Nicholls SC150 649 OP CONTROVERSY

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

Nobody is arguing that one (1) Nicholls 649 was noted on Scot’s survey. But as Jim said there’s only 1 confirmed out of 14,000 entries and could
have been a bad scan or mistake in the entry.

That same 14,000 card survey has the following data on these SWEET CAP 150 (factory 649) cards......

1 ...... Ewing
1 ...... Gilbert
1 ...... McIntyre
1 ...... Nicholls
1 ...... O'Leary
0 ...... Schlei
0 ...... Spencer
1 ...... Wagner

While guys like G. Davis, Johnson, Marquard, Matty, and Powers have 5-6 samples each.


P.S. Jim is attempting to rationalize his skepticism. But, he has no proof that this Nicholls entry is NOT valid.
Jim....of all people....knows that there exists a high probability of unique T206 front/back combos......e.g. 150 series Schulte with a PIEDMONT 350
back (as only one has been accounted for).

TED Z

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by tedzan

That same 14,000 card survey has the following data on these SWEET CAP 150 (factory 649) cards......

1 ...... Ewing
1 ...... Gilbert
1 ...... McIntyre
1 ...... Nicholls
1 ...... O'Leary
0 ...... Schlei
0 ...... Spencer
1 ...... Wagner



TED Z

I own all of those cards with a 649 back on that list with the exception of Nicholls. I have seen all of the 34 come to market within a 4 month period and all but one multiple times.

Those exist and I can prove it with scans. I have looked for the Nicholls long before I started collecting the subset and I have never seen one. No one else has ever seen one. You haven't produced any proof of one.

Do you see why I'm skeptical?

New front/back combinations still happen from time to time, but this is a common back where every other example shows up with regularity. They were printed the same in the same quantities. Nicholls would show up if it existed.

[Abravefan11]

Also you continue when pushed into a corner to point to Scot and his work when his list is a survey and he never claimed to own the card.

You're the only person that has claimed to own this card. Stop shirking that responsibility.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Interesting question of burden of proof. Is the burden to show it does exist, or to show that it does not exist?

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Interesting question of burden of proof. Is the burden to show it does exist, or to show that it does not exist?

Peter - When it comes to putting cards on a list of "confirmed" examples and publishing those list to the hobby to be used as credible information the burden absolutely falls on proving the card does exist.

The lists I use have a tremendous amount of cards on them that are listed as "possible" but not confirmed.

It's difficult to say with any certainty that a front/back combo will not show up but it is possible, but great care should be take when making those claims and you should be open to the idea you could be proven wrong someday.

Again when claiming the card as "confirmed" as in this case, the burden of proof falls on proving it does exist.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

Peter - When it comes to putting cards on a list of "confirmed" examples and publishing those list to the hobby to be used as credible information the burden absolutely falls on proving the card does exist.

The lists I use have a tremendous amount of cards on them that are listed as "possible" but not confirmed.

It's difficult to say with any certainty that a front/back combo will not show up but it is possible, but great care should be take when making those claims and you should be open to the idea you could be proven wrong someday.

Again when claiming the card as "confirmed" as in this case, the burden of proof falls on proving it does exist.

OK, but to continue the legal analogy, why isn't the confirmation on the 14,000 card survey and Ted's stating that he owned the card enough to meet his burden or, in legal terms, to shift the burden to the people claiming it does not exist?

[Abravefan11]

I don't know how to argue this question legally. All I know is I have compiled lists of thousands of inputs and I know how easy it is to make a mistake on one.

And time and time again collectors have claimed to own cards that defy front/back possibilities and when asked to produce the card it turns out to be a different back or they can't produce the card at all.

When there is enough evidence to warrant reasonable skepticism as in this case a tangible example of the card needs to be produced to confirm it.

Also I will add that Ted's other "Mission Accomplished" threads damage his credibility and cause further skepticism about his actually owning the card.

