 of these subjects were NOT printed with POLAR BEAR backs.
The initial POLAR BEAR press runs started in the Summer of 1910. American Litho printed 138 subjects of the 350-only series with the POLAR BEAR backs.

2nd..In the 150 series press runs, American Lithographic printed 34 different Southern Leaguers (SL)….16 of which represent the Southern Association. Then in
the 350 series press runs, ALC expanded the SL sub-set to 48 subjects....20 of which represent the Southern Association. The 4 additional Southern Association
subjects are Bill Hart, "Hub" Hart, Lentz and Rockenfeld. This fact is important, as it clearly sets a Spring 1910 timeline for the print run of the "T213-1" cards.

3rd..42 of the 48 subjects are absolutely 350-only series subjects. This fact is certain since these cards were subsequently printed with AB350 (frame)..BL350..
CY 350..DRUM 350 backs (circa Summer 1910). And, you have to realize that the 6 super-prints were originally printed in this early 350-only series press run
together with these other 42 subjects.
The 6 super-prints, of course, were also printed with the A-B-C-D pattern. It wasn't until the SOVEREIGN 350 "apple green" print run (circa Fall 1910) that the
6 super-prints were then extended into the 350/460 series.

It appears to me that your dogmatic mind-set is preventing you from understanding this sequence of events.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Pat R]

Honestly Ted what do you expect when you start off a thread calling people
naysayers and uniformed and accuse them of misleading just because their
opinion is different from yours. I am amazed at how you dodge questions
like a mongoose dodging a cobra and spin your answers though.

I was responding to your unedited post before you "corrected your typo"
so I'll continue using your original post.

img839.jpg

1st - This is different than your original reason but anyway there
are 67 Polar Bear no prints and all of them are 350 only subjects. Of
those 67 subjects 51 are major league subjects and only 16 are minor
league subjects which relates to my second response/question to you.
So the amount of PB no prints in the Coupons isn't surprising the main fact
is some of them were printed with PB backs.

2nd I stated minor leaguers not southern leaguers and the
question was are there any other backs that were printed with the
350 only subjects in the T206 set that has no minor league subjects
in it?

3rd I agree that 42 of the 48 subjects are 350 only subjects and
I never said they weren't you originally said all 68 were 350 only subjects
and they're not. 350 only means those subjects were only printed on 350
series backs 34 of the southern leaguers were printed with Hindu backs
in the 150 series and the super prints were printed with 350-460 and
460 backs.

[Exhibitman]

Are anyone else's eyes starting to glaze over? This is like reading tax code.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Are anyone else's eyes starting to glaze over? This is like reading tax code.

Adam

I appreciate your comment.....I did not intend to delve into all this "nitty-gritty regarding T206 / 1910 COUPON stuff.

Sometimes I feel like I am in a courtroom scenario on this forum responding to this continuous "grilling"

I've posted my theories on Net54 regarding T206's (and the like) since 2005. Most of them have withstood the test of time.

Many people like them, and then, some others don't.....Que sera, sera

Happy New Year, guy.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Are anyone else's eyes starting to glaze over? This is like reading tax code.

It is starting to sound like a cable news show where the liberal and conservative repeat talking points at one another.

[Pat R]

Ted, I am at fault here for getting baited in by your underhanded comments.
You used to do the same thing to Tim Cathey but he was always respectful
and classy with his responses I wish I could handle it the same way but
admittedly I can't.

Tim was an asset to this forum and it's a shame he is no longer active here.

For anyone that is new to the forum in the past few years and interested in
the T206 set Tim has a great knowledge about the set that he shared in his
posts and I suggest you check some of them out using his profile.

http://www.net54baseball.com/member.php?u=193#stats

[Bill77]

Just a crazy thought I had, but if say Coupon and Red Cross cards been printed with gold borders like T205 cards would the brown captions be easier to place as T206 cards or would their hypothetical gold border cards also be excluded from the T205 set?

And yes I know that no such gold bordered cards exist with coupon and red cross backs. I just think that part of the reason for those two sets being separated in part has to do with the exclusion from the T205 set. I also think that T213, T214, and T215 should have been just simply one set named something like the blue caption set, but that may just be me over simplifying things.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Ted, I am at fault here for getting baited in by your underhanded comments.
You used to do the same thing to Tim Cathey but he was always respectful
and classy with his responses I wish I could handle it the same way but
admittedly I can't.

Tim was an asset to this forum and it's a shame he is no longer active here.

For anyone that is new to the forum in the past few years and interested in
the T206 set Tim has a great knowledge about the set that he shared in his
posts and I suggest you check some of them out using his profile.

http://www.net54baseball.com/member.php?u=193#stats

Come on Pat, this is quite laughable: "getting baited in by your underhanded comments."

I have never, ever INITIATED negative comments against you. That's not my style. Yes, I may have responded with some remarks, and only because you have numerous times
on this forum called me a liar.

But, so did your two "buddies" Rivera and Cathey.

For years these two guys were very appreciative of my research into the T206 set. They would regularly pick my brain regarding T206's. Hey, I could bring up many Net54 posts
dating back to 2006 as evidence of this. And then, suddenly, in 2012 they turned on me.

I was especially disappointed in Jim Rivera. For many years I sold (or traded) him many, many rare back T206's at the Philly Show. When I got BROAD LEAF's, EPDG's, HINDU's,
LENOX, etc., I'd save them for him.
Jim thought he would give it a try being a dealer at the Philly Show, so I gladly allowed him to share my booth (circa 2009-2010). I would advertise "the Jim & Ted team" set-up
at Booth #408. We had fun "Talkin T206's" for hours at the Show. I met his family and he met my wife. I recall one time when a "walk-in" brought us a bunch of T206's. I started
sorting them out according to the Series they were in. One card in this lot was a PIEDMONT42 Wiltse (cap). I quickly recognized it as one of only 9 subjects known in the 460-only series....Jim was really impressed.
Oh well, Jim unfortunately showed me how "appreciative" he was ! !

So, that's the story Pat. I could tell you much more, but I don't think you want to hear it. Nor do the most of the members of this forum.

Good bye.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Come on Pat, this is quite laughable: "getting baited in by your underhanded comments."

I have never, ever INITIATED negative comments against you. That's not my style. Yes, I may have responded with some remarks, and only because you have numerous times
on this forum called me a liar.
But, so did your two "buddies" Rivera and Cathey.

For years these two guys were very appreciative of my research into the T206 set. They would regularly pick my brain regarding T206's. Hey, I could bring up many Net54 posts
dating back to 2006 as evidence of this. And then, suddenly, in 2012 they turned on me.

