What a find! 1916 M101-5 Chicago Examiner Sporting News Uncut Sheet

[DJR]

.

[Yankeefan51]

What a great find- congratulations!

How did you find the person in the small town in Ohio-
was it an ad, antique dealer or...

Best


Bruce Dorskind
America's Toughest Want List
bdorskind@dorskindgroup.com

[3-2-count]

That thing is absolutely awesome. Congrat's on an incredible find.

[Matthew H]

WOW! Thank you sharing the photos!

[ethicsprof]

congratulations!!!!
an incredible find.
top shelf in all ways!!

best,
barry

[nolemmings]

That's the first one I've seen. The last notation of 3-17/16 is likely the date it was either shipped or received. No, the Examiner was not a known distributor of any m101 set.
Great find--I once made a special trip to Bucyrus before the Cleveland National in wild hopes of stumbling onto a m101-4 sheet. Congrats on your good fortune.

[chaddurbin]

freakin' awesome...museum-quality stuff (or at least a bunch of psa 9s)

[Rickyy]

Wow what a find! Congrats.

Ricky Y

[Jim VB]

That's beautiful David!

[Matt]

Great piece! Interesting that on a sheet of 200, the two most valuable cards in the set are adjacent.

[Rob D.]

Congrats!

(As a Buckeye, I'm happy just to see a legitimate item emerge from our state.)

[bcbgcbrcb]

Great item! Congrats

[Leon]

Congrats David. This find couldn't have happened to a nicer gentleman either. I am very happy for you David. Awsome piece!!

[Beatles Guy]

All I can say is wow! Congrats to you!

[brianp-beme]

Great find! The M101-5 set has some scarce variations on certain numbers. Can you let us know which players are included for each of these numbers--it would be interesting to know if the scarce versions are both on the sheet:

12
23


Thanks,

Brian

[Baseball Rarities]

Great find! The M101-5 set has some scarce variations on certain numbers. Can you let us know which players are included for each of these numbers--it would be interesting to know if the scarce versions are both on the sheet:

12
23


Thanks,

Brian

Looks to me like 12 is Boone and 23 is Brown, which I believe are the more common variations.

What a display piece!

[jb217676]

Any chance you'll cut this up, I'm interested in a few cards.:D

[nolemmings]

yes the numbers 12, 23 and 186 depict the more common variations, but still, what a keeper!

Not to sound anal David, but could you take photos of the frame that displayed this sheet? It looks as if it may be the original frame that Mendelsohn used to send these out to prospective purchasers--his ad for the m101-4 sheets anyway states it will come "framed with two-inch gumwood frame (without glass), ready for hanging ...". I'd like to know whatever information you can share about the frame, the manner the sheet was attached, the type of hanging (e.g., wire or center hinge/clasp), where and what size are the pencil notations, etc, so it can be compared to subsequent finds. I'm not trying to be an archaeologist, but these things come along so rarely that it would be nice to at least document whatever we can about the piece. Congrats again.

[slidekellyslide]

WOW! :eek:

Congrats David!

[DJR]

.

[nolemmings]

David, yours is the only intact m101-5 sheet that I have seen, so I'm not sure what you meant by "unaltered". There appears to be no evidence that the sheets were taken down and cut into cards by their purchasers, odd as that might seem with kids and their ingenuity, as you will not find hand-cut m101s (other than those that were deliberately trimmed which almost certainly came factory cut first).

Again, the penciled numbers 3/17-16 on the back of your sheet seem very likely to date its delivery or shipment, as that date (St. Patrick's Day, no less) was right smack during the production run of m101-5. I also observe that the top heading of "Baseball Hall of Fame" on your sheet does not include the surrounding 1916 date that is found on the m101-4 Bucyrus and Furniture City Sheets. Interesting.

Anyway, here is the first m101-4 ad that Mendelsohn placed in TSN, which includes the offer to ship a framed sheet:

http://photos.imageevent.com/imoverhere/miscellaneous/huge/tsn-ad04061916.jpg

[benchod]

David, congratulations on a tremendous find
Todd thanks for posting your insight. I really enjoyed your Old Cardboard article

[benchod]

Also funny to see some of the players they were advertising; John Miller , Cravath. No Ty Cobb?
Ruth was relatively unknown I guess and not likely to make people rush out and get these cards. Thorpe was also one of the 184 others!
Why wasn't Speaker included in the set?

