1914 Cracker Jack baseball card

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian</b><p>I need to know what to look for to tell if it's an original or reprint. I dont think it would be worth having it graded and spending money and finding out its a reprint. Or if there are anyone buying these cards on here, drop me a line.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Julie</b><p>1) borders that are too broad<br />2) borders that are too white (Cracker Jack are creamy, not dead white)<br />3) the smell of bleach; flaking (the result of bleach)<br />4) 1914 Cracker Jack that are half upside down on the back.<br />5) 1915 Cracker Jack that are NOT half upside down on the back (though I think a few of these do exist legitimately<br />5) Any problem with color in the picture--except an excess of ruddiness which unfortunately is typical of too many CJs.<br />6) no class.<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian</b><p>very helpful! I will try to scan the card. It just has an authentic look to it. no glossy or waxy look to the surface. I will look at again real good.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Julie</b><p>I only have 9...

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Julie, you forgot the big give away, the "white" of the picture should blend seemlessly into the "white" of the boarder. <br /><br />Jay<br><br>Wow upside down is Mom. Mom upside down is what dad wants to see.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Brian H (misunderestimated)</b><p>I mainly collect '14s and my understanding/experience is that the '15s have all been reprinted and that only some of the '14s have. '15 Reprints are also far more plentiful than '14 Reprints. First some background: the '14 set (consisting of 144 cards) always references a set of 144 on the back while the '15 set (consiting of 176 cards) references a 176 card set on the back.<br /><br />The '14s (with rare exception such as that nearly perfect set graded by SGC) have some evidence of toning (from the caramel I presume). The '15s can be found far more frequently without the toning.<br /><br />I almost never bid on raw ones unless I know the seller and/or have credit card recourse via Paypal. I would also be especially weary of ungraded high quality examples and ungraded cards of the big dollar players -- Jackson, Cobb, Wagner, Matty, Johnson etc.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scott</b><p>How uniform is size on the '15s? I have some SGC-graded ones that have very short top borders and normal bottom borders. Apparently SGC thought they were within valid size limits.<br /><br />Also, do Federal Leaguer cards usually bring a premium? The ones I've seen on ebay did, but the '04 catalog didn't reflect this. I've been lazy and haven't picked up the '05 yet but will 'soon'.<br /><br />Also, regarding reprint sets - I've never actually held a reprint, only seen the oven-baked ones on ebay. Are the reprints decent?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Chris</b><p>If I'm not mistaken, I don't think you can see through the reprints when held up to the light. One thing nobody has mentioned Brian is that 1914 Cj's are very very thin. Thin like paper. '15's are thin also but the '14's are even more thin. If the card doesn't feel like you are holding a piece of paper it is a reprint. Although I have never held a reprint either, I am guessing they did not reprint them and make them paperlike as the originals are.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scott</b><p>I have owned a number of 1915 CJ's that were stained and slightly curled (due to being so thin), and typically received grades of VG or VGEX despite having nice corners and no visible creases - could this be due entirely to curling and stains?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Chris B.</b><p>I have had a couple that were downgraded at least two grades due to caramel staining - the Rickey shown here is a good example:<br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1104618708.JPG">