Page all of 2 12>
Topic Options
#1987392 - 06/14/09 06:04 AM T205 Mathewson (Cycle)
castaways
stranger


Registered: 06/14/09
Posts: 24

Offline
Why isn't the T205 Mathewson (Cycle, incorrect stats) listed on the SGC Registry? I have been reading old forums and most state that it really isn't an error/variation because all Cycle backs have that discrepancy. If that is the case, then why is the Wilhelm "suffered" listed on the master list as it seems to be found only with the Hassan back? Also, where would the Mathewson (cycle) card rate in difficulty compared with the top 5 difficult cards to obtain for this set?


Still looking for Wilhelm "suffered" low grade if anyone has one to sell.

Frank

Top
#1990748 - 10/14/09 07:46 PM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: castaways]
scottglevy
stranger


Registered: 10/14/09
Posts: 2

Offline
Frank,

I think that you have a very valid point. My thoughts on this item are well known ... and in full disclosure, I do have the cycle Matty card so I suppose that I'm a bit biased. However, there really is no difference between the Wilhelm suffered and the cycle Matty as both are variations that appear on a single brand back. I believe that at some point the hobby will recognize the Matty cycle as an error.

It's hard to tell exactly where the rarity of this card will end up. But I've been tracking it for close to a decade and have seen/heard of about 20 cycle Matty examples in existence.

If I had to guess (and it is only a guess!) I'd rate the very toughest cards to be:
#1 - Hobby no stats
#2 - Matty cycle
#3 - Moran stray line
#4 - Wilhelm suffered

Regards,
Scott

Top
#1990763 - 10/16/09 01:09 AM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: scottglevy]
castaways
stranger


Registered: 06/14/09
Posts: 24

Offline
Scott,

Thank you for the information, insight and opinion. I have only recently started trying to collect this set (almost halfway there) and find it quite interesting and challenging. I was able to pick up a Matty Cycle about 8 months ago, so I am biased on this subject as well. I emailed Brian at SGC and this was the response:

"We have not added it to the Master Set because all Cycle back Mathewsons come this way so it is more of an uncorrected error rather than a variation, but I will revisit that decision a little more in depth and get back to you if anything changes."

Which left me a little more confused as from what I was told (and I'm not a T206 expert) ALL T206 Demmitt & O'Hara Polar Bear Backs are cataloged as a VARIATION. Not sure why I got that response as there appears to be no difference between the two? How can you catalog a T206 Demmitt Polar Bear as a variation and not the T205 Mathewson Cycle? And if that isn't enough, and staying within the T205 set, don't ALL Piedmont Wilhelm's show "Suffe ed" and that is labeled as a variation

It would be nice if the TPG's would somehow show and identify these variations for those that are wanting to complete a True Master Set with all the different variations (whether they want to call it a variation or not).

Thanks again for the information.

r/
Frank


Still looking for a low grade (beater is fine) Wilhelm Suffered


Edited by castaways (10/16/09 01:31 AM)

Top
#1990766 - 10/16/09 06:34 AM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: castaways]
SMtJoy
veteran


Registered: 01/23/08
Posts: 1501

Offline
I agree the card needs to be listed as a variation, SGC lets be consistent.
Top
#1990828 - 10/18/09 11:17 AM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: SMtJoy]
castaways
stranger


Registered: 06/14/09
Posts: 24

Offline
It's "OFFICIAL" SGC finally has the Mathewson Cycle listed in their registry. Same weight as the Cobb.

#133 Christy Mathewson (Cycle Back)......... 10.00

r/
Frank

Top
#1990833 - 10/18/09 05:16 PM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: castaways]
Brian Administrator
Moderator
addict


Registered: 01/24/09
Posts: 603
Loc: New York

Offline
I added this card to the Master Set on Friday. I am open to sugestions on the weighting.

