T206 sov 460 super print question

[cfc1909]

"Most would say I wrote the book on the T206 SOVEREIGN cards with all the research I have done on them these past 5 years."

For those of you new to Net54, this book by Ted -- like all of the Zanidakis classics -- can be found in the fiction section of Amazon.com.

In your own words -you found the other 5 superprints in 11 months-I would say that is rather quick-1 card about every 60 days.

The group shared accurate lists with you around 2004 or 5 and you started posting them on 54 and getting some new confirmations and all was going good-it was a positive effort forward. At some point you decided all the research was done by you and claimed all the work as your own and you had been doing it since the early 80s. Just funny how all the collector/dealers from the time remember you as the Bowman guy.

That wasn't so bad until you started claiming you completed all these sets and subsets that have cards in them that do not exist. The main one being Nicholls in the Sweet Caporal 649 34 card subset. You insisted the set was 35 cards and you completed the set. When you were called on it, you had sold the set and faked a scan of Nicholls to prove its existance.

The same situation happened with the American Beauty 460 75 card set. When you were called on it you had 35 cards and just happened to sell 40 cards including the Cobb for 4k just before I got to the Philly show to see them.

I would caution Bill Browns super set entries by TZ.

We still respectfully share concrete information with you and you refuse to see it and continue to tell us how many cards you collected and how much you know.

We are just showing the facts how these Sovereign 460 superprints are no more difficult than a good portion of the other Sovereign 460s. It is not true that they are more difficult than the other 460s as once thought.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by cfc1909

"Most would say I wrote the book on the T206 SOVEREIGN cards with all the research I have done on them these past 5 years."

For those of you new to Net54, this book by Ted -- like all of the Zanidakis classics -- can be found in the fiction section of Amazon.com.

In your own words -you found the other 5 superprints in 11 months-I would say that is rather quick-1 card about every 60 days.

The group shared accurate lists with you around 2004 or 5 and you started posting them on 54 and getting some new confirmations and all was going good-it was a positive effort forward. At some point you decided all the research was done by you and claimed all the work as your own and you had been doing it since the early 80s. Just funny how all the collector/dealers from the time remember you as the Bowman guy.

That wasn't so bad until you started claiming you completed all these sets and subsets that have cards in them that do not exist. The main one being Nicholls in the Sweet Caporal 649 34 card subset. You insisted the set was 35 cards and you completed the set. When you were called on it, you had sold the set and faked a scan of Nicholls to prove its existance.

The same situation happened with the American Beauty 460 75 card set. When you were called on it you had 35 cards and just happened to sell 40 cards including the Cobb for 4k just before I got to the Philly show to see them.

I would caution Bill Browns super set entries by TZ.

We still respectfully share concrete information with you and you refuse to see it and continue to tell us how many cards you collected and how much you know.

We are just showing the facts how these Sovereign 460 superprints are no more difficult than a good portion of the other Sovereign 460s. It is not true that they are more difficult than the other 460s as once thought.

Where do I start here......I'll try starting with this statement of Jim's:

1st.....Jim says " In your own words -you found the other 5 superprints in 11 months-I would say that is rather quick-1 card about every 60 days. "

You are contradicting yourself. You just told the world here that these SOV 460 super-prints are not as rare as I am contending, yet you are surprised that I
acquired 5 of them in less than a year. So, what is it....Jim, get a grip ? ?

FYI....Scot Reader clued me in about the Chance and the Matty being available, so I acquired them within a month of completing my 402-card SOVEREIGN set.




In the months to follow I won these SOVEREIGN 460 Hal Chase cards and Evers from ebay.





2nd.....Jim says " The group shared accurate lists with you around 2004 or 5 and you started posting them on 54 and getting some new confirmations and all
was going good-it was a positive effort forward. At some point you decided all the research was done by you and claimed all the work as your own and you
had been doing it since the early 80s "

OK people....now this claim about me not giving credit to other Net54er's (Barry Arnold, Art Martineau, Frank Wakefield, Brian Weisner, etc., etc.) is sheer "B-S".
And, I can produce many, many threads to prove this. I am tempted to bump up these threads to show what kind of a fool Jim is making of himself. However,
flooding pages of Net54 with my old threads would drive every one here "bananas".

Furthermore, Jim claims that I didn't collect T206's in the early 1980's. Well, there is a Net54 member, Barry Sloate, who can vouch for the fact that I was col-
lecting T206's in the 1980's. I met Barry in 1983. He sold me some of my rare back T206's back then. In 1997, I sold Barry my near complete (1st) T206 set of
521 cards (with MAGIE).
You see guys, Jim DID NOT know me back in the 1980's, so where is he getting this fictional crap that he is spewing ? Is he living in "LA-LA" land ? Actually, I
have a darn good idea who fed him this crap, but that's for another day.