I was especially disappointed in Jim Rivera. For many years I sold (or traded) him many, many rare back T206's at the Philly Show. When I got BROAD LEAF's, EPDG's, HINDU's,
LENOX, etc., I'd save them for him.
Jim thought he would give it a try being a dealer at the Philly Show, so I gladly allowed him to share my booth (circa 2009-2010). I would advertise "the Jim & Ted team" set-up
at Booth #408. We had fun "Talkin T206's" for hours at the Show. I met his family and he met my wife. I recall one time when a "walk-in" brought us a bunch of T206's. I started
sorting them out according to the Series they were in. One card in this lot was a PIEDMONT42 Wiltse (cap). I quickly recognized it as one of only 9 subjects known in the 460-only series....Jim was really impressed.
Oh well, Jim unfortunately showed me how "appreciative" he was ! !

So, that's the story Pat. I could tell you much more, but I don't think you want to hear it. Nor do the most of the members of this forum.

Good bye.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

Ted, I pointed out your initial negative comment. In post #68 you said I was
uninformed and misleading people. The uniformed and misleading information
you referred to was based on your opinion not a fact so your comments were
absolutely negative.


I have been posting on here for 8+ years and we have had many heated
arguments but I have never called you a liar. And to be clear
I'm not calling you a liar now either I'm merely saying you're wrong.

I'm sure there are several people saying here we go again but I think I
have the right to defend myself when you say I called you a liar several
times when it never happened not once.

Now I ask you something you ask me all the time show me proof.

Show me where I made a negative comment towards you prior to post #68
and show me a post of mine where I called you a liar.

I expect silence when you can't come up with proof but I think owe you it
to me to respond when you accuse me of calling you a liar.

[tedzan]

Hey guys,

I could post a number of occasions where Pat R. has responded to a theory (or statement) of mine regarding T206's where he has in effect said I was lying (or misleading).
I'll only post here what I consider Pat's most egregious example questioning of my character and my dedication to inform the hobby of the complexities of the T206 set.

Excerpted from thread dated 12/3/2016..... http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...=220948&page=7

Originally Posted by Pat R

Ted,

If you're concerned about confusing readers you should clear up this discrepancy involving your group A subjects for those that search the archives.

Your group A subjects are all AB460 no-prints but in this thread about the
AB460 subset you put together you have four of the group A subjects listed
in your set. Ames (hands over head), Baker, Elberfeld (Washington-fielding)
and Snodgrass (Catching).
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...page=2&t=91361

My response…..

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hey Pat

Don't worry guy, most readers of my threads are not confused. My T206 theory's and the empirical knowledge I've gained from putting together various sets (and sub-sets)
these past 37 years. And, my collecting experience that I have very generously shared with members of this forum speaks for itself.
Anyone here is free to check-out the T206 information posted in the "Consolidated access to the 15 - T206 T-brand (front/back) surveys....UPDATED " thread which
Leon has archived......
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...=132611&page=6

And, I am surprised at your remarks regarding my AMERICAN BEAUTY 460 information and the near complete run (70/74) of these cards that I have put together. It has all
been documented in this Net54 thread...... http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...=124927&page=5
Which you are up to date on, since you have posted on this thread in 2016.


However, you choose to go back 8+ years to a thread that I posted, in which I listed 4 mistakes (out of 70 cards). Three of which (Baker, Elberfeld, and Snodgrass) in which
I discovered later that they actually had to be AB 350 cards. Unfortunately, these 3 cards in my collection had back damage and it wasn't easy to tell whether they were 350
or 460 (Factory #25 or Factory #42, respectively). Furthermore, back then Bill Brown's T206 Super-Set Excel list indicated that these 3 subjects (plus Ames) were confirmed
AB 460 cards. And, I have since then proven that these 4 subjects could not be AB 460 cards.


Anyhow, I'll tell you what really "ticks me off" about your remarks. I heard these EXACT words from some one 8 years ago (who doesn't post on Net54 any more). I sense
that this person has put you up to posting his 8-year old remarks (it's typical of his sick style). So, I dare you to deny that this is why you posted these negative remarks ? ?

I didn't think this was your style !

TED Z
.

Pat's response

Originally Posted by Pat R

No Ted nobody put me up to posting this. I have noticed discrepancy's
in several of your posts. I refrained from posting about them but I have had
enough of your condescending remarks like uninformed, ignorant, naïve, ect...

There is no doubt that you have done a lot of research on this set but for
me it is negated by the fact that you can't admit when you make a "mistake".

By the way Snodgrass (catching) wasn't printed with any of the American
Beauty backs so your back damage excuse doesn't cut it with me.

My response

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hey folks....if some one posts critical comments about you today that are identical to what you've heard from some one else 8 years ago, what is the probability
of this occurrence being just coincidental ? The probability is some where between 100,000 - Million to 1.

So....knowing you have a connection to that other party....you are not being truthful.

OK, you want to talk about mistakes....I admitted 8 years ago that I made on some of those T206 front/back cards. We were all still learning about The Monster.

And, what is more important is that my subsequent research resulted in significant information that is presented in this thread to Net54 members who appreciate
all this "nitty-gritty" stuff regarding T206's.

So, let's discuss your mistakes starting with this thread......in posts #45 and #47 you posted images of 460-only series subjects (Howell, Bergen, Overall, Murray)
that DO NOT pertain to the 350/460 series cards that this thread is devoted to. It is a distraction in the subject matter being discussed here.

If you want to talk 460-only series cards, why not simply start another thread.

TED Z
.

Incidentally, the other party in this discussion is Jim Rivera, who is Pat's buddy, and most likely has provided Pat with the above "talking points".

I will conclude this with the following......I do not understand what is Pat's problem concerning me. There have been some instances where he has posted on my threads
with some really meaningful stuff. But then there are times where he has impulsively been negative. And this has caused my thread to get side-tracked (as has occurred
in this thread).


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[t206fix]

What is the definition of a t206? Do we have a consensus? I always took the definition to mean a card issued by the ATC and distributed in/with packs of cigarettes between 1909-1911. Is there another definition out there?

If not, and if Coupons were produced in 1910 by the ATC, then by definition they should be t206s.

