Most of the Ruth rookies are blank back or Sporting News backs(the pop reports don't really differentiate between the two). The total of all other ad backs is under 35. That's pretty scarce.

Ruth Rookie
 

Unless an M101 Ruth Rookie is an “authentic” because it has been chewed apart by the family pet, you cannot find one for less than $50K anymore. Low grade 1’s - 2’s range between $65 - $120K (give or take) with really nice eye appeal ones at that grade level sometimes fetching even higher prices. The VG - EX levels easily jump to the $150K - $275K range, once again with aesthetics driving the prices. FYI, any extremely well centered examples typically realize significant premiums.

I don't consider myself a "professional," but I'm thinking that because it's Babe Ruth, who really is in a pantheon category all his own, the 1914 Baltimore News card is the best of the three, simply because it's the first Babe Ruth card ever issued. In this context it doesn't matter that he's a minor leaguer. And from a personal aesthetic standpoint, it adds a lot that the card has the year of issue on the back. So you have a card of the great Babe Ruth before he was B*A*B*E R*U*T*H, produced possibly back when he was better known as George.

I feel the same way. The BN Ruth is my holy grail card. I don’t give a crap what uniform he’s wearing. Financial considerations aside, I prefer to own the BN Ruth than any other card in the hobby. I would take a low grade BN Ruth over a
high grade M101.

1914 Baltimore News team "card"
 

BTW, if we are talking about early Ruth "cards", there is also a 1914 Baltimore News team "card" that features Ruth. The only one that I am aware of sold at REA in 2007. Here's the link: https://www.robertedwardauctions.com...ing-babe-ruth/

As I recall shortly after the sale there was an extensive discussion on this forum as to the definition of a baseball card and whether this team photograph qualifies. Regardless how one characterizes it, as is the case with the 1915 team postcard featuring Ruth, it is a great early image of him.

The Sporting News is his rookie card. Rookie card means his first trading card as a Major League Player (Federal League or other MLB-level team will count). Can have multiple rookie cards if multiple MLB trading cards came out in the same year. Can't be his rookie card if it's a minor league, college or other non MLB card.

Which one is his best or most desirable or most valuable or rarest or sometimes even first is another question.

P.s., rarity is strictly a measure of the number of cards, while scarcity is a measure of supply versus demand. Market value is as good a representation of scarcity as any. Whether or not you think the T206 Honus Wagner is rare, the $$ value indicates the card is very, very scarce (demand far exceed supply).

No, it isn't. The card has to be nationally issued, not a regional. If you are going to ignore that part of the definition, why can't someone else choose his very first card, the Baltimore News or something else?

Explain to us again which of the then 48 states did not allow mailing of The Sporting News to its citizens? Or Successful Farming for that matter? I've asked this of you many times before, and have also asked that you enlighten us with what you assert to be the true Babe Ruth rookie. I get crickets.

The crickets very well might be because I tell members if they are going to get into very much of a debate then the "full name in post rule" is going to apply. Some members don't want to to go there, which is fine, as long as they don't push whatever boundary there is to having your full name have to be in public on this forum. It's a fine line and I try to accommodate all members requests.
Carry on..
..and I happen to agree with you, Todd. I have thought his rookie MLB card is the M101/4&5s. I also don't think you can just say "his rookie card is" unless you qualify it a little bit. To each their own, except for the board policies :).

Thanks Leon. I actually don't have strong feelings about what is or is not a rookie card, since I don't collect them as such--heck; I'd rather that most folks considered the m101 not to be his rookie, as that in theory could drive down the price, making it only two stratospheres beyond my budget :) I just never saw any logic from this poster, who continually claims the m101 is not the rookie for reasons he cannot support, and who then still will not offer an opinion as to what card he believes should be called the rookie and why.

I don't subscribe to the 'nationally distributed' rule. However, even if that is the rule, the Sporting News definitely was a national distributed card and publication. Sporting News was the Sports Illustrated (or ESPN?) of its day.

