Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

One of those "which do you prefer and why" threads

Here is the choice. Assume the white cap version costs approximately $100 more. Also, neither back is more/less rare, and from what those in "know" say, the white cap version is a little more rare than the black cap.

Card A - T206 Mathewson White Cap, PSA 3:

image
image

Card B - T206 Mathewson Dark Cap, PSA 4(MK). The MK is for the vintage stamp on the back:

image
image

Cheers,

Bob

Comments

  • Maybe it's the scans but he black cap version looks a bit blurry. Also, I like the idea of a no-qualifiers good looking 3 as opposed to a 4 w/ qualifier. So for me I'd get the white cap one. Good luck either way.
  • jimradjimrad Posts: 2,777 ✭✭✭
    I always prefer the pungent aroma of Piedmont over Sweet Corporal.
    Positive transactions with: Bkritz,Bosox1976,Brick,captainthreeputt,cpettimd,craigger,cwazzy,DES1984,Dboneesq,daddymc,Downtown1974,EAsports,EagleEyeKid,fattymacs,gameusedhoop,godblessUSA,goose3,KatsCards,mike22y2k,
    MULLINS5,1966CUDA,nam812,nightcrawler,OAKESY25,PowderedH2O,relaxed,RonBurgundy,samsgirl214,shagrotn77,swartz1,slantycouch,Statman,Wabittwax
  • fattymacsfattymacs Posts: 2,579 ✭✭✭
    I prefer the image of the dark cap example.
  • Like the white cap better! Both sweet cards thou.
  • I like the white cap version better, reasons being, the black cap is a little less in focus (could be scan) and the white cap version has a bit better centering/eye appeal.
  • DavidPuddyDavidPuddy Posts: 3,487 ✭✭✭


    << <i>white cap version has a bit better centering/eye appeal. >>



    Yep.
    "The Sipe market is ridiculous right now"
    CDsNuts, 1/9/15
  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,185 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>I like the white cap version better, reasons being, the black cap is a little less in focus (could be scan) and the white cap version has a bit better centering/eye appeal. >>


    My feelings exactly. Definitely prefer the white cap version.

    Tabe
  • White Cap
    Cory
    ----------------------
    Working on:
    Football
    1973 Topps PSA 8+ (99.81%)
    1976 Topps PSA 9+ (36.36%)
    1977 Topps PSA 9+ (100%)

    Baseball
    1938 Goudey (56.25%)
    1951 Topps Redbacks PSA 8 (100%)
    1952 Bowman PSA 7+ (63.10%)
    1953 Topps PSA 5+ (91.24%)
    1973 Topps PSA 8+ (70.76%)
    1985 Fleer PSA 10 (54.85%)
  • TNP777TNP777 Posts: 5,710 ✭✭✭
    geez - no such thing as a bad-looking T206. I'd go for the white cap first, though - I don't have many condition standards, but I'll always take the better centered one first. Both of those cards are fantastic. I'll PM my address for the one you decide to discard. image
  • Nathaniel1960Nathaniel1960 Posts: 2,325 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I don't like MK's, but this one seems to add a bit to the card (historical wise) rather than subtract from it.
    Kiss me once, shame on you.
    Kiss me twice.....let's party.
  • BobSBobS Posts: 1,738 ✭✭
    Well, I did what I typically do and went in a completely opposite direction. I was trying to decide which I wanted to make an offer on, and ended up getting this one below for a little less than what the other two would have gone for. Back is not as nice, but I can use the extra $100 towards an eventual Cobb.

    image
  • purduepetepurduepete Posts: 791 ✭✭✭
    Great choice Bob! That holder really makes the card pop... image
    Tom

    Collecting: Topps 1952-79, Bowman 1952-55, OPC 1965-71, and Pre-War White Sox cards
  • mcadamsmcadams Posts: 2,618 ✭✭✭
    I love threads like these. I like the white cap version much better- something about the figure that I can't really explain. Just has more appeal and looks more natural.

    The ONLY advantage I see in the black cap version is that it includes the NY logo on the left sleeve, whereas in the white cap version, Matthewson has no jersey logo. I love the jerseys of that era.

    -Michael
    Successful transactions with: thedutymon, tsalems1, davidpuddy, probstein123, lodibrewfan, gododgersfan, dialj, jwgators, copperjj, larryp, hookem, boopotts, crimsontider, rogermnj, swartz1, Counselor

    Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
  • vladguerrerovladguerrero Posts: 4,077 ✭✭✭
    good call

  • What a great card. I like both images, but I think you made a good choice.
  • Tedw9Tedw9 Posts: 1,424 ✭✭
    Beautiful Matty Bob!

    A question about it....I see the back is different than the other two you posted. 350-460 Subjects compared to 150 Subjects and your card has a solid red bar below that. Plus the word New is missing along with the two pointing hands. Is your card an earlier printing or something along that line?

    Either way, it is a solid card and a great pick up, congrats!
    Looking for Carl Willey items.
  • BobSBobS Posts: 1,738 ✭✭
    Ted-

    I am just learning myself about all the back variations on these. The 150 series were printed first around 1909, then the 350 series then the 350-460 (I believe). In addition, different factories produced them. The one I bought carries a slight premium as the red bar is considered a factory overprint, which I'm not sure what that means but it's a little more scarce than a regular SC 150 back without it.

    Maybe someone else can chime in. I may be totally off base. Who knows.

    Edit: found this on T206museum.com

    Sweet Caporal cards are almost as common as Piedmonts, and were also issued during all phases of the T206 distribution, but are not seen with Southern Leaguers. A total of nine Sweet Caporal backs may be found, and most are very common. Three were issued with the 150 Series, at Factories 25, 30, and 649. Factory 649 overprint, with a red bar blocks out the old factory, is tougher to find. Two more were issued with the 350 Series, at Factories 25 and 30. Neither back is rare. Lastly, four backs appeared in conjunction with the 350-460 Series. One appears as all other Sweet Caporal backs, and the other as an overprint, an ornate design is used to block out a previous factory designation. Among this Series, the Factory 25 and the Factory 42 overprint variation are the less common, but demand no price premium.
Sign In or Register to comment.