I think the inclusion of Byrne, Mowrey and Rossman in the Coupon set indicates they were printed before Ted's ABCD grouping (AB, BL, Cylcle, Drum), since all three are ABCD no prints. This indicates Coupons were produced before the bulk of the 350 series. This excerpt is from Reader's Inside t206 The Bible:

Byrne, Mowrey and Rossman have been confirmed to date with a very limited number of 350 series backs that includes only Piedmont 350, Sovereign 350, Sweet Caporal 350/25, Sweet Caporal 350/30 and, in the case of Byrne and Mowrey, Tolstoi. The apparent unavailability of these subjects with a fuller complement of 350 series backs may be traceable to the depiction of these three players with teams from which they were traded in August 1909, before distribution of the 350-only subject group began.

Also note that Becker(1910), Campbell(1909), Charles (1909), Dubuc (1910), Engle (1910), Huggins (1910), McIntyre (1910), Paskert (1911), LaPorte (1911) and Starr (1909) were all traded to new teams during this time. Eleven more Coupon subjects were out of baseball by the time the t206 production had ended.

I do believe most t206 followers would reasonably conclude that Coupons were produced during the t206 era. ATC made a strong effort to include the right player with the right team. If they produced this set in, say 1914... it'd be all out of whack.

However, a few things Pat posted makes sense to me. The Coupons fit no other 350 pattern. I'm a math guy, and the patterns of the AB.350nf, BL.350, C.350 and D.350 make reasonable sense... The Coupon back does not (*see below, good luck trying to figure it out). Why?

48 random 350 subjects, of which 45 follow the ABCD pattern. Eleven also have a Carolina Brights card (including Billy Campbell, who was out of baseball by 1909). And, I asked this question earlier in this thread, but why doesn't the Coupon back include the "350 subjects"? As Mike, "Inside the West Coast Rapper", put it earlier, "it looks like a regional issue". Somebody may surmise that the ATC, circa 1909, decided to glue a few Coupons on the end of those 100+ cigarette cartons to distribute down south with a couple of Southern Leaguers to entice the locals to buy their new "Coupon" product. Maybe, it wasn't meant to be the full "350 subjects", but just a one off.

Therefore, in conclusion your honor, if Coupons were printed in 1910, by the ATC, they should be a t206 by most definitions.

Pat and Ted are t206 godfathers - their knowledge of the t206s will be passed down from generation to generation. We'll carve their names... ok, going a bit far, but I hate to see the rift between them. I have learned so much from both of them and appreciate their contributions to t206 history.

[DixieBaseball]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Are anyone else's eyes starting to glaze over? This is like reading tax code.

LOL...

The 20 Southern Leaguer's are not included in the Type 2 or Type 3 Set. That is one glaring difference in the the Type 1's vs the Type 2 & 3's. Obviously the dates are different and the 20 Type 1 Southern Leaguer's are identical to the T206 players from 1909-11, yet not included in the 1914 & 1919 Coupon sets. If you take for example the 4 SL Nashville players (Bay,Bernhard,Ellam,Perdue) from the T206 set, they match spot on to the Type 1 Coupon set, but when you get into the Type 2 1914 Coupons, Nashville players change over to Al Bridwell & Gabby Street & same for Type 3 Coupons as they feature Al & Gabby. It's like this with other players from SL teams and that makes a distinction between the 20 SL featured in Coupon that were offered in the American Litho / ATC brands later named - T206.

Also, as for the New Orleans Times Picayune, there was a series of Coupon Advertisements in the 1909-10 papers depicting different Sportsmen scenarios, like hunting, horse racing, sporting events, etc. The pack is on the advertisement with T206 style cards showing and players names. One such advertisement (that I own), depicts 3 Southern Leaguer's coming out of the top of the pack. When I have time I will have to dig up the Newspaper as I don't have it scanned and its buried in a dry dark place. The Coupon Ad's were run for a handful of months around the 1909-10 time frame.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by DixieBaseball

LOL...

The 20 Southern Leaguer's are not included in the Type 2 or Type 3 Set. That is one glaring difference in the the Type 1's vs the Type 2 & 3's. Obviously the dates are different and the 20 Type 1 Southern Leaguer's are identical to the T206 players from 1909-11, yet not included in the 1914 & 1919 Coupon sets. If you take for example the 4 SL Nashville players (Bay,Bernhard,Ellam,Perdue) from the T206 set, they match spot on to the Type 1 Coupon set, but when you get into the Type 2 1914 Coupons, Nashville players change over to Al Bridwell & Gabby Street & same for Type 3 Coupons as they feature Al & Gabby. It's like this with other players from SL teams and that makes a distinction between the 20 SL featured in Coupon that were offered in the American Litho / ATC brands later named - T206.

Also, as for the New Orleans Times Picayune, there was a series of Coupon Advertisements in the 1909-10 papers depicting different Sportsmen scenarios, like hunting, horse racing, sporting events, etc. The pack is on the advertisement with T206 style cards showing and players names. One such advertisement (that I own), depicts 3 Southern Leaguer's coming out of the top of the pack. When I have time I will have to dig up the Newspaper as I don't have it scanned and its buried in a dry dark place. The Coupon Ad's were run for a handful of months around the 1909-10 time frame.

This is what I'm waiting to see I asked where the 1910 dating came from
and I was told a newspaper clipping but no one could show a coupon ad
that mentioned the cards and I couldn't find where one was posted. All of the ads that I've seen are Old Mill and Hindu. There are
26 different Old Mill ads that I know of and each of them has one that mentions Texas League players and one that Doesn't.

1-4.jpg 5-8.jpg
9-12.jpg 13-16.jpg
17-20.jpg 21-24.jpg
25-26.jpg

[Pat R]

The ads came out small here's a larger version of one.

1.jpg

[tedzan]

Tony and Jeremy

I really appreciate your posts. Both of you have amplified on a lot of factors which I have presented here in my earlier posts.

Jeremy....it would be great if you can show us your New Orleans Times Picayune papers with the Coupon Advertisements (1909-1910 )
depicting different Sportsmen scenarios.

Thanks again,


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Pat R]

Here's a couple of Hindu Ads both picture Southern League players but only
one mentions them.

img653.jpg

img654.jpg

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Tony and Jeremy

I really appreciate your posts. Both of you have amplified on a lot of factors which I have presented here in my earlier posts.

Jeremy....it would be great if you can show us your New Orleans Times Picayune papers with the Coupon Advertisements (1909-1910 )
depicting different Sportsmen scenarios.
Thanks again,


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

I agree 100% if such an ad exist I would change my opinion and say they
should be included in the T206 set and they were just another T206 rule
breaker.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by t206fix

What is the definition of a t206? Do we have a consensus? I always took the definition to mean a card issued by the ATC and distributed in/with packs of cigarettes between 1909-1911. Is there another definition out there?