But I don't collect rookie cards, so I'll let the definitional debate proceed without me.

If I (or any other "rookie" card collectors) had to limit ourselves to only nationally distributed issues, there would be quite a few gaps in our collections! I have quite a few gaps due to the astronomical prices of the cards I seek, but that's my problem.

I guess, by that unusual criterion, 1947 Tip Top Bread and 1954 Red Heart and other regionally distributed "items" are simply not cards. Anyone who came up with the idea that national distribution was necessary in order for a card to be considered a "rookie card" simply needed an excuse for not filling certain holes in their collections due to rarity of certain regional or team issues. To me, that's half the fun.

I'm still blown away when I see a 1948 Bowman of Enos Slaughter being called a "rookie" card when he was 32 years old, had already made four All-Star appearances, and had played seven full seasons with the Cardinals DESPITE three years away from the game due to military service. FWIW, he has several pretty high population cards that pre-date the '48 Bowman - (1) 1941 W754 Cardinals Team Issue, (2) 1941 Double Play, and (3) 1947 Tip Top Bread among others. But I've digressed (a little)...

Wow Corey! Thanks for sharing. I hadn't seen that one until today...just added to my spreadsheet.

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

"Rookie card is defined in the mind of the collector."

I think even defining what a card is can become debateable!!

$108,000 for the Sox team Postcard tonight. Rookie or not, it’s definitely getting a ton of respect.

Ruth Rookie
 

With room to grow! This card’s value will continue to escalate.

Red Sox Team Postcard
 

I would agree. The 3.5 is a beautiful example of the 1915 Red Sox Team PC with Ruth as a rookie. The same card that sold for 108k last night sold for 66k a year ago. One of, if not the hottest piece in the hobby.

How is “hottest” measured? It’s thinly traded in terms of population and also the amount of buyers at the 50k-100k+ end. While Balt News can also be characterized as such, it has the distinction of being popularized as his first, and is also a solo image, as opposed to a team image. I for one much prefer solo images to team photos.

"hottest" is measured by ownership/personal interest!

Just pointing out that the same 3.5 sold for 66k last year and 108k last night. 5 years ago you could buy a 3 for 25k. Pretty solid interest for a team image on a postcard.

I would be surprised if one person, including Ethan, disagreed with you on your points. Everyone prefers a solo image to a team card. And referring to a pop 12 card as “hot” is probably a a stretch since there aren’t enough of them available to get “hot.” I think Ethan is probably excited to see his card gain the respect that he wisely anticipated it would when he bought it years ago. “Hot” isn’t the right word. I would think he meant that it is a previously underrated card that is finally getting attention (like say a 25 Gehrig Exhibits).

Would certainly agree with that.

Yeah, that pretty much sums it up. 😊

Care to share a scan of your example, Ethan? Thanks in advance if you can. Such an awesome postcard, and the coolness factor goes up when you consider it has Tris Speaker on it as well.

Sure. Hopefully it comes through. I think that it is a strong SGC 20.

I think the Ruth "rookie" PC is a pretty damn hot card right now.

And as an aside, it has also been graded 1.5 by PSA...which is the case for more than my PC...bringing the known population report down a notch or two.

❤️ ⚾️ cards!

Ruth Rookie
 

Yes sir Jeff...it’s on fire. All early Ruth Red Sox items are extremely hot. Money in the bank!

Unless it's Jeter, or McGwire, or .....

Ruth Rookie
 

14 Total “Pop” (SGC & PSA combined) with 2 crossovers, bringing the accurate “Pop” down to 12.

That is a beauty, Ethan. Thanks again!

Great card ethan. Definitely a shrewd pickup on your part. I also have never been a huge fan of team cards especially when ascertaining rookies. It also has been purported by post card collectors that this card is not as rare as people think... despite what the population reports show.

Great card ethan. Definitely a shrewd pickup on your part. I also have never been a huge fan of team cards especially when ascertaining rookies. It also has been purported by post card collectors that this card is not as rare as people think... despite what the population reports show. Perhaps this card is found in many post card collections around the globe just buried not graded or even thought about? Time will tell.

