A Modern Objective View of E90-1 Rarities

[ScottFandango]

Collectors today are very lucky that they have modern conveniences to help their collections grow....Its Amazing what Burdick and other founding fathers were able to accomplish with snail mail and very little published information...

Today we have the Internet which connects us instantly to people around the world...we also have TPG's, registries and most importantly, Population Reports..

These modern tools need to be used to reevaluate what we have come to know as American Caramel Rarities....

Each individual collector will have his own subjective opinion of the difficulty of a card based on how quickly, or how cheaply a certain card was obtained...

a collector may have been very lucky, and come across a very difficult card early in the collection process, and this card is then thought of as being "not that hard" when in fact, it may not have been seen for many more years...

My Goal is to take subjectivity out of the E 90-1 set and come up with a more accurate depiction of a cards difficulty....Enter the Population Reports...

Both PSA and SGC have extensive Pop reports that are nearing 20 years old...

People may say they are inaccurate but a few crossovers or crack outs will not spoil the information within...Look at the Pop reports as "the most possible graded cards in existence." Yes, there may be less in actuality due to crack outs, but that inflates the population...so a very low pop card may actually have Less in circulation than stated, thereby supporting rarity levels...

Our founding collecting Fathers have traditionally called these cards rare:
Mike Mitchell
Joe Jackson

..and these cards Very Difficult:
Bill Sweeney
Hans Lobert
Dave Shean
Larry McLean
Hugh Duffy....

However, New evidence paints a different, Objective picture...


Without further ado, I present the COMBINED POP REPORTS of PSA and SGC graded E90-1 American Caramels...

Leach Throwing 25
Dougherty 25
Bescher 26
Stone Left hand 30
Lobert 31
Shean 32
Gibson back view 34
Siegle 34
Howell Wind up 35
McLean 35
Speaker 36
Wagner Throwing 36
Duffy 36
Stahl 36
----------------------------

O'conner 38
Ritchie 38
Upp 38
Demmitt 38
Barry 38
Bliss 39
Leach Batting 39
Gray 39
Leever 39
Camnitz 39
Corridon 40
H Davis 41
Walsh 42
Young Clev 42
Sweeney 42
Keeler Red Port 42
Hartzell Batting 42
Karger 44
Mitchell 44
Bemis 44
Tenney 44
Pastorius 44
Sheckard 44
O'leary 44
McIntyre 44
Clement 44
Donovan 44
Stovall 45
Groom 45
Irwin 45
Bell 47
Clarke Pitt 48
McInnis 48
Gibson Front 48
I Thomas 48
R Thomas 49
Wiltse 49
Overall 49
Brandsfield noP 49
Lumley 50
Isbell 50
Phelps 50
Schlitzer 50
Blankenship 50
J Tannenhill 50
Butler 50
Keeler Throwing 50
Knight 51
Miller 51
Jordan 52
Donlin 52
Fromme 52
F Mitchell 54
Hall 54
Unglaub 54
G Davis 54
Ellis 55
Bush 56
Graham 57
Willis 57
L Tannenhill 58
Wagner Batting 62
Oakes 63
B Brown 64
Marquard 64
Joss Pitching 64
Schaefer 64
Krause 65
Bransfield P 67
Grant 67
Heitmuller 68
Bradley 68
M Brown 70
-----------------------
Engle 73
Dooin 77
Dygert 79
Hartzell Batting 80
Mullin 80
Stanage 84
J Sweeney 85
Mcquillan 85
Stone LH 87
Criger 88
Bailey 90
Summers 99
Howell Follow 106
--------------------high pop HOF's--------/
Bresnahan 89
Collins 91
Chance 94
Clarke Phila 101
Crawford 107
Chase 110
Joe Jackson 115
Keeler Pink 116
Tinker 120
Lajoie 122
Joss Portrait 127
Bender 129
Jennings 129
Mathewson 132
Wallace 133
Baker 135
Plank 139
Young Boston 149
Cobb 234
----------------

There you have it! They key to me is Bailey, Summers and Howell....these commons have been graded almost 100 times each...you can't say that there are so many Bailey, Summers, or Howell collectors that they altered the pop reports...these pop reports are truly indicative of the amount of cards out there...

There are really no outliers...an amazingly consistent pop report...

Only a handful of cards stand out as real Toughies!

So, say hello to the NEW MODERN RARITIES of the e90-1 set:

Tommy Leach Throwing
Dougherty
Bob Bescher ( the only card Steve soloway was unable to obtain for his set)
George Stone Left hand
George Gibson Back View
Johnny siegle (by far the lowest pop of any horizontal card In this set)
Harry Howell Wind up

Of special note are a few Rarities that are HOF's!
Tris Speaker
Wagner Throwing
Hugh Duffy

Enjoy!