If not, and if Coupons were produced in 1910 by the ATC, then by definition they should be t206s.

I think the inclusion of Byrne, Mowrey and Rossman in the Coupon set indicates they were printed before Ted's ABCD grouping (AB, BL, Cylcle, Drum), since all three are ABCD no prints. This indicates Coupons were produced before the bulk of the 350 series. This excerpt is from Reader's Inside t206 The Bible:

Byrne, Mowrey and Rossman have been confirmed to date with a very limited number of 350 series backs that includes only Piedmont 350, Sovereign 350, Sweet Caporal 350/25, Sweet Caporal 350/30 and, in the case of Byrne and Mowrey, Tolstoi. The apparent unavailability of these subjects with a fuller complement of 350 series backs may be traceable to the depiction of these three players with teams from which they were traded in August 1909, before distribution of the 350-only subject group began.

Also note that Becker(1910), Campbell(1909), Charles (1909), Dubuc (1910), Engle (1910), Huggins (1910), McIntyre (1910), Paskert (1911), LaPorte (1911) and Starr (1909) were all traded to new teams during this time. Eleven more Coupon subjects were out of baseball by the time the t206 production had ended.

I do believe most t206 followers would reasonably conclude that Coupons were produced during the t206 era. ATC made a strong effort to include the right player with the right team. If they produced this set in, say 1914... it'd be all out of whack.

However, a few things Pat posted makes sense to me. The Coupons fit no other 350 pattern. I'm a math guy, and the patterns of the AB.350nf, BL.350, C.350 and D.350 make reasonable sense... The Coupon back does not (*see below, good luck trying to figure it out). Why?

48 random 350 subjects, of which 45 follow the ABCD pattern. Eleven also have a Carolina Brights card (including Billy Campbell, who was out of baseball by 1909). And, I asked this question earlier in this thread, but why doesn't the Coupon back include the "350 subjects"? As Mike, "Inside the West Coast Rapper", put it earlier, "it looks like a regional issue". Somebody may surmise that the ATC, circa 1909, decided to glue a few Coupons on the end of those 100+ cigarette cartons to distribute down south with a couple of Southern Leaguers to entice the locals to buy their new "Coupon" product. Maybe, it wasn't meant to be the full "350 subjects", but just a one off.

Therefore, in conclusion your honor, if Coupons were printed in 1910, by the ATC, they should be a t206 by most definitions.

Pat and Ted are t206 godfathers - their knowledge of the t206s will be passed down from generation to generation. We'll carve their names... ok, going a bit far, but I hate to see the rift between them. I have learned so much from both of them and appreciate their contributions to t206 history.

Great post Tony. I think it's the most unbiased post in this thread.

It would be interesting to hear Scot's opinion on them.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Pat

We have gone thru this before....that pack in Jon's pix contained T213-2 or T213-3 cards. It did NOT contain 1910 COUPON cards. Think about it, the T-cards of that
era served the purpose of stiffening the cigarette pack. Two cards, one on each side of the pack were inserted.

There's no way the thin cardboard stock that the 1910 COUPON cards were printed on that could serve as stiffeners.

Incidentally, years ago I discussed with Jon the possibility of a cigarette pack containing 1910 COUPON cards, and if I recall correctly: Jon said that none were found.


Furthermore, a pack designed for 1910 COUPON cards would have had Quotation Marks on the brand name as the backs of these cards are printed with. The quotes
signify a new Tobacco brand which is in the process of getting a Registered Trademark.
Here are examples of this....

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






Therefore, continue your search for a Coupon pack that is labelled..... "COUPON".

Please contact me when you do find such a pack.


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

It's possible the quotes were never put on the packs from circa 1910.
In post #5 of this thread Jon says the pack on his website is from 1910
hopefully if he changed his mind he will chime in.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...ghlight=Coupon

It seems like they used quotes on a several tobacco products around that time.
I have this Carolina Bright's coupon that has "Carolina Brights" on the coupon
but on the picture of the pack Carolina Brights doesn't have quotes.

Tobacco Coupon Back.jpg Tobacco Coupon.jpg

[DixieBaseball]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I agree 100% if such an ad exist I would change my opinion and say they
should be included in the T206 set and they were just another T206 rule
breaker.

Hey Guys - Sorry, been away at Volleyball Tourneys the past serveral days... I still need to read and catch up on this thread, so forgive me if this has already been mentioned... The Federal Leaguers seem to be key to the time difference in the Type 1 and Type 2's, correct !? Burdick seem to get the Type 2 dating correct as that set is loaded with Federal leaguer's (Federal League 1913-15) and a perfect example is Al Bridwell 1914 Type 2 card - St. Louis Terriers Fed league team. Bridwell is also featured in the Type 2 set with a Nashville card having spent time bouncing around SL a bit. There are other examples in the Type 2 set of Minor League/Federal Leaguer's who are not featured in the Type 1 set as well. To me it seems fairly obvious the 4 Nashville players featured in ATC/American Litho 1909-11 are Bay, Bernhard, Perdue, and Ellam. Those 4 Nashville players are absent in the Type 2 and 3 sets as well as the obvious blue lettering which distinguishes the 2&3 sets from the Type 1. Two Clear examples that Type 1 were most likely not printed in and around the time of the Type 2 and 3 sets.

Pat - Thanks for all the advertisement examples of OM & Hindu... I think that may be what I have buried in my collection. I will dig it up at some point and verify... Too big to scan, and I haven't looked at it in years... Regardless of an advertisement, sure that is clear proof, but Coupon Type 1 cards are so rare, I doubt they had a Advertising campaign like the other ATC brands. While it would be nice to have a clearly dated advertisement as proof, I think its clear by the Federal league example aforementioned and the 4 Nashville players mirroring the T206 4 Nashville players that its more likely the Coupons were produced around 1909-11 than around 1913-19 like the Type 2 and 3's with blue lettering and glossy/thicker cardboard. It's only a matter of time as type 1's lean way more towards the 1910 date, than they do any other date imho.

Thanks, J

[Pat R]

Thanks for the reply Jeremy. My reasons for excluding them from the
T206 set is similar to your reasons for separating them from the Type 1 and 2's.

When I look at the T213-1's they stand out from the way any of the T206
backs were printed.

The T213-1's have three different groups represented in the 68 cards.

I randomly grabbed one of each from my collection as an example.

img840.jpg


Excluding Piedmont which was used on every card in the set with the exception
of Demmitt and O'Hara St. Louis these three cards are not found with the same
back on any of the T206 backs and the same thing is true for any combination
of one card from each group.