So much for Jim's continuing "B-S". I hate to say this, but lately, Jim has become an "angry man". I met Jim several years ago at the Ft Washington show. Jim
was a friendly guy back then and I sold him T206 AMERICAN BEAUTY's, BROAD LEAF's, CYCLE's, EPDG's, HINDU's, etc. at some really fair prices. In fact, I'd save
these cards for him since he usually arrived at the show on Saturdays. Furthermore, I would share with him my T206 expertise, which he appeared to appreciate.

In recent years the Philly Show moved to Valley Forge and the booth fees doubled in price. To continue this pricey show, I decide to share the booth with
another dealer. I gave Jim first crack at it. And, he was excited that I considered him. For a number of reasons both of us did not do that well at this new Philly
show. But, so didn't the other vintage card dealers. However, Jim and I stuck it out for 4 shows. Then we parted ways.


Hey guys, I could continue this for a lot longer, but I will spare you the "gory" details.....of how Jim has been on a vendetta to diminish my reputation on this
forum by contacting many Net54 friends that I have made on this forum and demeaning me.
And, it deeply bothers me that Jim, in his obsessive vendetta, has alienated me from some of my good friends on Net54. When Jim started bashing me, I wish
some of these good friends would have contacted me to get my side of this story.

Jim (and Tim), I was keeping this to myself....but, here goes....at the Chicago National this past summer many Net54er's visited with me (as they usually do).
And, quite a few wanted to know what was going on with the two of you in your constant bashing of me this past year ?

I took the "high road" and just changed the subject of conversation. However, I will tell you, Jim & Tim, that the further you persist in diminishing me, the more
you are diminishing yourselves....in the opinion of these fellow Net54er's. They don't tune in to this forum to read your constant negativity. It's time that the
both of you realize that your recurring criticisms of me and your snide remarks are back-firing on you.

Have a good night.


TED Z

[Abravefan11]

Ted - I have been extremely cordial to you in spite of your opinions of me. My greatest fault is in taking a different opinion to yours. I don't, nor do I care, to make any discussion personal, but simply share factual information to the best of my ability concerning the T206 set. While you may view my inputs as a personal attack on you they're simply a matter of trying to put out the best factual information about the set that I can. When someone posts a topic, be it you or anyone else, I present what I know to be the best of my knowledge with a factual response. If that is in contradiction to you it is by coincidence and not personal. Because you have a propensity for posting more incorrect information and wild speculation than anyone else on the board it may seem like I have it out for you, but nothing could be further from the truth. My only objective is to present the best information to those that collect the set and read the board. I don't believe anything in my above posts in this thread can be taken as a personal attack on you but rather an expression of my opinion on the subject put forth by another board member backed up by factual information.

If anyone that met you at the National has an issue with me, they simple don't know me. I'm very comfortable with who I am, the information I present and the collection I own. I feel those that do know me in the hobby would have a different opinion than the possible one's that don't.

[Runscott]

Wow. I say something nice about BOTH of you, and rather than let yourself be side-tracked for just a measly second, you ignore the compliment and go right back after each other again.

I guess this is more serious than I thought.

Scott <=== backing off and popping some corn

[Abravefan11]

Scott - I genuinely appreciate the compliment. I just want to discuss the set and I do this regularly on and off the board with the best guys in the hobby without altercation. I would prefer for things not to get derailed but sometimes it's impossible to ignore. I shouldn't get sucked into the vortex but admit sometimes it becomes to much not to. I'll continue to try sticking to just the information and topic at hand.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

Scott - I genuinely appreciate the compliment. I just want to discuss the set and I do this regularly on and off the board with the best guys in the hobby without altercation. I would prefer for things not to get derailed but sometimes it's impossible to ignore. I shouldn't get sucked into the vortex but admit sometimes it becomes to much not to. I'll continue to try sticking to just the information and topic at hand.

That's cool - if you know me, you know I spend a lot of time in the vortex.

If it weren't for you two getting me interested in T206 backs again, I wouldn't have spent $777 tonight for a card I couldn't afford.

[cfc1909]

Ted

I believe you collected 206s in the 80s-I never said I didn't. I don't believe you collected the backs and kept track of what existed and what didn't. You had a mix of backs in your set just like everyone else did because no one paid much attention to the backs except the Barnings. I am sure some others did but you were not one of them. If you did collect them then, you would not be claiming you completed so many subsets now in the middle and later 2000s.

You remember things differently than they happened about us setting up to gether at shows and that is fine.

What is not fine is when you put out bad information and bogus claims of completeing sets. Each time you are given factual information that shows your information is not accurate you say something like you need an edification or someone is reinventing the wheel.

I get tired of hearing how many sets you completed and how much of an expert you are. Each time I have asked you to show the sets you claim to own, you do not have them to show. I don't have a vandetta I just stated what happened when you are called on showing what you claim to own.

I didn't contact anyone about you either, I typed what I had to say right here. I came to your table and talked to you face to face about the AB 460s and the Nicholls. You can't create chase cards that no one will ever find.

I can come to the Philly show Saturday if you will show me the 151 Sovereign 150s that you claim to own.