t205 Matty cycle back

I just read the thread on the SGC board about the card. Someone claims that it is the second toughest card in the set. I say, no way. Just ask my brother how tough it is. He's owned more than a few and he doesn't even collect t205s.The guy making this claim says he has been tracking it for 10 years but also owns on, so I'm sure there is some bias to keep the overinflated value pumped up.

It's been a known variation since early 80s when I first started collecting and probably long before that. No one thought it was that tough then and certainly isn't tough now. The only reason any cares now is because Lew took some questionable liberties with description of the card in one of his auctions and two suckers bit. I have doubt that has know about this variation even longer than I have, yet his description made it sound like he had never seen or heard of it before.

Do any of you other t205 collectors really think that this card is the second rarest in the set?

Jay

I am not a t205 collector but have been around a while and seen this card plenty of times. It has got more attention since the Lipset auction.
All that stuff Levy is saying on the SGC board is so SGC will recognize it on their checklist and it worked. It is a smart move and will make the value increase.
The last one on ebay went for just under 2k. Before the lipset auction they could be had for the same price as any other Matty 205. Now a $500 card will cost you 2k. NOT the toughest card in the set but nobady will be selling Cycle Mattys so it will cost you when one comes up.

For some reason the 205 Matty has always appealed to me and I am glad I finally have a nice one.

One more -Hobby no stats is overrated also.-There is one in almost every auction

Has anyone ever posted on the SGC board? My regular username and password does not work on the message board.

Lee

Lee

I posted over there during the time when T206 Museum/Pat Chan was making the fake black bar Old Mills.
I had to sign up with a different user for their chat board. My user for my submissions did not work-seemed a bit funny to have two different ids.
I did take the time to sign up and post though because I wanted as many collectors to know as possible.

Well, I guess the Mathewson (Cycle back) has been added to the registry. It definitely isn't the second toughest card in the set.

Top three, in my opinion:

1) Hobby No Stats
2) Wilhelm "suffered"
3) Wallace One Line

For what it's worth, the Wilhelm "suffered" exists with more than one back.

Turner E.

I think this whole addition is wrong. If there was a corrected version found than I have no problem until than it is a Matty with a Cycle back that has a typo. If they are going to add this card to their master list they need to add every front with every back variation. With the being the case all of the Drums and tougher backs than Cycle would rank tougher than the Matty Cycle back.

I have owned 3 different T205 matty's with Cycle backs since Oct. 2000.

Lee

asoriano wrote:Well, I guess the Mathewson (Cycle back) has been added to the registry. It definitely isn't the second toughest card in the set.

Top three, in my opinion:

1) Hobby No Stats
2) Wilhelm "suffered"
3) Wallace One Line

For what it's worth, the Wilhelm "suffered" exists with more than one back.

Turner E.

So you must have a cycle Matty in your collection since you think that number's 2 & 3 are tougher to find than the cycle Matty? According to the pop reports, the cycle Matty is more rare than the Wilhelm Hassan and there isn't even a comparison with the Wilhelm Piedmont. Also, the only version of Wilhelm with Piedmont is the "suffe ed" version. Now I understand that not all cards are graded, but based on those totals from the TPG companies, I would beg to differ that the Wilhelm "suffered" and Wallace "one line" is more rare than the cycle Matty.

tks
T205 Guy

You need to remember that the Wallace and Wilhelm have had years of being recognized and noted on slabs. The Matty has only been recognized by any company in the past 6 months or so. Who knows how many are slabbed without being noted as having a Cycle back?

I started collecting t205s back in 1982. As early as 1983 I noticed the variation and long time collectors said they knew about it and it was no bog deal because it was only on the Cycle back. I've seen far more Cycle back Mattys than Wallaces and no one had noticed the Wilhelm card until a few years ago so I can't really comment on that, but I know I've seen more Mattys than that card in collections and for sale.

Pop reports are never a good place to make scarcity judgments, especially for new recognized cards.

Jay

Jay

Jay

I agree that you shouldn't use pop reports to get an accurate total, but I would accept those stats because more people are apt to get Mathewson slabbed than Wilhelm or Wallace due to his status. Although the cycle brand has just recently garnered extra attention, the fact is Matty is one of the most slabbed cards in the T205 set. Again slabbed more than Wallace and Wilhelm. With that information, I would really look at the TPG reports to get an estimate on the rarity.

