"Discovery" of the year for 2013

[Vintagecatcher]

The other thread for "2013 Thread of the Year" got me thinking that picking a "discovery" of the year might make for a fun thread.

My pick for discovery of the year is the thread which identified the cards assumed by the hobby to be issued by Derby Cigars as actually nothing more than "cutouts" from a period scorecard.

What other discoveries would you pick?


Patrick

[wonkaticket]

Jim B's N167 checklist additions.

[philliesphan]

I'd say Jim's "discovery" of the remaining (not seen in decades!) N167 cards and pulling off a once-in-a-lifetime feat of reuniting an entire set of N167 Old Judges. Amazing, legendary work that took tons of research and searching-

[dstudeba]

Jim's feat is incredible.

Thanks for the thread Patrick, I missed the Derby Cigars discovery. That is a great picture.

[Leon]

Jim's feat is incredible.

Thanks for the thread Patrick, I missed the Derby Cigars discovery. That is a great picture.

Not so sure on this one. We need to see the back of that scorecard. If it isn't blank (most scorecards have something on all sides for advertising) then that isn't where they came from.

[Al C.risafulli]

I think every discovery in this hobby is amazing; the fact that we're still finding out things about century-old cards is incredible to me.

That said, Jim's N167s are pretty incredible, simply due to their value and rarity. That would be my vote.

-Al

[Leon]

I think every discovery in this hobby is amazing; the fact that we're still finding out things about century-old cards is incredible to me.

That said, Jim's N167s are pretty incredible, simply due to their value and rarity. That would be my vote.

-Al

Have to agree. I will go with Jim's N167 also. The more we know about a set the more intriguing it is to "discover" something we didn't know. I am in the camp of us learning a ton more over time. A few years ago the Blanke Wenneker Nadja box was a pretty big deal in that we never knew where Nadja's came from. Also, the T202 with Jackson sliding was pretty cool.....

[E93]

Thanks for the props guys. For me, a big part of what made this so exciting is that it is really the first baseball card set in the traditional sense.
JimB

http://photos.imageevent.com/jimblumenthal/n167/websize/N167%20Dorgan%20frontandback.tiff.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/jimblumenthal/n167/websize/N167%20Esterbrook%20frontandback.tiff.jpg

[atx840]

Definitely a great discovery and achievement Jim....beautiful cards.

The 42+ Red Hindu find, for me not so much the # but that a few examples finally confirmed. As well as two Cobbs + two T210 Jacksons...great discovery.

http://www.auctionreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/scp2-20-13.jpg

[tbob]

I have to go with Brian's discovery of the Frank Smith M116 card with the Boston caption. One of one, as far as I know and both interesting and shocking. Had it been a T206 instead of an M116, a greatly undervalued and unappreciated set, collectors would be in a tizzy.

[brianp-beme]

Thanks Bob for bringing it up...I am quite partial to the M116 Smith Boston discovery. However the Derby Cigars scorecard discovery is quite intriquing, and would be interesting to know what is on the backside. How did I miss the Derby thread? Just found the link: http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=177444&highlight=Derby

Brian

[Runscott]

Jim's feat was so noteworthy that I think we should have a thread for 2nd-best discovery. I know Jim is an incredibly humble guy, but this was a great thing for the hobby - putting together the first set. Who knows, perhaps no one was able to do it, even back when the cards came out?

[t206fix]

- putting together the first set. Who knows, perhaps no one was able to do it, even back when the cards came out?

My grandpa did - they are in his attic ;)

[wonkaticket]

Jay's 1887 N172 Ewing is quite a game changer as well.....

[slidekellyslide]

Quick question that I didn't see asked in the original thread about the Derby "cards", but who, how and why did those cards get designated as "Derby Cigar" cards?

[Vintagecatcher]

Hi Dan,

Lew Lipset put the Derby Cigar cards in a section called "Cinderalla Cards" in his Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards, Volume 3 20th Century Tobacco Cards--1909-1932.

On page 103 Lew states, "Finally, we place a group of cards that have been associated with Derby Cigars in the Cinderella cataegory. These cards measure 1 3/4" X 2 3/4" and have no printed advertising. One collector has indicated he found one in a Derby Cigar box, which is the appropriate size. If it could be shown more conclusively that these cards were issued in or with Derby Cigars, these card would be deserving of a separate listing."

In this case, I would say that the glass slipper doesn't fit Cinderella!

If these cards were "cutout" of a period scorecard or perhaps were a supplement inside a scorecard then I would consider them similar to the notebook covers that were later cut up which shared the images of the E96 set.


Patrick

[Leon]

Hi Dan,

Lew Lipset put the Derby Cigar cards in a section called "Cinderalla Cards" in his Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards, Volume 3 20th Century Tobacco Cards--1909-1932.

On page 103 Lew states, "Finally, we place a group of cards that have been associated with Derby Cigars in the Cinderella cataegory. These cards measure 1 3/4" X 2 3/4" and have no printed advertising. One collector has indicated he foound one in a Derby Cigar box, which is the appropriate size. If it could be shown more conclusively that these cards were issued in or with Derby Cigars, these card would be deserving of a separate listing."

