View Full Version : 1914 Cracker Jack BRESNAHAN NO NUMBER
Archive
05-17-2008, 02:19 PM
Posted By: <b>Robert {Bigb13}</b><p>Does anybody know how this happened and are there any other cards with no number on them? Rob
Archive
05-17-2008, 04:06 PM
Posted By: <b>Robert {Bigb13}</b><p>Does anyone know anything about this card? Rob
Archive
05-17-2008, 05:21 PM
Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>Lew Lipset had a pretty detailed description of this card in one of his auctions when he was selling one. As I remember it, there are no other players in the set that have a numberless variation. And there doesn't seem to be any particularly good explanation of how some Bresnahans went out without a number.
Archive
05-18-2008, 12:04 PM
Posted By: <b>Robert {Bigb13}</b><p>I just read that is it really that rare? Rob E145 1914 Cracker Jack. #17 Roger Bresnahan without the number on the rear. <BR><BR><SCRIPT type=text/javascript>function doSelect() {if (document.getElementById) {if (document.getElementById("bidSelect").value == '8860') {document.getElementById("bidLabel").innerHTML = "Your Bid";}else {document.getElementById("bidLabel").innerHTML = "Your Maximum Bid";}}}</SCRIPT><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top>Lot 9. <A href="http://www.oldjudge.com/archive/200504/baseball/e145/#9"><B>E145 1914 Cracker Jack. #17 Roger Bresnahan without the number on the rear.</B></A> Without question the rarest card in the 144 series and the only known variation. Bresnahan was printed with and without the “17” on the back. The variety without the number, obviously a printing flaw, is extremely rare and I have seen only three examples in over 25 years. The offered card has light staining on the rear, a couple of minor blemishes on the front, no creases and is a nice very good. <BR>Minimum Bid <B>$3,000</B>. <BR><BR><BR><A href="http://www.oldjudge.com/archive/200504/baseball/e145/#9">Back to List</A> </TD><TD width=20> </TD><TD vAlign=top noWrap align=right><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=bottom noWrap align=right>Minimum Bid <B>$3,000</B> </TD><TD width=130> <FONT class=fl><B></B></FONT> </TD></TR></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><DIV align=center><A href="http://www.oldjudge.com/archive/200504/baseball/e145/9/#a"><IMG hspace=10 src="http://www.oldjudge.com/site/oldjudgecom/img/dataset/archive/200504/Lot%209%20S.jpg" border=1></A><BR><BR><BR></DIV></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Archive
05-18-2008, 09:14 PM
Posted By: <b>Robert {Bigb13}</b><p><DIV>I have looked in some old price guides and back in the 1994 Beckett big book it does not show the variation but in the 1998 Standard Catalog of Baseball Cards it shows it listed as the no number on back for a price of 600 which was by the way the same price as the card with the number on the back. My question is does anybody know when it was discovered? Rob</DIV>
Archive
05-18-2008, 09:26 PM
Posted By: <b>James Gallo</b><p>I don't know when this was discovered, but they are not as rare as they once were. There was a hunt auction last year I think and there were 3-5 no number examples. Several have been floating around on ebay since.<br /><br />It is a card that really doesn't seem to draw a lot of attention I guess because the 1914 set is so tough to complete that there aren't a lot of people trying to collect them all.<br /><br />James G<br><br>Looking for 1915 Cracker Jacks and 1909-11 American Caramel E90-1.
Archive
05-18-2008, 09:43 PM
Posted By: <b>Dan Koteles</b><p>looks it had gotten wet. The Red is showing in his shoulder and the card is warped. 2 cards came about recently and i had great opportunity before ebay and dint pull the trigger .It was a very strong 4 card smoking the card above and one got a steal for around 2800.00 .My timing was not good for the card at the time.
Archive
05-19-2008, 09:11 AM
Posted By: <b>Robert {Bigb13}</b><p>This is a card I picked up. What do you guys think about it? Rob<IMG id=fullSizedImage alt="Bresnahan-f.jpg Bresnahan-f picture by RBalke2617" src="http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t199/RBalke2617/Bresnahan-f.jpg?t=1211209647">
Archive
05-19-2008, 09:26 AM
Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Obviously, the front is fantastic for the grade. Congrats!
Archive
05-19-2008, 09:31 AM
Posted By: <b>James Gallo</b><p>Is that the one with the miscut back that was around? The problem is the back is the main part of the card and for me if it is the miscut one, it kind of defeats the purpose. The front is nice though <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />James G<br><br>Looking for 1915 Cracker Jacks and 1909-11 American Caramel E90-1.