PS..the T206 Wagner has one of the smallest pop reports in its set, verifying its status as THE iconic rarity....notice there are over 100 Joe Jackson e90-1..

[ullmandds]

Nice research Scott...how would you rank/categorize the e90-1 miller w/sunset pose...which I've seen very few of...and which noone seems to recognize as a variation or scarcity within this set.

I know...I have a one track mind!!!

[ScottFandango]

I would love to see a scan of the backs of those if possible!

[ullmandds]

i'll get you 1 tonight when I get home.

[ScottFandango]

Any new variation talk is highly acceptable in this thread:D

Is that a blank back or does it have American Caramel 100 subjects on back?

My initial reaction was the sunset card iis a E101 without some blue shadowing...

Would LOVE to see the back! Will wait patiently...

[ullmandds]

scott...it is definitely an e90-1...it has an e90-1 back...not blank. I have seen maybe 3 of them since I've been searching for miller glove pose...like approx 3-4 yrs.

Mine was acquired from a fellow board member who purchased a lot of mostly e90-1 raw at auction in the last 2 yrs or so...the lot contained 2 of these sunset millers and also contained some tougher e90-1 like keeler red portrait.

This variation has been discussed in the past(see archive) but no one seemed to know/care much about it?!

[ScottFandango]

Hmm. ..wonder if has shaded reverse borders...

If it does...boy oh boy.....

[ullmandds]

here is a link to previous discussion. that lot was a huggins and scott auction...so you could probably find your answer.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=151300

[ullmandds]

link to huggins auction lot...correction...there were 3 of the millers w/sunset in it!

http://may12.hugginsandscott.com/cgi-bin/showitem.pl?itemid=45141

[ScottFandango]

No scans of the back on any of those Millers

That may be important in figuring out that variation...

[ullmandds]

perhaps another board member will post a scan of the back of their miller w/sunset...otherwise I will around 630 pm central time!:D

[pkaufman]

I love the sunset variation Miller card.....I think it was a great find. I tried to get SGC to put "sunset variation" on the label of mine, but they said it was not recognized yet in any publications. Perhaps we need to do a little more lobbying. It is certainly a very obvious and striking artwork variation. Will try to get a scan up for Scott a little later.

[ullmandds]

i tried to get sgc to label it too...and they would not!!!!

[ScottFandango]

Psa told me they wouldn't recognize new discoveries until (at the time) Bob Lemke agreed to it and added it to the baseball bible...

[deadballfreaK]

OK. Here's mine. Had no idea there were two varieties.

http://i1278.photobucket.com/albums/y520/kdmadden/sunset_zps4adf4607.jpg (http://s1278.photobucket.com/user/kdmadden/media/sunset_zps4adf4607.jpg.html)

[smtjoy]

Nice research, thanks for working it up.

I will add one thing when looking at pop reports on sets. If the set has a few very expensive cards, they tend to be graded a lot more than the commons, your list bears this out. In some exhibit sets the stars (Ruth, Cobb, Gehrig, etc) can have pops 2-4 x the commons. Just something to keep in mind.

[ScottFandango]

Thanks for the detailed scans.....

I wonder if more collectors can post their millers....

[ullmandds]

Guess which back is which?

[ScottFandango]

The left is sunset variation...

Red ink residue ...Maybe


Interesting that vintage card prices shows the sunset version....

It would be interesting to have a thread where people show scans of this card only and we can make a tally....

[ullmandds]

Scott...im pretty sure its the right...appears toned in comparison. Ill double check when i return to the cave.

[ullmandds]

Id bet a tally would result in mid-upper single digits.

[marcdelpercio]

Here are my two.

[ScottFandango]

Thanks for posting...

Guess you have one and one....

So far no shaded reverse border examples of Miller...

Keep them coming! Good stuff!

[brianp-beme]

Nice compilation Scott...here are a few thoughts.

I do not think the Joe Jackson card has ever been considered rare. Extremely popular, yes, especially the last twenty years, and thus expensive. But not a difficult card compared to other E90-1's. Check out Lew Lipset's Encyclopedia...he does not include it in his lists of difficult to extremely rare cards.

I also would like to make a point about the 'graded' rarity of most of the common players at the top of your lists (which is appreciated, by the way). It has only been in the past two or three years that the Leach-throwing, Dougherty, Bescher, Stone-left hand, and Howell-wind up have had more than a nominal added value in the SCD Guide. All of these cards were basically listed as commons in the 2009 guide. By 2011 their prices had been elevated (except for Stone-left hand).