[wonkaticket]

Peter there is no Nicholls confirmed on the superset survey. The only known record of Nicholls was made by Scot R; he admitted that it could have been a mistake via wrong scan back front combo from eBay many years ago.

Ted went off this list of Scot's told everyone he had the card when asked to show it he said he just sold it (snap fingers here)...

Any other collector of worth told me they had this card I might buy the dream for a bit but still ask to see it. Fact is this is the Same Ted who pulled the AB 460 subset mission accomplished thread. When asked by dozens to show up..guess what that's right you just missed it...as the Church Lady would say..."Isn't that convenient."

Funniest thing about this whole mission accomplished subset for the Sweet Cap 649 is that when he won the Johnson card in B&L and posted he had this 35 card set not 34…when Jim asked him to bring them all not only was Nicholls missing but many others were as well. When Jim asked him how then are you finished the set forget the Nicholls tall tale for now…Ted said I’ve been keeping a list and I’ve owned all 35 over the years but sold many of them off.

LOL that’s like me coming on here and saying I just finished the T206 set and when asked where are the 520+ cards I state well I had one of each over the years.

Once again more tall tales not I’ can now confirm all these cards and here are the images so the list is…no it’s hey everybody I finished this set look at me and tell me how great I am.

John

[marcdelpercio]

It is really impossible to prove that a card does NOT exist. I could claim that I own several previously uncatalogued T206 cards and nobody could prove that I don't. Logically, it would seem that anybody (especially one who truly wishes to research and document this set) who did own such an elusive card would be very eager to display it frequently or at least verify its existence.

It would be the equivalent of a prominent biologist who claimed to have captured a Yeti, but then refused to show the rest of the scientific community any evidence.

[Peter_Spaeth]

On the original thread, another collector stated that he too had put together a 35 card set (same number Ted identified including the card at issue).

#20 10-20-2008, 01:15 PM
Archive
Administrator Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,918

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED....Sweet Cap 150/fac 649 ovpt subset

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted
Thanks guys.

I'm curious, if anyone else out there has completed this short series of T206's ?

TED Z





Archive
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Archive
Send email to Archive
Visit Archive's homepage!
Find all posts by Archive
Add Archive to Your Contacts

#21 10-20-2008, 07:26 PM
Archive
Administrator Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,918

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED....Sweet Cap 150/fac 649 ovpt subset

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Ted,
Congrats.... I put that set together several years ago with the help of Scott Elkins. I think it was 2002 or 2003, but both of us put a set together.
Be well Brian


PS Hi Ted... too bad the number is 35 instead of 36 or it would really start your sheet discussion going...

PS 2 As you know this set is important when trying to find out "possible backs"...

[wonkaticket]

Originally Posted by marcdelpercio

It would be the equivalent of a prominent biologist who claimed to have captured a Yeti, but then refused to show the rest of the scientific community any evidence.

LOL dead on but in this case it's more like….. “opps you just missed the Yeti I just sold it....oh well maybe next time but trust me he’s out there keep looking for him you're bound to find him...but currently I'm the only superstar who has…how dare you question me!”



John

[wonkaticket]

I too own most of those cards or have owned them as I gave one Wagner away recently.



Funny though never seen a Nichols or owned one...only person I know who has ever claimed to own one is Ted.

Maybe ted has never owned it and this whole story along with others is just another elaborate test by Ted to see if we are worthy to talk T206’s.

Funny in just a handful of collectors I was able to confirm the Wagner above which is a tougher Sweet Cap 649…but not one person has seen a Nicholls besides the entry on Scot’s list and this phantom card of Teds.

Cheers,

John

P.S. If anyone can produce a real not re-backed, fake scan etc. Nicholls Sweet Cap 649 OP I’ll pay you cash to see it. If it’s in decent shape I’d say I’ll trade you a VG Green Cobb for the card but my extras are P150 so their OC to the top as 95% of them all are unless they are Hindu.