Brian
_________________________
Brian Dwyer

Top
#1990838 - 10/19/09 01:33 AM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: Brian]
castaways
stranger


Registered: 06/14/09
Posts: 24

Offline
Brian,

Thank you for including this card to the Master Set. I know that it this subject has been brought up numerous times before, but glad that SGC decided to include. Suggestions to weight, although I'm no expert, nor have I been tracking like some of the others (Joshua & Scott), but I would think that it should be somewhere between 8-10 due to the fact that he is a HOF'er and it is on a scarcer back.
While on the subject of weight, it would be nice if SGC in the future would look at the weights for (Moran "stray line" and the Wilhelm's) as they do not seem to be proportionate with other's weight from the set due to scarcity.
Thanks again for the great job and superb customer service. SGC is top notch.

r/
Frank

Top
#1990844 - 10/19/09 07:41 PM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: castaways]
scottglevy
stranger


Registered: 10/14/09
Posts: 2

Offline
Brian,

Thanks for listing this card in the master set - it's nice to see SGC leading the hobby in decisions like this. I have no doubt that PSA will follow suit at some point in the future.

I think you actually nailed the weighting pretty much dead on in your first shot. I believe that in terms of rarity, past resale value and what I expect will eventually become desirability the Matty cycle is the 2nd most important card for the T205 set, with Hobby no stats being top dog.

Regards,
Scott

Top
#1991820 - 12/05/09 05:28 PM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: scottglevy]
bowlingshoeguy
newbie


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 26
Loc: Minnesota

Offline
I have to disagree with this being a part of the master set. If the Matty is included than all the different back variations should be included, know if a corrected version of the Matty card is found with a Cycle back than I agree. I just can not see the justification for adding a card to the list just because a certain brands back variation has either misinformation or a typo.

Brian I would really like to hear the justification for adding the matty Cycle back as a variation without including the other back variations to the list.

As far as the the toughest list goes. if you are going to add the Matty Cycle you need to ass all the different players with DRUM backs, and other back variations that are tougher than Cycle.

I personally do not care if individual collectors want to bid against each other for a card if they have the proper information on the cards they are bidding on, but when Lew Lipsett runs an auction for a T205 Matty with a fountain of misinformation and it is brought to his a attention and he does nothing about it. I have a big problem with this. To me by adding the Matty Cycle back to the SGC list is only adding to this problem.

Just as a footnote, I have been buying steadily since Oct 2000 and have owned 3 different T205 Matty Cycle backs, I no longer own any of them, (I believe Scott owns the last one I had). I made out quite nicely on the resell of all of them.

I hope this is not a trend,

Lee
_________________________
Always accepting consignment for Sterling Sports Auctions

Top
#1991824 - 12/06/09 09:41 AM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: bowlingshoeguy]
castaways
stranger


Registered: 06/14/09
Posts: 24

Offline
Lee,
By adding this to the master set, it removes the problem of any misinformation by other sellers doesn't it? Again, you seem to be fixated on the Cycle Matty, but there is no difference than the Wilhelm variation. Piedmont only has the "suffe ed" version, but nothing is made of that variation. For all those that don't agree with it being a variation, none have given a valid arguement with the other's that are considered a variation. Why is there a premium applied to the T206 Polar Bear Demmitt, since that seems to be the only brand that has him with St. Louis? I do believe that is labeled a variation.

It's funny how when people seem to make out "quite nicely", nothing is made of it. It is only when some can make out "even better" does it become an issue.

You seem to be missing the point of this listing as no other T205 Matty brand has incorrect stats. I think by listing it only helps the hobby and generates more interest. I believe that SGC did the right thing adding it, as it is in line with other variations that are listed on the registry.

Frank

Top
#1991825 - 12/06/09 10:14 AM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: castaways]
bowlingshoeguy
newbie


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 26
Loc: Minnesota

Offline
Frank,

First of all I have no fixation with the T205 Matty Cycle. I reason I reply is because It is a card that I have first hand knowledge of this card and have not responded to the Wilhelm because I have little to no knowledge about the card but if the card is a one back only with no corrected version it falls into this same category that it belongs as a back variation and should not be listed.

The reason this variation got so much press is because of Lipset's auction with misinformation and the price received, whereas the Wilhelm card has not had such press.