Then you have the minor league players. All of the 350 series backs have minor league players and most of them have over 40% but there isn't a
single minor league player in the T213-1's.

Other people have said that it looks like they reused some of the T206 plates/artwork after the printing of the T206's and I feel the same way
when I look at the group of cards used for the T213-1's.

The following is pure speculation... We know from many of the old newspaper articles that inserting the "baseball pictures" was a big success at the
time. I see the T213-1's as a cheap trial promotion. Print them with the old T206 plates on thinner stock and see how it goes. They find it's
a success so they have them printed on thicker cardboard and decide to change the captions as a cheap way to put their own brand stamp on them
without having to make a bunch of new plates.

[Ritz Collector]

Was wondering the same thing

[tedzan]

Any given day on ebay you can dial up T213 Coupon cards, and you will typically find approx. 200 cards listed. The majority
of them will be T213-2 cards. And, on the average as many as 20 % of them will be T213-3 cards.
Very seldom will you find even one "T213-1" card listed for sale.

It's obvious to me the 1910 COUPON cards were not designed to be inserted in the standard (10-cigarette) pack of that era.
My theory is they were either......
simply handed out to customers purchasing this new ATC brand, or pasted on a 200-count cigarette cartons,, or just placed
inside one of these cartons. In any event, this Willett was most likely the latter case. As it is the best looking 1910 COUPON
card in my collection.

.



Collecting these cards, I have noticed that approx. 10 % (or perhaps as much as 15 %) of them have this type of paper loss
on their backs (which most likely resulted because these cards pasted on cigarette cartons). The repetitive spot-like spoilage
on these cards is too consistent to blame it on some random cause.

.



This one, though, has faint cardboard residue on it from also being pasted on a cigarette carton. Apparently, whoever removed
this card from a carton did it very, very carefully. I've seen very few 1910 COUPON cards (less than 1%) exhibiting this type of
minimal back damage.

.



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[DixieBaseball]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Thanks for the reply Jeremy. My reasons for excluding them from the
T206 set is similar to your reasons for separating them from the Type 1 and 2's.

When I look at the T213-1's they stand out from the way any of the T206
backs were printed.

The T213-1's have three different groups represented in the 68 cards.

I randomly grabbed one of each from my collection as an example.

Attachment 339932


Excluding Piedmont which was used on every card in the set with the exception
of Demmitt and O'Hara St. Louis these three cards are not found with the same
back on any of the T206 backs and the same thing is true for any combination
of one card from each group.

Then you have the minor league players. All of the 350 series backs have minor league players and most of them have over 40% but there isn't a
single minor league player in the T213-1's.

Other people have said that it looks like they reused some of the T206 plates/artwork after the printing of the T206's and I feel the same way
when I look at the group of cards used for the T213-1's.

The following is pure speculation... We know from many of the old newspaper articles that inserting the "baseball pictures" was a big success at the
time. I see the T213-1's as a cheap trial promotion. Print them with the old T206 plates on thinner stock and see how it goes. They find it's
a success so they have them printed on thicker cardboard and decide to change the captions as a cheap way to put their own brand stamp on them
without having to make a bunch of new plates.

Pat - If the Coupon Type 1's were regionally released during the time frame with the other 16 ATC brands released between 1909-11 in New Orleans/South wouldn't they want to stick to the Southern League players and known Big league players of the day and not get into Minor league players from places like Toledo or Buffalo as minor league cards for example? This would indicate regional Southern release to me... I think that is the plausible answer why the minor league players are not present in the 68 card set. Also, this set of 68 seems like a strange number for a release and reminds me of the Red Sun set "First Series 1 to 75" (On reverse of Red Sun card) and the parallel drawn from that Regional release where by they never produced a 2nd series b/c the first series perhaps underwhelmed cigarette consumers. Obviously something caused Red Sun to not make a 2nd series. (Series 2 - 76-150) ?!? Both of these brands, Coupon & Red Sun, were both New Orleans brands and Red Sun was produced/released around 1909-10 time frame (No RS advertisements known as well, correct !?) and most likely Coupon as the 17th American Litho / ATC brand. We don't know that there was not going to be more Coupon (Type 1) cards released. Their rarity indicates something happened, just like it did to Red Sun Series 2 not being produced. I think the Red Sun set indicates something was not quite right in Tobacco/baseball card world in 1910 in that region and if this set was released in that time frame, it perhaps suffered the same fate!? Perhaps Red Sun & Coupon didn't make quite the splash against the larger National brands and the cards were a marketing stunt that just didn't materially help, so ATC / W.R. Irby nixed the series 2 RS & didn't produce/release any more Coupons.

Lastly, if you could show me a Full size American Beauty card, I would go away and say Coupon may not necessarily be one of the 17 Amer Litho ATC brands, but since exception was made on AB, why not exception on Coupon (Type 1)?! This was not a style change, but yet a size change (Width of card) and so was Coupon, a size change (Thickness of card).

Everything about the Type 1 Coupon looks like the other 16 Amer Litho - ATC brands including Ty Cobb Tobacco with exception to the thickness which can be explained by American Beauty as it is clearly different. Also there is no argument or debate for Type 2 and 3 Coupons as that would be no different than Old Mill making another set of cards in 1914 and 1919. That seems to throw people off imho. Also consider that Old Mill was on another completely different set (T210). Why not call them Old Mill Type 1 & 2 ?!? My point is Burdick made a catalog for cards. A wonderful way to help collectors... Just because he labeled certain cards T206 or T213-1 doesn't change anything about the card being just like the other American Litho - ATC brands. If you include American Beauty as a T206, then Coupon should be as well. (Not Coupon Type 2 or 3)

[DixieBaseball]

Ted - Love the Willett, but my favorite Coupon you own is the Pink Matty. Such a beautiful card! Here are a few more SL Coupons...

[tedzan]

Jeremy

Great stuff, guy......and, do you have all 20 of the 1910 COUPON Southern Association subjects ?


I need the 1910 COUPON card to complete my run of Greminger……


.





.



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[DixieBaseball]

Ted - I had another Greminger at one point, and traded/sold it to someone in this Net54 community but that was many years ago. This is the only one I own now and it does comprise my SL run of Coupons. Took me well over 10 years to get all 20. As I mentioned in earlier posts, the grading companies are very inconsistent on grading these puppies. I have several that are off by a grade to a grade and a half both ways.