I always like to think of all the sets, near-sets and larger groupings of E90-1 auction lots over the years...quite often some of the 'better' cards of these raw collections (usually the big name hall of famers and the traditional 'rarities' of the set) were the ones that were sent out for grading. I think you have honed in on some of the scarcities of this set, but I also think some of the real low populations on some of the commons has been the result of these cards not being perceived as particularly rare until very recently. In other words, I think these are scarce cards, but more are likely out there ungraded to narrow the gap at the top of your scarcity charts.

In another line of reasoning, I believe that your list really exposes the HOF rarities of the set, as these are cards most likely to have been graded over time. I knew about the difficulty of the Speaker card, as well as the Duffy, but the Wagner Throwing comes as a little bit of a surprise as to how scarce it is, as Wagner cards are about as likely to have been graded as any in the set.

Once again, an interesting read. And by the way, my Miller fielding has no smog induced sunset. I think the sunset version should be noted in the guides and by the TPG's as a legitimate variation, especially since it is an 'added' color (not a missing color) variation from the commonly seen card.

Brian

[honus94566]

What is the pop. of the Keeler red portrait? I didn't see it listed in the OP of this thread... I am pretty sure it is quite a bit tougher to find than either of the other two Keelers.

[ullmandds]

Yes...red keeler is def toughest of the 3.

[brianp-beme]

The Keeler Red portrait card is mistakenly identified as part of the Keebler cookie family (42 on the combined population list).

Brian

[steve B]

I can't say wether it would apply to E90s, but in the closeup looking I've done with T206 population reports there's a rather clear 2:1 ratio for HOF cards being graded.

Also a bit early, but I think that may be much higher for rare cards or ones believed to be rare.
Magie is in the same range as any p150 common. But we know it's not common.

That may affect the number on the Mitchell.


Steve B

[judsonhamlin]

That the Leach and the Stone are rarities does not surprise me in that all other players represented by two cards have one that has already been recognized as rare or less common.
I would also question the accuracy of the Clarke (Pittsburgh) numbers. That card never seems to come up and I can recall seeing one or two mislabelled over the years, so the true number may be lower.
Also, I find it curious that many of the red background cards fall on the low pop side of things (Duffy, O'Connor, Leach, Richie, Keeler, Tenney and Bliss, for example).

Great work!

[honus94566]

The Keeler Red portrait card is mistakenly identified as part of the Keebler cookie family (42 on the combined population list).

Brian

LOL.... That's why I didn't find it when doing a search for the word "Keeler" on the page :)

[ScottFandango]

LOL.... That's why I didn't find it when doing a search for the word "Keeler" on the page :)

darn spell check!

Judson, isn't it cool how most of the red cards with similar artwork all fall near 44 graded examples! So consistent its freaky!

[Exhibitman]

Nice research, thanks for working it up.

I will add one thing when looking at pop reports on sets. If the set has a few very expensive cards, they tend to be graded a lot more than the commons, your list bears this out. In some exhibit sets the stars (Ruth, Cobb, Gehrig, etc) can have pops 2-4 x the commons. Just something to keep in mind.

+1

I'd add to Scott's comment that the pop reports are less an accurate reflection of the total number of cards out there and more strongly indicative of choices made by collectors and dealers to get cards slabbed. I'd suggest, with all due respect, that the real population of many of the lower tallied cards is actually far closer to the real populations of the high tally HOFers but is not reflected in the pop because not enough people care to slab them. For that reason I am always leery of using pop reports as the foundation for a rarity analysis. Since my forte is Exhibit cards, I can speak to an example from there. In the 1939-46 Salutations set the Johnny Rizzo card is a real bastard to find. PSA has slabbed 8. Gehrig and Klein are two of the other ridiculous short prints. PSA has slabbed 16 and 14 of them, respectively. Now, are they twice as easy to find as Rizzo? Heck no. They happen to be popular candidates for slabbing is all because they're HOFers, while Rizzo has limited audience appeal. In the E90-1, Miller is a good example. Miller is listed in a pioneering work as a rarity so even someone who doesn't collect the set but is aware of what cards are reputed to be rare and who comes across one is more likely to slab it to try and cash in. That said, I've done analyses like this before for boxing issues and they are quite useful for exposing rarities, so I do appreciate the effort. I'd suggest following up with a VCP analysis of how many have transacted and how many are offered for sale. I've found that to be the most accurate indicator of rarity. When a card regardless of grade simply doesn't have much of a transaction history over a few years, that's a pretty solid indicator that it is a toughie.