As pointed in the earlier reply " I just can not see the justification for adding a card to the list just because a certain brands back variation has either misinformation or a typo."

Frank, your whole response to this thread has no rational if you can not answer the question I imposed. Just because an error has been made in the past does not mean it should continue in the future.

As far a the Demmitt, O'Hara to me there is justification in the fact that it seems PB was the first to print this card while with St. Louis and later traded to a new team and thus the rest made the proper team designation. I situation such as this does not apply to cards with typos that were not corrected. Plus there variations have been with the hobby for years and it just will not change.

As stated before, if people are willing to pay thousands of dollars for a card that was $100 a year ago because one longtime dealer overhyped an auction that is there right.

Frank,

Please explain your argument as to why this should be a stand out variations with no correction to the back on the Matty T205 Cycle and why every back variation should not be listed.

Lee


Edited by bowlingshoeguy (12/06/09 01:55 PM)
Edit Reason: bad spelling
_________________________
Always accepting consignment for Sterling Sports Auctions

Top
#1991835 - 12/06/09 06:21 PM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: bowlingshoeguy]
Brian Administrator
Moderator
addict


Registered: 01/24/09
Posts: 603
Loc: New York

Offline
The Mathewson 37-1 was added to the 2010 SCD as a variation in the T205 set. As such, we added it to our Master Set listing. It will be designated 37-1 Record in the extended description on the third line of the label from here on out.

Thanks,

Brian
_________________________
Brian Dwyer

Top
#1991839 - 12/06/09 11:38 PM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: Brian]
bowlingshoeguy
newbie


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 26
Loc: Minnesota

Offline
Thanks for the reply, Brian

I understand that the SCD listing gives it some credence. But no one still has answered my question as to justifying it's inclusions without 2 variations of the Cycle back.

I impose the question to anyone that feels the card needs to be included as a distinct variation.

Please explain your argument as to why this should be a stand out variations with no correction to the back on the Matty T205 Cycle and why every back variation should not be listed.

Lee
_________________________
Always accepting consignment for Sterling Sports Auctions

Top
#1991948 - 12/09/09 07:54 PM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: bowlingshoeguy]
lentel
stranger


Registered: 12/09/09
Posts: 1

Offline
 Originally Posted By: castaways
Why isn't the T205 Mathewson (Cycle, incorrect stats) listed on the SGC Registry? I have been reading old forums and most state that it really isn't an error/variation because all Cycle backs have that discrepancy. If that is the case, then why is the Wilhelm "suffered" listed on the master list as it seems to be found only with the Hassan back? Also, where would the Mathewson (cycle) card rate in difficulty compared with the top 5 difficult cards to obtain for this set?


Still looking for Wilhelm "suffered" low grade if anyone has one to sell.

Frank
 Originally Posted By: bowlingshoeguy
I have to disagree with this being a part of the master set. If the Matty is included than all the different back variations should be included, know if a corrected version of the Matty card is found with a Cycle back than I agree. I just can not see the justification for adding a card to the list just because a certain brands back variation has either misinformation or a typo.

Brian I would really like to hear the justification for adding the matty Cycle back as a variation without including the other back variations to the list.

As far as the the toughest list goes. if you are going to add the Matty Cycle you need to ass all the different players with DRUM backs, and other back variations that are tougher than Cycle.

I personally do not care if individual collectors want to bid against each other for a card if they have the proper information on the cards they are bidding on, but when Lew Lipsett runs an auction for a T205 Matty with a fountain of misinformation and it is brought to his a attention and he does nothing about it. I have a big problem with this. To me by adding the Matty Cycle back to the SGC list is only adding to this problem.

Just as a footnote, I have been buying steadily since Oct 2000 and have owned 3 different T205 Matty Cycle backs, I no longer own any of them, (I believe Scott owns the last one I had). I made out quite nicely on the resell of all of them.