Although I wouldn't classify myself as an expert, I have been tracking some of the more difficult cards in the T205 set. The Wallace "one line" has come up for auction quite a bit over the last 5 years. The Wilhelm "suffered" has only surfaced a couple times. I haven't tracked the cycle Matty, but over the past 2 years, I've only seen 2 sold.

tks

Mark

Lots of Mattys are slabbed, but they haven't made back distinctions until recently. There a lot of t205 Matty out there in slabs with no note as to what back it has.

Jay

I believe that Josh Levine has been tracking backs and fronts and at last report he figured there were about 10 or 11 of the Matty Cycle backs. This being said, if you are going to lump the Matty Cycle and the Wilhelm "suffered" (if it only has one back brand and no correction) than you need to all the front and back variation possiblities thus making any Drum back far tougher than the cards listed.

The same goes for me as to why the Cobb Lenox brown is not one of the highest priced T206s, I would be surprised if there was many more than 3 (with one varitified at this time). But it seems no one really cares unless there is an oddity to the card.

I sure hope SGC changes there mind and drops the Matty and Wilhelm from the master list for those reasons. For those that use the agrument of the Demmitt/O'Hara at least there is factual evidence that they both played for St. Louis and then got traded to NY and there is strong evidence that the PB back was the first to produce this series and was rightly corrected in the following printing with different ad backs. The Matty and Wilhelm are some sort of Typo.

The other arguement because there are cards recognized already under this basis to me is wrong because there is so much more knowledge to fronts and backs then in the past does not mean the old standards have to be continued.

At one time there was another T202 in the checklist for many years but later removed after never seeing another and the that the original one was considered a taped together card. There is also the lovely example of the T206 SLer with the OM black bar back that had been accepted in the hobby by most but has know been uncovered as a fraud.

For those that argue for the Matty and Wilhelm, I would like to hear your arguement as to why they are different from say a Matty or wilhelm of another back. The only arguement I seem to hear is the past transgressions of Demmit/O'Hara.

Lee


Lee

Over the years, I've owned 2 Matty's with Cycle backs (according to my records). Unfortunately this was before the difference was publicized so I never took stock as to the difference.

I think a lot of people believe the wilhelm suffered version comes only in a piedmont back. My wilhelm suffered version has a cycle back. I have only seen this one but believe there must be others. Sorry for the scan, my computer skills are poor

Thanks for posting Kyle. I still have had no one that believes the Matty should be included to answer my question. I think we are are looking for continuity in the listings and the Matty as a variation without a corrected version does not fall into the variation category.

Lee

lentel wrote:I think a lot of people believe the wilhelm suffered version comes only in a piedmont back. My wilhelm suffered version has a cycle back. I have only seen this one but believe there must be others. Sorry for the scan, my computer skills are poor

I'm certainly not one who thinks the "suffered" version only comes with a piedmont back as I've never seen one with a Piedmont back. Currently the "suffe ed" version of Wilhelm is only found with a Piedmont back. No "suffered" version is found on that back type. So far, the "Suffered" version is found on all other Wilhelm backs. I don't believe that a "Suffe ed" version has been found with a Cycle back. Do you know if one exists? If not, then your Wilhelm (according to bowlingshoeguy) shouldn't be listed as a variation since no "uncorrected" or "suffe ed" version exist on that back. He is claiming that if there are two different versions of a card, then both versions should appear on each back type, otherwise it isn't a variation. I'm really trying to understand the logic, but can't seem too.

Wilhelm "suffe ed" - only found with Piedmont back (not found on Hassan or Cycle)
Wilhelm "suffered" - found on all other back types
These cards are considered variations because they are different.

Mathewson "37-1" - only found with Cycle backs
Mathewson "37-11" - found on all other back types
Not considered a variation according to some although they are different.

Please can someone explain that logic too me?

Just noticed that PSA added the Mathewson "Cycle 1 loss variation" to their registry. So it appears that the top 2 TPG companies consider this a variation.

Again, nice card and thanks for showing.

Mark

I'm with my brother. If the variation is specific to a certain back with no correction, that is no different than claiming a Drum back is a variation of a Piedmont back. Yes, the text specific to that player may be different between the two backs, but if the variation is confined to one back with no correction, then it's a Cycle back card, or whatever back it happens to have.

The Demmitt and O'Hara t206s are used as counters to this example, but those were corrections made due to trades. The Matty card started out as an error and was corrected after the Cycle press run. Assuming this is what happened, this would mean that cards with the Cycle brand back were printed first.

Jay