Archive
05-19-2008, 09:36 AM
Posted By: <b>Robert {Bigb13}</b><p>No, here is a scan of the back. Rob<IMG id=fullSizedImage alt="Bresnahan-b-1.jpg picture by RBalke2617" src="http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t199/RBalke2617/Bresnahan-b-1.jpg?t=1211211232">
Archive
05-19-2008, 09:37 AM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Robert,<br />Nice card. Can we see a scan of the back?<br />JimB
Archive
05-19-2008, 09:38 AM
Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Looks like SGC was tough on that card for the left edge damage.
Archive
05-19-2008, 10:49 AM
Posted By: <b>Robert {Bigb13}</b><p>What do you think Jim? Rob
Archive
05-19-2008, 12:34 PM
Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>THat is a great card. I can't remember seeing one before. Seems like SGC was pretty harsh on the grade. Eye-appeal is great!<br />JimB
Archive
05-19-2008, 08:37 PM
Posted By: <b>Robert {Bigb13}</b><p>Well everyone here always states buy the card not the holder. What do you think the grade should be? Rob
Archive
05-19-2008, 09:42 PM
Posted By: <b>James Gallo</b><p>I saw this card for sale on ebay. I believe that damage to the side are tears and as such the card is correctly graded. All companies will hammer a card with tears. It appears to have a C shaped crease and at the edges there are tears at the top and bottom of the C. Please correct me if I am wrong about that.<br /><br />If I am not, then as I said it is graded correctly. A good example of a card that looks a lot nicer then the grade.<br /><br />James G<br><br>Looking for 1915 Cracker Jacks and 1909-11 American Caramel E90-1.
Archive
05-20-2008, 02:32 PM
Posted By: <b>Robert {Bigb13}</b><p><DIV>I don't know I think poor is pretty harsh. Rob</DIV>
Archive
05-20-2008, 05:40 PM
Posted By: <b>Robert {Bigb13}</b><p>I see SGC has graded 8 does anyone know how many PSA has graded? Rob
Archive
05-20-2008, 05:44 PM
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>Card appears to be graded accurately given the damage to the side of the card. PSA has graded 12 of them.
Archive
05-20-2008, 05:53 PM
Posted By: <b>BRIAN</b><p>From my experience, the no number variation is not the "rare" card in the set. I want to say that Hunt had several last year at their all-star sale. If you are playing the pop report game with the Cracker Jacks, take a look at #93. there are only 7 total graded by PSA and SGC, that's the gem. I helped put together the 2 CJ sets that were in the last REA sale, and that was the one card that was more difficult to come by than any other. I had hoped that the '14 set would have fetched more, in the world of graded sets, there can be only 7 complete. Shows what I know.<br /><br />BK
Archive
05-20-2008, 09:53 PM
Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Brian - I also thought the 1914 set would sell for more, but the 1914s are severely undervalued compared to the 1915s IMO.
Archive
05-20-2008, 11:53 PM
Posted By: <b>Brian</b><p>And that is why I will stick to designing tees, wooden robots, and buying ungraded beat up cards that catch my eye. I don't have the stomach for high stakes investments, cards included.
Archive
05-21-2008, 06:39 PM
Posted By: <b>Robert {Bigb13}</b><p>Why is # 93 that hard to find it is a common? Rob
Archive
05-21-2008, 07:46 PM
Posted By: <b>ted</b><p>"<br /><br />Brian - I also thought the 1914 set would sell for more, but the 1914s are severely undervalued compared to the 1915s IMO."<br /><br /><br />There are so many hi end 1915 around that the 14 should be even higher. It seems every auction or so a whole string of PSA 8's are in there, I guess people bought a lot of sets back in 1915, where the 14 that wasnt an option
Archive
05-21-2008, 10:02 PM
Posted By: <b>Brian</b><p>I have no idea why Del Pratt is so hard to come by. The deceptive part of pop reports is that it only covers the graded cards (duh right?!). Who's to say that people haven't cracked the cards out, and got them regraded by another house. The number could be less than 7. There are so many raw cards that hit the market all the time, Mastro's winter sale had a CJ master set, with an ungraded Del Pratt. I'm sure there are more that are out there, they just haven't hit the market yet.
Archive
05-22-2008, 02:00 PM
Posted By: <b>Robert {Bigb13}</b><p>Can someone tell me why doesn't Beckett list this card? Rob 1914 Cracker Jack BRESNAHAN NO NUMBER