Blank backed E121?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Mark L</b><p>Has anyone seen one of these before? I take it that it's considered an E121 rather than a W575-1 solely because of the clean cut and the "trace of printing"--which I can't make out. <br /><br /><a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/1921-E121-American-Caramel-J-Rawlings-blank-back-SGC-40_W0QQitemZ150248295878QQihZ005QQcategoryZ57993QQ rdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1638 Q2em118Q2el1247" target="_new" rel="nofollow">&lt;a href="<a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/1921-E121-American-Caramel-J-Rawlings-blank-back-SGC-40_W0QQitemZ150248295878QQihZ005QQcategoryZ57993QQ rdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1638 Q2em118Q2el1247&lt;/a" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://cgi.ebay.com/1921-E121-American-Caramel-J-Rawlings-blank-back-SGC-40_W0QQitemZ150248295878QQihZ005QQcategoryZ57993QQ rdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1638 Q2em118Q2el1247&lt;/a</a>" target="_new" rel="nofollow"&gt;<a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/1921-E121-American-Caramel-J-Rawlings-blank-back-SGC-40_W0QQitemZ150248295878QQihZ005QQcategoryZ57993QQ rdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1638 Q2em118Q2el1247&lt;/a</a>&gt" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://cgi.ebay.com/1921-E121-American-Caramel-J-Rawlings-blank-back-SGC-40_W0QQitemZ150248295878QQihZ005QQcategoryZ57993QQ rdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1638 Q2em118Q2el1247&lt;/a</a>&gt</a>;

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ken McMillan</b><p>could be a koester bread or a w575 in my opinion.<br /><br />kmac

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Kevin Saucier</b><p><i>Has anyone seen one of these before? I take it that it's considered an E121 rather than a W575-1 soley because of the clean cut and the "trace of printing"</i><br /><br /><br /><br />It could very well be authentic but anything is possible.<br /><br />I've removed just the printing (no paper) on the back of an E121, just to see if it could be done. It passed TPG, although it wasn't labeled as a blank back. It looked great and there was no traces of an alteration. Could have left any degree of faint printing if I wanted. Right after, as a raw card, I made a ghost print or image on the front.<br /><br /><br />Kevin<br><br>------------------------------<br /><br /><a href="http://www.AlteredCards.com" target="_new" rel="nofollow">www.AlteredCards.com</a> - in-depth education on advanced card doctoring techniques & detection with detailed examples<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>There are also people on this board who know everything in the world about E121s and similar cards, and none of them have chimed in on this thread yet. Although I have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express, I am not going to call myself an expert and potentially wreck a guy's sale on a card when I don't really know what I'm talking about.<br /><br />That said, I do collect the Henry Johnson Confectioners cards. My opinion is that some collectors try and make a distinction between E121s and W575-1s, and they base that distinction solely on what's printed on the back of the card. Henry Johnsons, however, are not cut the same way as normal W575-1s - to me, they're clearly machine cut. My theory is that the cards are actually machine-cut, blank-backed E121s with a hand stamp on the back.<br /><br />If that's the case, it's entirely logical that a blank-backed E121 would exist. And I would trust Brian's judgement on that over most, given that he actually knows what he's talking about.<br /><br />-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I feel a little wind coming my way with that statement <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>. I do classify most "E121" cards that have ad backs as W's.....I can imagine there are blank backed E121's too....The card in question looks blank backed to me. I might classify it a different way but who knows??...I'm easy...

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>fkw</b><p>The higher quality photo cards with the blank back are known as W575-1A and many of them are machine cut so could have been an anonymous candy issue. They might have been included with candy and never stamped (similar to the Henry A. Johnson cards).<br /><br />The lower quality photos (grainy) are W575-1B and these were thought to be issues (torn from) vertical strips.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rhett Yeakley</b><p>I just saw this thread otherwise I would have responded earlier.<br /><br />A few years ago I noticed there were actually 2 different sets people were referring to as W575-1, just as Frank has stated. I decided to call the High quality photo/paper cards as W575-1A and the low quality paper/photos as W575-1B. The A subset is 100% factory cut and NEVER HAND CUT (despite what might be on a flip), while the B subset is factory cut on both sides with a cut top and bottom border (as they were originally issued in strips on a roll and ripped or cut off on at a time (similar to W573's and W501's). The B subset is actually a 100% reproduction of the W501 set, save the card # and G-4-22 at top have been eliminated. Honestly the W575-1B's should be called W501-2 or W501B's but proplr seem to prefer to call them W575-1B's it seems.<br /><br />The W575-1A set is what would be commonly referred to as "Blank Back E121's" as they are exactly like E121 cards in every way but have a blank back. Included in this set would be the cards produced for the Henry A. Johnson, and James P. Keating companies, as these cards are simply W575-1A's with a stamp placed on back. Cards produced by Koesters Bread for their 40-card World Series promotion would be included in this group as unless a card differs substantially from the W575-1A version (ie was only produced for Koesters like Jesse Burkett, Alex Ferguson and a few others are thought to have been) the cards are indistinguishable, despite what many dealers would lead a potential buyer to believe.<br /><br />I will include a picture of Walter Holke in all 3 versions (W575-1A, W575-1B, & W501) to show the differences. <br /><br />In my opinion SGC made a mistake in holdering this card the way they did, as the card is 100% a W575-1A card.<br /><br />Let me know if this wasn't clear, we have discussed these sets in the past a few times as well.<br /><br />-Rhett<br /><br />Holke photo:<br /><img src="http://starsofthediamond.com/3diffholke.JPG"><br />From Left to right W575-1A, W501, W575-1B (or W501-2)<br />Important to note the same white splotch on the front of the later 2 proving them the W575-1B's to be a reissue of W501 (or vice versa).