[tedzan]

Jeremy

From our previous conversations, I figured you had all 20 of the Southern Association guys.....congratulations.

Eventually, I'll find a 1910 COUPON Greminger. I'm a patient dude, when it comes to stuff like this.

Best regards,


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Pat R]

Jereme, if the American Beauty checklists didn't match up with any
of the other backs in the T206 set like the Type 1's do I would agree
with you but they do and as a matter of fact they match up exactly
with several of the 350 series backs.

I also contend your minor league explanation supports excluding the
type 1's rather than including them because they would have had to
completely re-arrange at a minimum 2 or 3 sheet layouts in the
middle of printing all of the other T206 backs but if they were using
the plates/artwork after they were used on the T206's it wouldn't
interrupt the printing for the other T206 backs. This is one of the
reasons I asked where the 1910 date came from. Did they print
them right after the 350 only series was finished using the old
plates or did they have access to the plates/artwork and print
them after the printing of the 460 series concluded.


I haven't come across an ad that singles out Red Sun but here's a store
ad that lists Red Sun as one of the Liggett & Myers cigarettes they sell.

Liggett & Myers ad.jpg

[DixieBaseball]

Fair point, Pat but I would be curious what date do you think they printed them? 1912 or 1913? Not likely based off the players in the set and the look of the Coupon is just like the other 16 ATC brands. If they printed them in the 1909-11 time frame, then that would indicate they are the 17th American Lithographic ATC brand, but just printed in limited quantity and released regionally which may or may not been their full intent. I think the same reason they were printed/released in scarcity is the same reason Red Sun was printed/released in scarcity and Red Sun, we know was most likely released in early 1910 (produced in 1909/1910) with the intent to release a 2nd series at some point following that 1st series of 75 cards. With some Coupon cards having as few as 2-3 examples known, it is quite possible there could be a few yet discovered, and then perhaps proofs which might indicate more cards were going to be produced liked the Olberman T206 SL 8 proofs + Eddie Collins Proof. Why were those 9 cards not included in T206 set and why did it take 50 years for those cards to be known? Where do those fit into the T206 set? Does T206 represent 521, 524, or 530 cards to be complete? Why does the Old Mill T210 set released in 1909-10 have 114 cards? If Red Sun T211 which mirrors Old Mill T210 for 75 cards, and were to assume they were going to put 75 more cards in that 2nd series or would they just mirror the T210 set and put only 39 cards in that 2nd series ? All of these numbers are arbitrary for unknown reasons. Perhaps Coupon is the same ?! I believe Coupon was released in 1909-11 time frame and if Red Sun didn't do well and release a 2nd series in New Orleans, I believe Coupon could have been in a similar situation. New Orleans, regional brands perhaps didn't cut it against National brand cigarettes. More discovery hopefully to come!

http://t206resource.com/Olbermann%20Proofs.html

[DixieBaseball]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Jereme, if the American Beauty checklists didn't match up with any
of the other backs in the T206 set like the Type 1's do I would agree
with you but they do and as a matter of fact they match up exactly
with several of the 350 series backs.

I also contend your minor league explanation supports excluding the
type 1's rather than including them because they would have had to
completely re-arrange at a minimum 2 or 3 sheet layouts in the
middle of printing all of the other T206 backs but if they were using
the plates/artwork after they were used on the T206's it wouldn't
interrupt the printing for the other T206 backs. This is one of the
reasons I asked where the 1910 date came from. Did they print
them right after the 350 only series was finished using the old
plates or did they have access to the plates/artwork and print
them after the printing of the 460 series concluded.


I haven't come across an ad that singles out Red Sun but here's a store
ad that lists Red Sun as one of the Liggett & Myers cigarettes they sell.

Attachment 340190

This store ad is really interesting. Where did you find this information? Do you have any idea of the date of this? (I am guessing 1912-1919) Interesting that Red Sun is on the list but Coupon is not. We would need to ask Jon C. but I believe there is only one known Red Sun pack from 1910 known to exist. Also, perhaps only 1 Coupon pack from that era as well, but not sure on that...

[MichelaiTorres83]

Given that a lot of t206 cards are miscut and some have 2 names I would ask if there are any miscut coupons? I also wonder are there any 2 name cards that disprove or contradict 2 name cards in the t206 set?

Every t206 card back has a miscut of some type.

[MichelaiTorres83]

Would the fact that type 2 and 3 being from a factory not associated to t206 at all for any other back and type 1 cards being from the same factory not associated to any other t206 back be enough of a point to classify them as a t213 with the others?

That to me seems like the most logical reason it would not be a t206.

How would one use an undated card to make this determination? If a t206 was printed in 1909, then sold with a 1914 stamp what year was the card issued? To me the date is a lot less relevant than a characteristic of the card itself.

Since there is no date and everyone is guessing it seems most logical to go by the most obvious portions of the card followed by the less obvious ones. Most of the time the answer is the simplest one.

I think he got it right and everyone is overthinking it based on an imaginary date range.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by DixieBaseball

[/B]

This store ad is really interesting. Where did you find this information? Do you have any idea of the date of this? (I am guessing 1912-1919) Interesting that Red Sun is on the list but Coupon is not. We would need to ask Jon C. but I believe there is only one known Red Sun pack from 1910 known to exist. Also, perhaps only 1 Coupon pack from that era as well, but not sure on that...

I had it in a folder of newspaper clippings I saved. I found another one and I
think you will find this interesting since Red Sun is considered a regional brand
associated with Louisiana. Both ads are from Ohio newspapers the original
ad I posted is from Jan 19 1914 and this one is from Feb 17 1914.

Liggett & Myers Ad 2.jpg

I just spent a couple of hours looking through Louisiana newspapers from
1900-1920 and I couldn't find anything on Red Sun cigarettes.

This is a Liggett & Myers ad that was in a Louisiana paper on Feb 19 1913
that has several brands that are listed in the Ohio ads but no Red Sun.

Liggett & Myers Louisiana Ad.jpg

Here's a larger scan of the brands in the ad
Liggett & Myers Louisiana Ad - Copy.jpg

I also found this W.R. Irby ad in a Jan 11 1914 Louisiana paper. No
Red Sun in this one either but it does have Coupon in the ad. Notice
that all of the brands are in quotation marks including Coupon.

W.R. Irby Ad 1914 Copy.jpg


I have limited knowledge regarding the Red Sun cards but they do seem
similar to the T213's in that they use images from the T210 series 8
which also used some of the T206 images.