I do have a question...do any of you know how many of these cards are found with a handwritten price on the back in pencil?

It’s very possible that there are a few raw copies out there. The same can be said about rarities like the t206 Wagner or Baltimore News Ruth. But even assuming that there are twice as many unknown raw cards out there, which is an extremely generous hypothetical, that means there are still only 30 or so on the planet. That is still less than the amount of known t206 Wagners. It would still be extremely rare. My point is that EVERY card has the potential of having undiscovered or raw copies. Look at what happened with Cobb-backs: the pop nearly doubled in one find! They are still coveted and extremely rare and valuable. Heck, sometimes a healthier population takes a card out of the realm of “too rare for its own good” and into mainstream appreciation due to availability.

There is definitely a raw one or two still out there...

This is all true.

As for Pete's question...I know of 2 examples of the 1915 Team Postcard with rookie Ruth that have been written on, mailed and have a postmark from 1915 with a stamp.

Ruth Rookie
 

For the record, regarding virtually ANY card (including the T206 Wagner), there are unreported examples. The “pop” reports are simply a guide for collectors to utilize for some sense of rarity. For example, Heritage just disclosed a hoard of raw 1952 Topps that includes 6 super nice Mantles, one of which graded a PSA 8.5 (it will be in their August Platinum auction). Look at the Lucky 7 find. Who would have ever thought 7 (now 8) additional Ty Cobb “Back” Cards would ever be discovered? Bottom line is the true count of any high end and/or scarce issue will always remain a “black hole”.

I think my comments are being taken the wrong way. Of course there are finds out there of all shapes, sizes, and varieties yet to be unearthed. My point is that there are a lot of postcard collectors out there...not just baseball postcards like many of us...but all postcards. It's like a crossover thing...postcards that just happen to be baseball related.

Ruth is definitely an anomaly...the fact his early cards were with boston and super desirable. The dietsche cobb fielding should be a 6 figure too then!!!!!

I agree with Pete. Not only are there a lot of postcard collectors out there, they are worldwide, not just in the US. The percentage of post cards that are graded is minuscule. Thus, more-so than for baseball cards, there is the potential for a lot more 1915 BoSox postcards that are not included in pop reports.

1915 Red Sox PC
 

My understanding is that the postcards were issued to fans attending an October game in Boston....unlike the 10s of thousands of 1914 Cracker Jack cards that were purchased in candy boxes. So I guess the question is, how many fans attended and actually took the PC home? Yes, a box of them could be in some back room at the ballpark. If someone hears of that being discovered, please PM me. 😊

Ruth Rookie
 

Let’s see them....when they surface, then we will re-evaluate the value. Jay, you know as well as I do that “speculation” is worth nothing more than a nickel in this hobby.

Where did you get this info from? I have no doubt that these postcards were sold either at the game or local souvenir shops, but I have never heard about them being given out to those in attendance.

Babe Ruth
 

+1

Nice story, but I don't believe it. My guess is that they were sold locally, and maybe widely.

The Dietsche Cobb is just now starting to take off. However, there are other 1907 Cobb postcards (some more rare than the fielding dietsche) and the w600, so the dietsche isn’t the only 1907 Cobb. This appears to be the only 1915 Ruth, and the first in a Red Sox uniform. People are a bit irrational when it comes to Ruth. Understandably so. He is the GOAT. Not to mention, as you wrote, there aren’t many cards of Ruth in a Red Sox uniform.

I agree that there are a good amount of postcard collectors. However, most postcard sets were regional and were printed in very small quantities. Even postcard collectors (or their heirs) who are ignorant about baseball know who Babe Ruth and TyCobb were. The internet has been around for over 20 years where they could look up their hidden gem and immediately know what it’s worth. Do you not think that postcard collectors know what they are collecting or what they are worth? Is postcard collecting the one hobby where collectors somehow have no clue of the value or importance of the items they collect? For the most part, a collector isn’t going to be ignorant about the value of an item that HE PURCHASED. And his heirs will most certainly look into the value of his collection once he has passed away.