[ScottFandango]

+1

I'd add to Scott's comment that the pop reports are less an accurate reflection of the total number of cards out there and more strongly indicative of choices made by collectors and dealers to get cards slabbed. I'd suggest, with all due respect, that the real population of many of the lower tallied cards is actually far closer to the real populations of the high tally HOFers but is not reflected in the pop because not enough people care to slab them. For that reason I am always leery of using pop reports as the foundation for a rarity analysis. Since my forte is Exhibit cards, I can speak to an example from there. In the 1939-46 Salutations set the Johnny Rizzo card is a real bastard to find. PSA has slabbed 8. Gehrig and Klein are two of the other ridiculous short prints. PSA has slabbed 16 and 14 of them, respectively. Now, are they twice as easy to find as Rizzo? Heck no. They happen to be popular candidates for slabbing is all because they're HOFers, while Rizzo has limited audience appeal. In the E90-1, Miller is a good example. Miller is listed in a pioneering work as a rarity so even someone who doesn't collect the set but is aware of what cards are reputed to be rare and who comes across one is more likely to slab it to try and cash in. That said, I've done analyses like this before for boxing issues and they are quite useful for exposing rarities, so I do appreciate the effort. I'd suggest following up with a VCP analysis of how many have transacted and how many are offered for sale. I've found that to be the most accurate indicator of rarity. When a card regardless of grade simply doesn't have much of a transaction history over a few years, that's a pretty solid indicator that it is a toughie.

fair point, however:

how do you account for 106 Howell follow through, 100 Summers, and 90 Baileys being graded? these represent the most commonly graded cards yet have no more significance than Leach Throwing or Stone LH or Bescher...

also, I feel that if you search for the current availability of these low pop cards, you will have a hard time finding one for sale....I agree that the frequency seen is important and I believe the pop reports for these low pop cards is reflective in its current availability...

[tedzan]

Hey Scott

A lot of work there guy, thanks for the time and effort you put into this research.....great stuff.

Years ago, I did a comparison of the E90-1's 1910 (last) series subjects with the 1909 RAMLY. There is no doubt that this E90-1 last series cards were
short-printed. And a good number of them are Boston-based and Cincinnati players (Graham, Ritchey, Stahl, Bill Sweeney, and Karger, Lobert, McLean,
Mitchell, respectively).

I arrived at this theory that a possible conflict with the 1909 RAMLY set may have resulted, since American Caramel did not include these guys in their
1st and 2nd series issued in 1908 - 1909.

And, of course (in my opinion the toughest) Tris Speaker was issued in the short-printed 1910 series since his first full season in the Major's was 1909.

Any thoughts on this hypotheses ?



My 3 favorite E90-1 cards

http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt113/zanted86/e90duffy.jpg.http://i529.photobucket.com/albums/dd339/tz1234zaz/atrispeak.jpghttp://i529.photobucket.com/albums/dd339/tz1234zaz/e90wagnerfranknagy.jpg




TED Z

[ScottFandango]

I surely thought you were on to something back then...

those cards you listed make sense that they were issued at the same time..

Aside from the Boston thing, not only does the Pop report confirm their similarities, but if you look closely at the artwork in those cards, you will see they have a different "print-dot pattern" than the earlier issued (more common) cards...

they have an almost "Speckled" look to their backgrounds, not a solid/blended look like most of the others...

the B Sweeney has the most obvious "speckling" going on...check it out!

PS, NICE RARITIES YOU POSTED!

[tedzan]

Aside from the Boston thing, not only does the Pop report confirm their similarities, but if you look closely at the artwork in those cards, you will see they have a different "print-dot pattern" than the earlier issued (more common) cards...

they have an almost "Speckled" look to their backgrounds, not a solid/blended look like most of the others...

the B Sweeney has the most obvious "speckling" going on...check it out!



Scott

Very interesting regarding the printing characteristics you have noted on 1910 series cards. I will check them out.

RAMLY was situated in Worcester, MA. Therefore, it is understandable why ACC withheld the Boston-based players' cards until this last series.
I did some research regarding why the Cincinnati players were withheld until this last series; however, I cannot find it. When I find it I'll post it.
I do recall that there is a connection with the Worcester club.


TED Z

[Bosox Blair]

I arrived at this theory that a possible conflict with the 1909 RAMLY set may have resulted, since American Caramel did not include these guys in their
1st and 2nd series issued in 1908 - 1909.