So where does the 1910 date on the T211's come from. If it's based on
the subjects in the set like the T213's seem to be I would question how
accurate that date is too if that's the only thing the date is based on.
You can pinpoint an earliest date based on what teams certain subjects
played on at the time but you can't pinpoint a stopping point based
solely on the subjects in the set. There are numerous pre and post
war cards that were printed depicting players on teams that they weren't
on when the cards were distributed.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by DixieBaseball

Pat - If the Coupon Type 1's were regionally released during the time frame with the other 16 ATC brands released between 1909-11 in New Orleans/South wouldn't they want to stick to the Southern League players and known Big league players of the day and not get into Minor league players from places like Toledo or Buffalo as minor league cards for example? This would indicate regional Southern release to me... I think that is the plausible answer why the minor league players are not present in the 68 card set. Also, this set of 68 seems like a strange number for a release and reminds me of the Red Sun set "First Series 1 to 75" (On reverse of Red Sun card) and the parallel drawn from that Regional release where by they never produced a 2nd series b/c the first series perhaps underwhelmed cigarette consumers. Obviously something caused Red Sun to not make a 2nd series. (Series 2 - 76-150) ?!? Both of these brands, Coupon & Red Sun, were both New Orleans brands and Red Sun was produced/released around 1909-10 time frame (No RS advertisements known as well, correct !?) and most likely Coupon as the 17th American Litho / ATC brand. We don't know that there was not going to be more Coupon (Type 1) cards released. Their rarity indicates something happened, just like it did to Red Sun Series 2 not being produced. I think the Red Sun set indicates something was not quite right in Tobacco/baseball card world in 1910 in that region and if this set was released in that time frame, it perhaps suffered the same fate!? Perhaps Red Sun & Coupon didn't make quite the splash against the larger National brands and the cards were a marketing stunt that just didn't materially help, so ATC / W.R. Irby nixed the series 2 RS & didn't produce/release any more Coupons.

Lastly, if you could show me a Full size American Beauty card, I would go away and say Coupon may not necessarily be one of the 17 Amer Litho ATC brands, but since exception was made on AB, why not exception on Coupon (Type 1)?! This was not a style change, but yet a size change (Width of card) and so was Coupon, a size change (Thickness of card).

Everything about the Type 1 Coupon looks like the other 16 Amer Litho - ATC brands including Ty Cobb Tobacco with exception to the thickness which can be explained by American Beauty as it is clearly different. Also there is no argument or debate for Type 2 and 3 Coupons as that would be no different than Old Mill making another set of cards in 1914 and 1919. That seems to throw people off imho. Also consider that Old Mill was on another completely different set (T210). Why not call them Old Mill Type 1 & 2 ?!? My point is Burdick made a catalog for cards. A wonderful way to help collectors... Just because he labeled certain cards T206 or T213-1 doesn't change anything about the card being just like the other American Litho - ATC brands. If you include American Beauty as a T206, then Coupon should be as well. (Not Coupon Type 2 or 3)

I would be for excluding American Beauty from the t206 cards, except they were used for t205 cards also. So, clearly they were intended to be part of t206. Not so for Coupon. Coupon is an unique set and in my opinion should remain that way.

[RCMcKenzie]

I wonder why Carlos Smith Shreveport was not included in the T213-1 series?

How do people view the 136 cards found with a Hindu brown back? Is that a set? There's no Cobb. Before Burdick, how did people know that a sweet cap 150 back and a Hindu SLer were part of the same "set"?

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

I wonder why Carlos Smith Shreveport was not included in the T213-1 series?

Hi Rob

The Shreveport Giants were in the Southern Association 1901 - 1903.
Then Shreveport became the Pirates in the Southern Association 1904 - 1907.
During 1908 - 1910 they were transferred to the Texas League.


Hey guys....this LEAGUE change for Shreveport, in my opinion, certainly narrows the timeline window
of the printing of the 1910 COUPON set.

TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[insidethewrapper]

Let me start out by saying ,"I don't understand the T206 set and all the different backs". Seems like 16 or so different sets to me. If Topps came out with cards and placed them in candy bars ( Almond Joy, Kit-Kat, Payday,Mounds,Mr. Goodbar etc, etc), let's say all brands made from the same company with different backs, I think they would all be different sets and listed as 2019 Almond Joy, 2019 Kit-Kat etc.
Could someone explain why this wasn't done with the T206 set with all the different backs ? Thanks

[tedzan]

Hi Mike

Here's the simple answer to your very good question....

Breaking down the T206 set into 16 sub-sets would have been too complex at that time when Jefferson Burdick catalogued these T-cards. And, actually it still is.

Personally, I would have preferred this if he had each T-brand a set in their own. In recent years, I have put together T206 sets according to the various brands...…

AMERICAN BEAUTY 460
PIEDMONT
SOVEREIGN
SWEET CAPORAL, Factory #30


TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[DixieBaseball]

Originally Posted by Pat R

I had it in a folder of newspaper clippings I saved. I found another one and I
think you will find this interesting since Red Sun is considered a regional brand
associated with Louisiana. Both ads are from Ohio newspapers the original
ad I posted is from Jan 19 1914 and this one is from Feb 17 1914.

Originally Posted by Pat R

Attachment 340216

I just spent a couple of hours looking through Louisiana newspapers from
1900-1920 and I couldn't find anything on Red Sun cigarettes.

This is a Liggett & Myers ad that was in a Louisiana paper on Feb 19 1913
that has several brands that are listed in the Ohio ads but no Red Sun.

Attachment 340217

Here's a larger scan of the brands in the ad
Attachment 340220

I also found this W.R. Irby ad in a Jan 11 1914 Louisiana paper. No
Red Sun in this one either but it does have Coupon in the ad. Notice
that all of the brands are in quotation marks including Coupon.

Attachment 340221


I have limited knowledge regarding the Red Sun cards but they do seem
similar to the T213's in that they use images from the T210 series 8
which also used some of the T206 images.

So where does the 1910 date on the T211's come from. If it's based on
the subjects in the set like the T213's seem to be I would question how
accurate that date is too if that's the only thing the date is based on.
You can pinpoint an earliest date based on what teams certain subjects
played on at the time but you can't pinpoint a stopping point based
solely on the subjects in the set. There are numerous pre and post
war cards that were printed depicting players on teams that they weren't
on when the cards were distributed.

Pat - Very interesting, but with Liggett having multiple brands for it's factory locations in places like New Orleans, St. Louis, MO., etc - it wouldn't surprise me to see all of their brands listed under their Corporation together, even in Ohio. Very cool and may help further explain the Red Sun story down the road as more information is found. Thnx for sharing that store ad !