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Mark L</b><p>Rhett,<br />I think that anyone who has collected these cards in any number should recognize the distinction that you have drawn between the two kinds of W575-1's. Now, I have a number of w575-1a's that have been hand cut. According to your account, they must have been trimmed. Maybe, but they haven't been cut down to any particular size or to simulate sharp corners. Moreover, a lot more of them are handcut than are the various E121's that have fallen into my hands. Is it generally agreed that ALL w575-1A's are factory cut? In any case, I hope that you and (or) some of the other authorities on the set will get to work on an article or two for Old Cardboard. One last question: has anyone here tried to put together a W575-1A set? Are there any surprises?<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>MW</b><p><i>&lt;&lt; The A subset is 100% factory cut and NEVER HAND CUT (despite what might be on a flip)&gt;&gt;</i><br /><br />Rhett,<br /><br />If this statement is true then why does the first card you show -- labeled as W575-1 in yellow and designated in the text below the image as W575-1A -- appear to be hand-cut, as evidenced by the incongruent left edge?<br /><br />I think a far stronger case could be made that the Rawlings is a Koester Bread card since it was purchased with a large group of E121s.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rhett Yeakley</b><p>Mike, the Rawlings may very well be a Koesters card, but as he appears in the E121 set identical to the one you have listed that would be total conjecture. <br /><br />The Holke above labeled as W575-1 is not "hand cut" and I see no incongruent left border. The card is in a PSA holder and any inconsistencies with the card in the scan are probably due to it being slightly raised from the scanner surface.<br /><br />Here are some other W575-1A's from my collection as well...<br /><img src="http://www.geocities.com/rhettmatthew_37/dealw575.JPG"> <img src="http://www.starsofthediamond.com/w575holkeportrait.JPG"> <img src="http://www.geocities.com/rhettmatthew_37/w575bholke.JPG"> <img src="http://www.starsofthediamond.com/w575hoyt.JPG"> <img src="http://www.geocities.com/rhettmatthew_37/w575bkilduff.JPG"> <img src="http://www.starsofthediamond.com/w575killefer.JPG"> <img src="http://www.geocities.com/rhettmatthew_37/w575bmurphy.JPG"> <img src="http://www.starsofthediamond.com/w575sallee.JPG"> <img src="http://www.geocities.com/rhettmatthew_37/w575bthomas.JPG"> <img src="http://www.geocities.com/rhettmatthew_37/w575bwilliams.JPG"> <img src="http://www.geocities.com/rhettmatthew_37/w575wood.JPG">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>Rhett,<br /><br />It is difficult for me to comment on some of the other cards you have pictured without seeing larger scans. As for the Holke, it is my opinion that PSA labeled it properly.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rhett Yeakley</b><p>Michael, I have handled a few baseball cards in my time and several hundred in the W575-1 & E121 family, I can tell a trimmed card from the series when I see it. The statement that W575-1A's are "NEVER" hand-cut was probably a little extreme on my part but the vast majority (95% plus) I have handled have been cut similar to that of the E121 set, which does have a large amount of factory cut size variance. The cards pictured above are not trimmed and are not "hand cut" regardless of whether you would like them to be or not. I don't need you to give the cards your blessing by saying they are not hand cut, I am certainly capable of doing that myself.<br /><br />I have no problem with you or anything like that, you can try to sell your card for what you want, and you certainly have my blessing to do so. Your card very well might be from the Koester's bread set or a set produced by a candy company (as that is how I (and many others) have theorized that W575-1A's were distributed, due to the factory cuts and the occasional caramel staining (a la E121)).<br /><br />-Rhett

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I don't even get into these debates too much anymore as I have my own thoughts. I know I am old fashioned but I always go by Burdick first (yes, he made mistakes but there are ones in the English language too), The Sports Collectors Bible second and sometimes I will throw in an Egan number if I am feeling spunky. I tend to agree with Rhett on this subject....and might I add you did a very nice job in explaining, sir. best regards

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rhett Yeakley</b><p>I also want to add that by default PSA will label W575-1's as "Hand Cut" on their flips whether there is evidence of that fact or not. The following card I have (which is a PSA blunder) shows this as the card is obviously not from the W575-1 set (It's a Blank Backed E135) and is also not "Hand Cut".<br />-Rhett<br /><img src="http://www.starsofthediamond.com/e135mamaux.JPG">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>Rhett,<br /><br />Perhaps my eyes are playing tricks on me but it seems as if the Mamaux has a pretty "funky" cut too.<br /><br />My contention is simply that it seems much more likely that one would expect to find an E121 blank back within a large group of E121s (originating from a homogenous collection) than a W575-1A (as you call it) in the same group.