[ChiefBenderForever]

Amazing discovery ! A true life power ball !

[DJR]

.

[Jay Wolt]

David, wow! Fantastic pickup, congrats!

[Wesley]

Great find David. Your sheet looks to be in much nicer condition than the Bucyrus Brewing and Furniture City Brewing sheets that we saw a few years ago.

[Jason Carota]

Absolutely amazing find. Congrats!

[DJR]

,

[Baseball Rarities]

Also funny to see some of the players they were advertising; John Miller , Cravath. No Ty Cobb?
Ruth was relatively unknown I guess and not likely to make people rush out and get these cards. Thorpe was also one of the 184 others!
Why wasn't Speaker included in the set?

Craig,

Not only was Ty Cobb not used in the newspaper advertising, he was not even included in the M101-5 set. I wonder the reason why - especially considering he was added to the M101-4 set later that year.

[teetwoohsix]

An amazing find!! Congrats, and thanks for showing the scans/photos.

Sincerely,Clayton

[nolemmings]

David, I'm not sure of your question. Of course Mendelsohn created the
m101-5 sheet--he is credited in the photo you showed, as well as on the bottom of the Examiner pages you linked--thanks for those by the way, great research!

Kevin, Cobb was listed in the second TSN ad a couple/few weeks after the one I posted. As for his exclusion from the m101-5 set, you are right, and although we may never know why, it seems plausible that it was not an oversight, but that Mendelsohn did not have his permission yet--the sets were only about 45-65 days apart in production.

[DJR]

.

[baseballart]

Cobb was listed in the second TSN ad a couple/few weeks after the one I posted.


Todd

Are you searching TSN through Paper of Record (available to SABR members)? I've tried to locate Mendelsohn hits but come up empty.

Thanks,

Max

[nolemmings]

Actually, I took the offer to refer to a team photo on page 5, to be provided to certain shaving cream dealers identified in the following pages. There are no cards per se with the Examiner logo, at least none of which I'm aware. It also appears that they blotted out Mendelsohn's card numbers, and obviously re-aligned and re-ordered them in their newspaper spread.

[nolemmings]

Max, I'm recalling from my notes and the OC article Tim and I wrote in '08. I used Paper of Record back when it was available to everyone (for a price), and belonged to SABR briefly years ago. I should probably re-join if for no other reason than to have access to Paper of Record again.

[nolemmings]

In addition to the team photos I mentioned earlier, which were available from shaving cream dealers, the Examiner did indeed offer the 200 Mendelsohn card set known as m101-5, for a three-month subscription. This is found on p. 15 of the Wednesday 4/5/16 edition--there is likely a similar ad two days later in the edition touting the National League players.

http://digital.chipublib.org/cdm4/cliparticle.php?id=DIVL2385&CISOOBJECT=24316&CISOROOT=/CNP1916&CISOPTR=24308&DMSCALE=0&DMTEXT=

Curiously, the ad lists a few of the players included in the set and names Matty--who is of course not in the set at all. It also references "Joke" Tinker.

Finally and even more curiously, when the paper lists all AL players and their last year's records in the Wednesday edition, it includes the scarce Cady and omits Mordecai Brown, and Cady's pic is among those shown. Also, in the NL paper two days later, Beals Becker is listed and his pic shown. Thus two of the scarce variations were perhaps meant to be included, but not the third--Bobby Wallace. Either there were multiple printings of the m101-5 sheet to explain why yours does not have the variations, or maybe there had been some prototypes sent by Mendelsohn used for the ad but not used at the time of distribution.

Oops, I just saw Bobby Wallace's photo in the Examiner newspaper ad as well, although he and his 1915 stats are not listed.

[Marckus99]

Wooooooooooooow!

[DJR]

.

[barrysloate]

Holy sheet! That really is amazing.

[DJR]

.

[nolemmings]

Thanks. Seems ike alot of space top to bottom--5 1/2 inches? Was it matted?

[DJR]

.