TED Z

Hi Ted,

The old thread was here: http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=156516&highlight=american+caramel+ramly&page=4

I'm afraid I still don't understand your theory. Either you are postulating (a) that the Boston players pictured in Ramly could not appear in E90-1 until later, or (b) because of some arrangement between Ramly and the Boston clubs, no Boston player - whether they appeared in Ramly or not - could be on a 1909 E90-1.

I think those are the only two possible theories, but I have never been able to figure out which one you were putting forth.

But here is the thing - both (a) and (b) don't work.

There are many Boston players in E90-1 that we think were from the scarcer late series who have no Ramly card. So if it was (a) above, there is no reason why those cards could not have been issued in 1909.

So maybe Ramly had the Boston clubs locked up - ie. (b) above? The quick answer to that one is "no" - Cy Young Boston proves this is not the case.

I'm not trying to pick at you, but I can't understand how any "theory" could be formed when either way it does not work on the facts.

Cheers,
Blair

[Bosox Blair]

Maybe one of my problems with your theory is that - as a Red Sox collector - I don't see any significant overlap with these sets.

In E90-1 there are only 6 Red Sox cards (T204 has twice as many). Here are the E90-1 Red Sox:

1. Tris Speaker - does not appear in Ramly at all
2. Cy Young - does not appear in Ramly at all
3. Biff Schlitzer - does not appear in Ramly at all
4. Charley Hall - does not appear in Ramly at all
5. Ed Karger - appears in Ramly, but not as a Boston player
6. Jake Stahl - this is the only card of the 6 where he appears with Boston in both E90-1 and T204.

Maybe I'm obtuse, but how can a relationship theory be formed on the basis of this?

Cheers,
Blair

[tedzan]

Blair

I posted this thread about the E90-1 set back in 2006. I think I mentioned my RAMLY vs American Caramel (E90-1) theory in my thread............

" Let's Talk E90-1....toughest Candy card set ? "
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=89941

Anyhow, I'll reprise my theory in a follow-up post here, as I have to go out now.


TED Z

[ScottFandango]

In checking EBay, (I know not all encompassing but the most visible site)
I noticed something that was expected.....

Of the top 14 cards on the scarcity list, only ONE is available for purchase on ebay right now..($600 Howell Windup -not mine)

There aren't any others for sale, supporting my position...

Next I will check completed auctions ....

[ScottFandango]

A large batch recently sold on eBay, many nice cards and many with a July 10th 1910 stamp on the back....a Joe Jackson PSA 1 sold for $4750 with no buyers premium...

A Tommy Leach Throwing (a new age rarity card) PSA 1 sold for $91, which was more than all the following individual cards from the same sale:

Tannenhill PSA 3.5
J Sweeney PSA 3
Schaefer PSA 4 mk
Stovall PSA 3
Stone No hands PSA 4
Mullin PSA 4
Leever PSA 3
Tommy Leach Batting PSA 3
Jordan PSA 2.5
Howell PSA 4
Engle PSA 5mk
Donlin PSA 3
Corridon PSA 4 mk
Camnitz PSA 4 mk
Bransfield P no shirt PSA 5mk
Bradley PSA 5 mk
And a 3 card Auth lot of Keeler Tinker Overall....

So I will be watching for other sales of the aforementioned new rarities...can they continue to separate themselves from the other cards...
Time will Tell

[tbob]

I put together an E90-1 set card by card about 6-7 years ago and sold it about a year ago so I wanted to offer my observations about card rarity.
I am blown away by the number of McLean cards in the pop lists! It was far and away the cardest card for me to find. Shean was the next toughest.
I didn't have any problem with the Howell, Bescher or Dougherty cards, maybe I was just lucky.
The two toughest HOFers, for me, without a doubt were Speaker and Walsh.

I'd rank my top 5 in toughness to find:

1) McLean
2) Shean
3) Speaker
4) Walsh
5) Leach throwing

[CaramelMan]

I put together an E90-1 set card by card about 6-7 years ago and sold it about a year ago so I wanted to offer my observations about card rarity.
I am blown away by the number of McLean cards in the pop lists! It was far and away the cardest card for me to find. Shean was the next toughest.
I didn't have any problem with the Howell, Bescher or Dougherty cards, maybe I was just lucky.
The two toughest HOFers, for me, without a doubt were Speaker and Walsh.

I'd rank my top 5 in toughness to find:

1) McLean
2) Shean
3) Speaker
4) Walsh
5) Leach throwing


Bob, it looks like your experience matches the posted population Reports pretty closely. I bet though, that someone could say they found McLean rather easy in their personal quest. That is what makes collecting interesting, everyone has had similar yet inherently unique experiences that shape our beliefs.

I agree with your list BTW:o