T205 Observations

I'm just about to finish my T205 set after a trade and I was thinking about the 'reality vs. perception' arguments about scarcity in this set. I picked up about 90% of the set via eBay and there were a few cards that eluded me, although I'd argue that not a single one of them is rare.

Of the HOFers, Joss is certainly the scarcest and Jimmy Collins (Minor Leaguer) is seen less often than others. The Wallace "two lines of stats" is in the same league with J.Collins. But the one that, in my opinion, should be included in the "tough" group is Johnny Evers. It just isn't seen nearly as often as, for example, the 'open mouth' versions of Bresnahan and Eddie Collins. I think this is an oversight in price guides, etc.

Most of the tough commons have been called out, but I'd lump Jacklitsch and Killian in there. All of the alternate "one ear" cards (Chase, Harmon, Wiltse, etc.) are scarce, but not that hard to find.

I'm not impressed with Hoblitzell "no stats", Moran "extra line of text", Wilhelm "suf fered"... there are lots of them, especially considering how much they sell for now. I never bothered with the alternate versions of Latham and Leifield, but I suspect they're overrated.


Bill

I've been tracking t205s on eBay for about 4 months now, noting front back combos. On a dump day a few months ago you could literally buy the whole set, card by card, except for the Hobby no stats from all the listings that day.

I would agree, Evers doesn't seem to come around that often and most of the variations are overrated. All can be had with a little patience.

Jay

bcornell wrote: The Wallace "two lines of stats" is in the same league with J.Collins.

The rarest wallace variation is the "one line of 1910 stats". I don't know if you have the last spring issue of SGC but they did a good job rating how scarce cards are.

A few weeks agoo, there was an evers psa 6 on ebay for 899$. I agree he is a tougher hall of famer to obtain.

In my searching, I have not seen any wilhelm's anywhere. I think that he is th hardest player to get (in any variation). Both of the "suffered" and "suffe d" variations are difficult to come by.

-Randy

For what it's worth, I concur with Bill's opinion re: the t205 Evers. When I put together my t205 HOFer subset, Evers was the last one I was able to acquire. Might not be quite at the Joss level, but he's up there.

I don't have enough experience with the variations to comment on their relative scarcity, but it's an interesting subject for discussion. Where would the Shean/Graham Cubs variations fit in?

Bill - congrats on finishing the T205 set! If you don't mind me asking, what were the last few cards you needed for completion?

bcornell wrote:I picked up about 90% of the set via eBay and there were a few cards that eluded me, although I'd argue that not a single one of them is rare.

Hi Bill,

As another collector who has put together a complete T205 set (although I chased the variations to complete a master set) I am 100% in agreement that no T205 deserves to be called rare including the hobby no stats.

bcornell wrote:
I'm not impressed with Hoblitzell "no stats", Moran "extra line of text", Wilhelm "suf fered"... there are lots of them, especially considering how much they sell for now. I never bothered with the alternate versions of Latham and Leifield, but I suspect they're overrated.

I will disagree with you slightly here in that these variations are definitely scarce in comparison to the number of examples of a common T205 which can be found. Not as scarce as the scarcities from other, more difficult, sets but definitely scarce within the context of T205.

As far as the Latham and Leifield variations they are definitely more difficult than their counterparts but certainly obtainable.

I would offer Grant and Suggs as cards which I think are somewhat overrated and considered to be T205 scarcities but are fairly easy to obtain.

One thing that people don't know is the rare variations of Piedmont. There are two factories, 25 and 42. Fact. 42 is much more rare that fact. 25. I think this is the sme with t206's.

Here's one on ebay: http://cgi.ebay.com/1911-T205-Gld-Bdr-Larry-Doyle-Piedmont-Fac-42-SGC-10-1_W0QQitemZ180235764050QQihZ008QQcategoryZ31718QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

-Randy

Since I've been tracking t205s, I haven't noticed any difference in the 2 different piedmonts. Sellers will note the factory 42 in hopes that people will that it is rare like in the t206 set. The only truly rare backs are Hindu and Drum. All others are pretty easy to come by, even if you wanted to put a set together with just one back. Cycle would probably be the toughest do, but you wouldn't have any minor leaguers in a Cycle only set. The American Beauty backs would tough too, especially if you went with just straight black or straight green.

For those that don't know, minor leaguers are only found with Hassan and Polar Bear backs. Most of the variations are found with only back type. If you want to put together a complete basic player set with one back, you have to do it with either Hassan or Polar Bear.