[nolemmings]

Thanks alot!! I guess I never saw the "suitable for framing" language. Since Mendelsohn advertised sheets in a frame, without glass, this clearly did not come shipped from him. He didn't advertise non-framed sheets as such, although it seems logical he would sell them. Shipped rolled or flat--who knows?

There were a good dozen or more different ads in the Examiner for March and April. One showed Thorpe among others. Others listed Tinker as a shortstop when the card has him as mgr. One identifies Cobb as one of the cards you would receive, when he wasn't even in m101-5. But the most interesting was the first one you linked--it featured a "card" of Matty that never made the set, and it appears to be the same photo used in Mendelsohn's prototype or aborted set from 1917 (I'll have to review my notes). Great resource for sure--thanks again!!

[Shoeless Moe]

http://cgi.ebay.com/1916-M101-5-CHICAGO-EXAMINER-UNCUT-SHEET-PSA-SGC-RARE-/320677505125?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item4aa9de6865

[benchod]

And thar she'll sit in the museum we call BIN

[ls7plus]

Interesting that this thread has been recently revived with the sheet being offered for sale. I can't help but make one comment, though, after reading the entire thread with regard to the statement made back in September that Babe Ruth was a relative unknown in March, 1916. While he certainly wouldn't have been a well-established megastar, he would clearly have been something of a wonderkind, even then! In fact, the Babe had just come off a 18-8 season for the Red Sox in 1915, with a 2.44 ERA. This, as a twenty-year old, following up a 22-9 season as a 19-year old with Baltimore in the International League. I think it would be pretty naive to believe that such a player wouldn't have made just as big a splash as a 20-year old rookie would make today with that kind of record!

Larry

[Exhibitman]

http://cgi.ebay.com/1916-M101-5-CHICAGO-EXAMINER-UNCUT-SHEET-PSA-SGC-RARE-/320677505125?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item4aa9de6865

Well, it does have a Best Offer provision. Do you think fifty bucks would be in the ballpark?

[teetwoohsix]

Wouldn't this item do better in a major auction? I would think it would create a shark attack.......

[autograf]

But you'd HAVE to sell it unless there were some hidden reserve. Not entirely sure he wants to sell it. It's a great hallmark piece for ANY collection obviously at any price. Any best offers yet? Adam, I'm going $100 so you'll have to ratchet it up just a hair!

[benchod]

In an auction it would probably sell for around 12-20% of the BIN imho

[Shoeless Moe]

I'd like to see it in a SGC or PSA holder : )

[chaddurbin]

In an auction it would probably sell for around 12-20% of the BIN imho

craig that estimate seems low. even a VG ruth goes for about 20k these days. you cut up an oversized ruth here and you still have the rest of the set to work with.

[autograf]

I'm in the $50-$75K camp on value.........this should not be construed as an offer to purchase said sheet........

[bcbgcbrcb]

I think Tom is pretty close, wish I had that kind of money but my best guess in a major auction house format would be around $80K - $90K. Anyone believe that it may eventually be bought and cut into individual cards?

[benchod]

I hadn't thought about the cut up and slabbed value
I was basing it more on the price the Indianapolis Brewing sheet went for

[chaddurbin]

i was joking about cutting it up, but i could see it easily sell for 50k+.

[wolfdogg]

WOW.....nice......congrats

[JamesGallo]

Lets put aside the total shame it would be to cut this up but that being said do you guys really think there would be a lot of demand for these cards in an authentic hand cut type holder.

My understanding is that none of the grading companies will even slab cards cut from a sheet...

Perhaps you could get good money for a few of the big cards, but would someone put out 20K for a cut sheet ruth when they can get a factory cut one?

I don't think so. I think cutting it would be a shame and I think the seller would net less money over the long run, unless they had certain cards presold or convinced one of the grading companies to give grades to the cards.

James G

[ls7plus]

My bet would be six figures--$100,000+--based on rarity and significance, intact. Just saw that a Ruth M101 rookie went for just under $34K in PSA 3. The only downside to the sheet (which may not be a downside at all, given the relative ease of display framed and on a wall in the right collector's sports room/man cave) might be its unwieldly nature. Gidwitz used to be quite big on uncut sheets. Would be interesting to get his take on this one.

Wish David the best on a spectacular piece--I'm not usually an envious person, but wow!

Larry