Old Judge Pose Rarity

[oldjudge]

When we were gathering pose images for the Old Judge book we had access to four major private collections, and public collections at the Hall of Fame, the New York Public Library, the Burdick collection at The Met, and the Ernie Harrell collection at the Detroit Public Library. We did not have an opportunity to examine Wharton-Tigre’s collection at the British Museum or to see a major Midwest private collection. Despite this, we found images of all but 86 listed poses. In the almost ten years since the book was written we have found images of all but 7 of the 86 we were missing. Many of these images we have found multiples of, and in the case of at least one I have seen four different copies. The reason I bring this up is because some dealers and auction houses have used the fact that a pose is not pictured in our book to assert that is rare. The fact is, it may be or it may not be. Many of the poses pictured in our book are unique copies. The point is, by itself, whether a pose is pictured in the book, or not, does not imply its’ scarcity. Only a thorough knowledge of the poses will reveal that.

[autograf]

In reviewing all of those collections did you guys do some census on the poses that were in all the collections?

[oldjudge]

Nothing formal, although that would be an interesting project for the next set of knuckleheads exploring this area.

[Jobu]

I would love to see a scarcity survey. The book has a few pages dedicated to the toughest of the tough, but something broader than that would be really cool to me, someone who is pretty new to OJs. Not sure what might be gleaned from pop reports on this front.

I know someone recently asked if you planned an update to the book for the new images and information that you have. If you were to create something like this, say just in pdf format, how long do you think it would be and how long do you think it would take to create? Perhaps Net54 could crowd fund you to produce such a document, assuming it wouldn't be an insane amount of work for you.

[insidethewrapper]

Could you post the list of 7 and maybe someone on here can lower that number ?

[oldjudge]

Mike— The missing pose images are as follows. I miscounted last night; we still need ten images:

1.Barkley(19-7); Bat at ready (may in fact be 19-6 that is pictured, as Wharton-Tigre never saw this one)
2.Bligh(31-3): Stooping, catch, hands chest high
3.Coleman(83-1): Catch, hands chest high (Also not seen by WT, may be 83-2)
4.Flood(164-3): Pitch, hands at neck
5.Hatfield(217-3): Bat at ready nearly horizontal
6.Hoffman(228-2): Pitch, hands head high
7.Lyons(284-4): Stooping, hands cupped at knees
8.Nichol(346-8): With Reilly, bodies facing each other
9.Pettee(365-2): Ball in R/hand shoulder high
10.Phalen(367-3): Catch, hands waist high

If anyone has any of these please post here or email me at oldjudge@gmail.com

[oldjudge]

I know we have a lot of Old Judge collectors out there--any of these unpictured known poses, or unlisted poses?

[Fred]

Jay,

Oddly enough there were two different cards of the same uncataloged pose (going by the OJ Bible) of Parsons that were on ebay at the same time. The following is of the image of the card:

http://www.net54baseball.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=303111&stc=1&d=1516592267

Parson wasn't mentioned in your previous post either, I suppose that means you already have this image. Is this pose going to be 361-6?

The price being asked for the card shown in the image is about $4K but the seller is also taking offers. What do you think a fair price for that card would be? The more faded version of the card went for a little under $200. Not sure if that is considered a deal on that card. What do you think?

[oldjudge]

Fred—If you look at the pose description in the book(taken from the Cartophilic Society listing) for 361-1 you will see that description fits both that pose and the “new” pose. Unless you had both poses you had to assume that whichever one you had was 361-1. After the book came out people could see that there were in fact two different, but quite similar, poses. The “new” pose is 361-6. Add the text to 361-1 “, feet apart”. The description for 361-6 is the same as 361-1 except it ends in “, feet together”. As for value, I’m not sure it is any scarcer than any other Parsons pose.

[Fred]

Jay,

I started to look at other OJ images I collected and found another of the 361-6 poses. So as you have indicated, it's probably not scarcer than any other Parson pose.

You may have already posted something in the past but if not, could you please provide an update on all new poses, players or otherwise interesting finds since the book was published.

Thanks!

[oldjudge]

Ha, Ha--Some day