Jay

Is it just me, or are people paying extra for minor leaugers. Is it because they are rare? I thought they were as difficult as commons.

I checked the magazine and piedmont 25 takes up 28.25% of all t205's. Factory 42 takes up 0.96% of all t205's. That's a huge gap!

-Randy

What article is this? I have a hard time believing those numbers given what I've seen on eBay over the past 4 months or so.

Jay

The last spring sgc collector's magazine (t205's on cover) had this info. It was based on 17,000 cards.


-Randy

I think the Wilhelm "suffered" version is pretty tough. The "suffe ed" version is nowhere near it.

Correction - I meant the 1-line Wallace... duh.

The Hoblitzell cards are interesting. I've never understood why the Piedmont card with no stats should be scarce, considering that Piedmonts are so plentiful. The "no stats" card, though, is definitely tough but so are the "no C" and the "Hoblitzel" ones.

I still can't figure out Wilhelm. Is "suffered" scarcer than "suf ered", or vice versa? I have the "suffered" one, but I didn't realize it until I took a look at it a couple of months ago.


Bill

Ben Fisher asked me to post here...I rarely get over her to post but on this subject I do know a little. First off, the article referred to was written by Shawn Adkins and I had shared a good deal of my information with him. For the past 8 years I have tried to track every T205 ebay sale, large auction sale, and some of the more popular dealer sites. I have extensive experience putting together a master set (minus the Hobby no stats) and have personally handled thousands of T205s...Unfortunately, I am at work and do not have access to my notes and research so much of this is from memory.

On Evers being rare. The rarity here is created by two things. One he is a popular HOFer. The second, and this is opinion only, is that the card is just super nice looking. You all laugh but Evers comes up as often as other HOFers. Without my notes in front of me, Evers is in the same class as Matty, Chance, Bender, and Speaker. Evers comes with the standard backs of the other HOFers in the set.

There are several different levels of scarcity in the T205s created by the back advertising and the print runs. Players can be rare with the Piedmont 25 back because there were at least 3 different print runs with that back that included player substitutions and error fixes. Same goes with the Hassan backs. Certain players, I am convinced, were substituted in later print runs for the minor leaguers. The minor cards are slightly rarer but not too bad. There are as many Collins as other minor leaguers. It is just percieved rare because of his HOF status.

The only non-variation HOFer that I tracked that was noticeably tougher was the Duffy. That card is tough.

For awhile I thought that some of the commons were tougher including the Killian (I now own 8!)...the rarities listed by Shawn are accurate. Just a bit of his percentages are off in my opinion (and research) but still very close to mine.

The Hobby no stats is rare. There have been a few sold lately but I can tell you that I have only seen about 15 total in 10 years. Some have sold multiple times (I tracked one that sold 4 different times in ten years).

The Moran stray line is rare but nowhere close to the Hobby. In fact, the only thing that approaches the Hobby no stats is the Wilhelm variations. The version with the piedmont back (I always mess these up) seems to be close to the rarity of the Hobby. This actually makes sense in that both cards seem to have been corrected in later print runs.

If there are any specific questions, please drop me an email and I will try to respond this evening when I am home with my research in front of me.

Joshua Levine

Wite3 wrote:In fact, the only thing that approaches the Hobby no stats is the Wilhelm variations. The version with the piedmont back (I always mess these up) seems to be close to the rarity of the Hobby. This actually makes sense in that both cards seem to have been corrected in later print runs.

Hi Josh,

I have always been under the impression that the Hassan/"Suffered" version is a bit tougher and it would make sense as Hassans aren't quite as common as Piedmonts.

You mention that the Wilhelm was corrected? If so, I don't believe I've ever seen a Piedmont back that has "Suffered" on it. I've always thought that ALL Piedmonts had "Suffe ed" and ALL Hassans had "Suffered".

Do you have a scan of either a Hassan card with "Suffe ed" or a Piedmont with "Suffered" on it? If so, I'd love to see it!

My opinion is that BOTH Wilhelms are pretty scarce with the Hassan/"Suffered" version being the tougher one of the two based upon my experience. That was the last card that I needed to complete my set when I was working on it.

Hi guys, new poster over here. As my father and I begin to wrap up the T205 set, I have to agree that Evers is one of the tougher HOF'ers to obtain. Without a doubt, the toughest HOF'er in the T205 set would have to be Joss. You just don't see the card very often. Cicotte has also been a harder card to find in nicer condition as well.