I hope this is not a trend,

Lee



Just to let you know my t205 wilhelm suffered version has a cycle back and sgc graded 30. I can send you a pic if you like

Top
#1991954 - 12/10/09 02:06 AM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: lentel]
castaways
stranger


Registered: 06/14/09
Posts: 24

Offline
lentel,

Congratulations on that acquisition. It would be nice to see that beauty. Do you know if Cycle has both versions? I meant to say in my initial post that Hassan doesn't have both versions of the card and Piedmont doesn't have both versions. That seemed to be the reason for initially not listing it as a variation since no other Cycle Mathewson had the correct stats on back.

r/
Frank

Top
#1991963 - 12/10/09 11:01 AM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: castaways]
bowlingshoeguy
newbie


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 26
Loc: Minnesota

Offline
I had my suspicions that there were different backs for the Wilhelm, but did not say anything because I did not have the required knowledge like Kyle.

Frank, It is great that you responded to Kyle, but why do you not bother to try and answer my question? I am have imposed the question frequently and there seems to be no one that wants to answer it.

I think we all want continuity in the listings and the matty does not fall into that category until a corrected version or another error with a different ad shows up.

Lee
_________________________
Always accepting consignment for Sterling Sports Auctions

Top
#1991964 - 12/10/09 01:50 PM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: bowlingshoeguy]
castaways
stranger


Registered: 06/14/09
Posts: 24

Offline
Lee,

The Matty is in the same situation with Wilhelm. Currently Wilhelm "suffe ed" is found with only Piedmont backs. It is not found on a Hassan back. That card was deemed a variation. I'm not sure if it is found on the cycle back, that was why I inquired since only one Cycle Wilhelm has been graded by SGC. I'm assuming it is the "suffered" version.

Let me ask you a question. Since all T205 Mathewson's (except cycle) have the backs that say 37-11, what would you call the one that has a 37-1 record? To me, that meets the definition as being a variation as it is different from all other Mathewsons. Some how, it has to be identified as being different.

r/
Frank


Edited by castaways (12/10/09 03:23 PM)

Top
#1991975 - 12/10/09 10:23 PM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: castaways]
bowlingshoeguy
newbie


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 26
Loc: Minnesota

Offline
As I have stated in almost all my responses. I have no problem with the card being a variation if a corrected version is found with a Cycle back or another ad back is found with the 37-1. Until than it is no different than a Matty with a Drum, American Beauty, Hassan, or Piedmont backs they are all variations of the matty so why aren't they listed as such?

Lee
_________________________
Always accepting consignment for Sterling Sports Auctions

Top
#1991976 - 12/10/09 11:42 PM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: bowlingshoeguy]
castaways
stranger


Registered: 06/14/09
Posts: 24

Offline
How would it be the same as a Matty with a Hassan back? If all Drum, American Beaut, Hassan or Piedmont backs say 37-11 and the Cycle says 37-1? That's where I don't understand. It can't be the same as those, because it is different. You don't need to have a cycle that says 37-11 to see that the 37-1 is different from all other brands.

Frank

Top
#1992010 - 12/12/09 08:27 AM Re: T205 Mathewson (Cycle) [Re: castaways]
bowlingshoeguy
newbie


Registered: 12/05/09
Posts: 26
Loc: Minnesota

Offline
Frank, I don't know how to explain it any better. Each T205 has a different ad back are technically a variations. They are not listed as such. If another ad back is exposed with the 37-1 or a corrected version with the 37-11 back shows up then it becomes a unique variation. Until than it is no different then a T205 matty with a Cycle or if you want to call it 37-1 card, same card different name. If you don't get it Frank that is fine and you are welcome to think what you like.

Happy Holidays,

Lee
_________________________
Always accepting consignment for Sterling Sports Auctions

Top
Page all of 2 12>


Moderator:  EARLSWORLD 
Hop to:
Who's Online
0 registered and 4 anonymous users online.
Newest Members
klmnop450123, abcdef863349, vwxyz{570399, nopqrs004715, tjf092071
1963 Registered Users

Generated in 0.022 seconds in which 0.001 seconds were spent on a total of 14 queries. Zlib compression disabled.