Per Lew Lipset's EOBBC, Frank Huelsman (Mobile), who is in the Red Sun set only played with Mobile during the first part of 1909 and Jake Daubert, the Southern Association Batting Champion in 1910 who joined Memphis after the season was underway is not in the Red Sun set. This time stamps the set along with the Southern Assoc players of that era to to 1909-10, so most likely released in 1910. Also Hub Perdue (Nashville) who played in the Majors in 1911 (played for Nashville from 1907-10) is in the Red Sun set. Lots of evidence on timeline that Red Sun is in fact a 1910 set. Those discoveries were made a long time ago by Burdick, later published by Lipset with further time stamps of players, etc. T211 Red Sun is not in question on dating imo and neither is T210 Old Mill as there is many similar dating of players that can be started and stopped around that era with minor league to major league explanations such as the examples mentioned on the Red Suns. (Shoeless Joe is in T210 Old Mill with New Orleans, yet played in 1908-09 for A's, before joining NO for 1910, then onto Cleveland for 1911 season) This indicates to me that OM was produced in 1910, released in late 1910, early 1911. Red Sun can be conservatively put in that same time frame. 1910-11, and most likely Coupon Type 1 as well - 1910-11, which all falls under the time frame of 16 ATC brands release, potentially leaving out the 17th ATC brand, Coupon, from Burdick's 1940's designation of T206 as the 17th ATC brand inclusive of his T206 cataloging of brands.

Back to the Coupon ("Type 1" as Burdick's designation). It's a fact, that Coupon can be more easily tied to T206 / 16 ATC brands than it can to Coupon Mild & Sweet from 1914 ("Type 2" as Burdick's designation) because there are No team changes in the Coupon set of 68, as well as the pictures and captions match up to the rest of the T206 set comparing the 68 cards, but there are are many team changes in the Type 2 and 3 sets, as well as blue lettering, gloss on Type 2's. At the end of the day, all these types are simply Burdick's understanding at that time 75 years ago and that is how he labeled them. Nothing more, nothing less. Pretty obvious, the Type 1's are more alike the 16 ATC Brands from 1909-11, later labeled T206 by Burdick, than they are alike the later dated T213-2&3 sets from 1914 and 1919. Again, if AB is inclusive in T206 with size differences (width), then Coupon should be with size differences (Thickness).

So, my understanding is the entire set of Coupon Type 1 players matches the 350 series players spot on, including the 20 Southern League players from the 8 Southern League teams, correct !? If that's the case, when was the 350 series produced/released?? Further evidence Coupon is a 1910-11 set.

Also, one other important piece to the potential dating of 1910 release for Coupons is within those 20 Southern League players in the Coupon set. Two are from Little Rock. (Hart & Lentz) Little Rock was only a member of Southern Association in 1909 with the other teams Nashville, Memphis, Birmingham, Montgomery, Mobile, New Orleans, and Atlanta. Chattanooga took Little Rock's place in 1910 in the Southern Association, and as we can see from the T210 Old Mill set, the Series 8 is void of Little Rock, but has Chattanooga in it. Further evidence not just on T210 Old Mill, but certainly Coupon as having a 1910 release.

I believe the 68 card set of Coupons is probably not complete. If 9 T206 proof cards can not be known for over 100 years, then a set as rare as Coupon could certainly end up with more cards, even if they are only proofs, scrap, etc... Wouldn't surprise me a bit if a new find yielded some unknown players from that 350 series subjects. (Side note : Type 3 has 70 cards, and Type 2 has 187)

I will lean on Ted, Scot, you, and others on the following questions...

What about the other "Southern Leaguers" from the T206 set? Any patterns with the remaining "SL" players even though they are not actually SL players but called that in the T206 set... (Texas League, South Atlantic League, Virginia League are all absent from the Coupon set, correct !?) The Coupon set has 20 True Southern League players in it. Those 8 Teams represented are period to 1909. This would suggest they were produced & released around that time frame, most likely 1910, but most certainly not later than 1911.

Why is the Coupon set missing T206 Southern leaguers from The South Atlantic, Virginia, and Texas leagues ? Perhaps, it's as easy as where they were released. New Orleans. New Orleans was in the Southern Association obvioulsy and the 20 SL players represent 8 teams in the SA.

And, again wouldn't the Type 1 Coupons matching the 350 series for all 68 cards not put a time stamp of 1910-11 on the set, thus making them the 17th ATC brand ?? What have I missed on the 350 series and the parallel of the 68 Coupon subjects ?


https://www.sportscollectorsdigest.c...f_370_million/

[DixieBaseball]

New Orleans Market selling Coupon Cases/Cartons (Behind Glass) - Notice the Cigarette dispenser on counter... Boy, I would give my pinky nail to go back in time, and have a some fried oysters for lunch right there in that moment for about an hour or two, then purchase some Coupons for the road.... Carton - (Circa 1914-20)

[DixieBaseball]

Coupon

[DixieBaseball]

Originally Posted by MichelaiTorres83

Given that a lot of t206 cards are miscut and some have 2 names I would ask if there are any miscut coupons? I also wonder are there any 2 name cards that disprove or contradict 2 name cards in the t206 set?

Every t206 card back has a miscut of some type.

Interesting questions. I am not aware nor do I believe I have seen a miscut Coupon card and I am not aware of any 2 name Coupon cards, however I believe there may be miscut Type 2 and 3 cards as well as possibly some oddly proportioned borders with possible 2 name on Type 2 & 3 Coupons.

One important thing you need to consider is just the scant quantity of Coupon. With only 68 players and less than 10 known to exists of any of those players (taken into account SGC/PSA pop reports show typically around 2-5 graded examples and of course the raw estimate, I think Coupon's exists in numbers of somewhere around 2-15 examples, perhaps slightly higher of each player. Probably less than 1,000 Total Coupons... (Until a find of an uncut sheet, proofs, or a chest from New Orleans where the smoker only smoked that brand ) That number compared to other brands is 1% or less, so there just may not be enough sample to see any 2 name or miscut Type 1's.

Edited to add : Also consider how big the T210 Old Mill set is and how many cards are in that set it has scant few wrong backs, miscuts, 2 name cards compared to T206. For a set this big, it has a very low number of odd cards. The quality control must have been really good on the T210's.

I think each set has different factors based on quantity, quality control, etc. - Also perhaps logistics may have played a part in some odd way. (American Litho to Train to Factory to Consumer)