As for the "tougher" commons, I would say McIntyre and Mullin have been giving us a bit of trouble to locate. The toughest Minor Leaguer is Jimmy Collins (as mentioned above).

The variations in the T205 set can definitely be confusing.

My top 5 would be:
1) Hobby No Stats
2) Wallace (1 Line of 1910)
3) Wilhelm ("suffered")
4) Moran Stray Line
5) Gray (Stats)

Honorable mentions: Shean (Cubs), Barger (Partial), Collins (mouth open) and Hoblitzell (name correct no "Cin.").

I have never seen a Wilhelm "suffered" with a Piedmont back. I was also under the impression that they were only found with Hassan's?

Turner Engle

P.S. Scott, looks like you have an awesome master set on the registry. I just noticed you passed us today

Most Wilhelm "suffered" versions are hassan's. Althought I have seen a few Piedmont backs. My "suffered" version is the only Cycle back I have ever seen.

Wow, that is very interesting. Awesome card.

It might be me, but I"m curious if players were assigned with certain backs. I see a lot of Briscoe Lords with Cyle backs. Many Ty Cobbs have Polar Bear backs.

I also wanted to say that I think that Floyd Kroh is a tough card. He is no star but I haven't seen a lot of his cards around. He is probably as scarce as Evers.

Lastly, I would like to confirm that there is a big difference between Piedmont 25 and 42 (like t206's) If you search, you'll probably find one fact. 42 for every 20 fact. 25's. (I'm just guesing off the topp of my head)

-Randy

lentel wrote:Most Wilhelm "suffered" versions are hassan's. Althought I have seen a few Piedmont backs. My "suffered" version is the only Cycle back I have ever seen.

Good point, I should have stated that I have always thought that all Piedmonts were "suffe ed" and all of the rest of the T205 backs have "suffered" on them.

I have never seen a corrected "suffered" Piedmont back. If someone has a scan of a Piedmont back correctly fixed to "suffered" then I'd really enjoy seeing it!

Turner, thanks for the compliments. I haven't been actively working my T205 set for the past two years although I will pick up a very occasional upgrade here and there.

Ever since I had my T205 set graded by SGC around 2005/2006 I asked and have been waiting for them to add the master T205 set to the registry. Nice to see that they finally got around to it and I've just been very lazy about moving my cards over until recently when SGC fixed some issues and I was able to get most of my cards moved over.

I did some searching on net54 and it seems the Piedmont fact 42s are significantly scarcer than their #25 counterparts. This has some interest to me now, as among the grab-bag lot i won in Huggins and Scott was a T205 Sweeny Fact. 42, although, as you can see, it will probably grade out as poor due to some chucklehead penciling in "194" right after the factory line. Still, are the 42's garnering any premium?

Hi Todd,

Count me among those who feel that Piedmont fact 42 is almost as tough in T205s as it is in T206s. I have just one example in my collection that I "accidently" acquired in a lot purchase on ebay, similar to your story.

I do not think enough collectors realize (or care) about this scarcity in T205s to pay much of a premium for it while, with T206s, there are many more back collectors out there and you do see a premium for a Piedmont fact. 42 back.

I think it's interesting to note that someone was recently selling off a bunch of T205's and listed several Fact.42's among the bunch. If they are really as rare as the T206 ones, then this guy certainly had a very skewed percentage in the selection he had listed. I would say he had maybe 25 cards listed and probably 10 - 12 were Fact42's with no premium added to them.

AndyH

A great thread that needs a bump, plus I've changed my view on the Piedmont fact 42 scarcity. When I started tracking backs it was when someone happened to have a large number of them on eBay, hence skewing my perception. Almost 3 years later I can now confidently say that a Piedmont fact 42 trails only Hindu and Drum in scarcity. Josh might have some different numbers since he's got a larger database to work from.

sabrjay wrote:A great thread that needs a bump, plus I've changed my view on the Piedmont fact 42 scarcity. When I started tracking backs it was when someone happened to have a large number of them on eBay, hence skewing my perception. Almost 3 years later I can now confidently say that a Piedmont fact 42 trails only Hindu and Drum in scarcity. Josh might have some different numbers since he's got a larger database to work from.

The article published in "SGC Collector" by Shawn Adkins puts Piedmont 42 behind only Hindu, Drum and Broadleaf based on a database of over 17,000 cards.