In this case, I would say that the glass slipper doesn't fit Cinderella!

If these cards were "cutout" of a period scorecard or perhaps were a supplement inside a scorecard then I would consider them similar to the notebook covers that were later cut up which shared the images of the E96 set.


Patrick

Part of your information is incorrect. They won't fit in the Derby Cigar packs and most collectors who have studied and held them know it. I have probably owned 30 of the 35'ish known to the hobby. Lew said he found one in a Derby Cigar box and that is the only reason they are associated with the Derby brand (and the packs have similar colors to the cards). Anyone who said they found one in a pack is telling a fib in my humble opinion, unless the card was put in the pack much after production. But they don't have anything to do with Derby except for the urban myth started in the encyclopedia and carried forward. If you look closely at the "whatever it is" pictured with the players in the first post you will also notice the lack of black borders on the inner part of the pictures. My guess is they were issued as strips but I am definitely not sure. I should add I realize the information quoted above is second hand and just being used in dicussion, but since acquiring some of the packs and many of the cards, I don't believe the original information was correct. "Derby" is fine until we know more but I don't think there will be any way they are associated...

[Vintagecatcher]

Hi Leon,

I quoted what Lew Lipset wrote in Volume 3 page 103.

That was my source.


Patrick

[slidekellyslide]

Thanks for the info.

[jcmtiger]

Part of your information is incorrect. They won't fit in the Derby Cigar packs and most collectors who have studied and held them known it. I have probably owned 30 of the 35'ish known to the hobby. Lew said he found one in a Derby Cigar box and that is the only reason they are associated with the Derby brand (and the packs have similar colors to the cards). Anyone who said they found one in a pack is telling a fib in my humble opinion, unless the card was put in the pack much after production. But they don't have anything to do with Derby except for the urban myth started in the encyclopedia and carried forward. If you look closely at the "whatever it is" pictured with the players in the first post you will also notice the lack of black borders on the inner part of the pictures. My guess is they were issued as strips but I am definitely not sure. I should add I realize the information quoted above is second hand and just being used in dicussion, but since acquiring some of the packs and many of the cards, I don't believe the original information was correct. "Derby" is fine until we know more but I don't think there will be any way they are associated...



Patrick is correct with the quote from Lew's book, I don't see where Lew said he found one in a box unless Leon has seen another quote from Lew somewhere else.

Joe

[packs]

Looks like a definite tie to the program. But no tie to any other origin. I would guess they are cut from the program. If that is true I think the value is much lower.

Seems like too much of a coincidence that such a unique design would be used for a program and independent set of cards. Occam's razor

[Denali]

The Vampire Wagner.

[Leon]

Looks like a definite tie to the program. But no tie to any other origin. I would guess they are cut from the program. If that is true I think the value is much lower.

Seems like too much of a coincidence that such a unique design would be used for a program and independent set of cards. Occam's razor

They are the same poses as whatever is shown. I will give it that. However, the cards we have seen all have blank backs. I would like to see the back of that ephemera shown in the first post. Is it a program, a scorecard, a supplement etc...? Short of that answer, concerning the back, all anyone is doing is guessing.....And btw, there are a lot of card and pictures with the same type photos on them. We see them all of the time. It's not a coincidence that things made 80-100 yrs ago got remade into other things. The same pictures and poses were used for lots of different applications from what I have seen. Maybe we will find out for sure in the future....who knows...

[packs]

People are guessing but doesn't it seem pretty likely they are related? It's the same unique design and the A's did play the Giants in that series. That's a lot of coincidences surrounding a set almost nothing is known about.

[Leon]

People are guessing but doesn't it seem pretty likely they are related? Much more likely than a second identical independent set being produced by an anonymous company?

It's not just a pose or player. It's the same unique design and the A's did play the Giants in that series.

They certainly could be related or associated or the same. I dunno for sure....maybe we will know definitively in the future....

And to be clear on the other issue of Lew saying anything pertaining to the Derby's.....I was only quoting (and miss quoting at that) what was stated in his Encyclopedia. He said a collector said he had found it that way. I thought something else. My apologies for that miss quote...and that is all I know of other than owning some.

[slidekellyslide]

Certainly someone here either owns or knows someone who owns a 1913 World Series scorecard...it shouldn't be too hard to clear up this mystery. It seems pretty likely to me that these "Derby" cards are cut from that.

edited to add: And you know looking at the above photo which shows the covers of both 1913 WS Programs and then the sheet of "cards" perhaps these were blank backed sheets inserted into the programs?

[brianp-beme]

Someone else mentioned this one that I so easily forgot (and in very little time, I might add)...the E121 Meadows. What I find so fascinating about this find is that this Meadows card is not just a team change or some other minor modification, but a completely new image never seen before in any of the E121sets. How in the world did it go unnoticed for so long?

Brian