These things have been around for over 100 years and we know of only 12 of these Ruths. I doubt that more than 10-15 new copies will ever surface. And as I mentioned in a previous post, extreme rarity isn’t always a good thing for a card’s value anyway. When you think about the high-dollar cards in our hobby, they aren’t exactly the pop 5 cards. The Wagner is up over 40 that we know of. The 1914 joe Jackson is up over 50. There are over 100 of the m101 Ruth. On my way home I tripped over a 1952 mantle. I’m just not sure that your concern over the potential discovery of a few more of these is really valid. I don’t think you believe there are hundreds of these floating around. So if another 20 pop up, I don’t think it would crush the value as much as you fear it may.

Photo was taken 9/30/15 by Sommers by the way.

I know I'm in the minority, but I actually prefer a type one photo from that session to the postcard having owned them both. Larger, more clear, more detailed, more rare, etc. but again that's just me.

https://photos.imageevent.com/bicem/...Photograph.jpg

Ruth Rookie
 

Absolutely correct! In fact, 10+ more surfacing over the next few years might even elevate its exposure. Look at the Lucky 7 find (now 8). There are now 23 known tobacco Ty Cobb as backs and their value is stronger than ever. Over 100 Ruth rookies and their value remains solid with room to grow. There are numerous collectors that seek out Babe Ruth Red Sox cardboard, and a few more on the market will only help this craze.

Ruth Rookie
 

Great photo Jeff....outstanding contrast and clarity!

Awesome photo Jeff. How many different poses are known from this sitting? I think that I have seen four different - all with minor differences. I always thought that it was interesting that Sommers released so many different poses instead of just picking their favorite and going with that one.

Agreed Jeff. I'd take the photo any day!! I'm a photo guy though..

+1

I agree Jeff. Since I consider neither to be baseball cards I would rather have the larger, sharper image which would be the photo.

Photo / Postcard
 

I've had the photo...it's wicked nice, but I'm a cardboard guy. Felt like the postcard was a clear upgrade for me.

If they were, it was a World series game--Boston ended its 1915 regular season on the road, with no home games in October. They only played two World Series games at home, drawing more than 40k at each. Although they could have been handed out or sold at those games, I agree with others they would have been available elsewhere and later also. Still, the 1919 Reds issue comes to mind, where the postcards were all issued with NL. Champs first and then World Champions after the Series. Since Boston won it all in 1915, one could argue the caption would or at least could have stated World's Champions if the issuer waited until around the third week in October before releasing them.

They were definitely issued before the end of the World Series. There are two postcards known with postmarks - October 11 and 12th 1915 respectively.

That's what I figured. But it makes me wonder why they were not issued again thereafter with an updated caption? By the way, the two dates you referenced are the two days the games were played in Boston--somewhat supporting that they may have been made available for the big event, which by the way was played at brand spanking new Braves Field so as to draw bigger crowds.

Don't think they did, one would have been discovered by now.

I agree Jeff. But that too lends credence to the idea that they were ballpark giveaways/sales or were only available for a very limited time, IMO. Otherwise just update the caption starting October 14th, after the World Series was over, at likely little additional production cost. I thus may have to retract my earlier though that these were available elsewhere and later--certainly could be so, but not by a whole lot, it would seem.

I gues that I read this to mean that the postcards may have been handed out like a program would be today: https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball-c.../50004-50192.s

I pictured someone giving them out as people walked in.

Amazing photo, Jeff
I'm really in the minority as I love the photo and the postcard equally well!

Written by player-manager Bill Carrigan's wife, Connie, after game 3 of the World Series played at Fenway on October 11th. Love the baseball content. You already know what the front looks like.
To the left is a Thompson photo of Carrigan I just won this past week to display with the 1915 Red Sox postcard

1915 Ruth PC
 

Nice postcard Craig!