1933 Goudey - Am I Seeing Double?!
 

I finally bit the bullet and pulled down my first Lou Gehrig card ever. I am really excited about this new edition to my nearly complete 33 Goudey set. But, what I am not really excited about -- particularly as a T206 collector who has no patience or interest in the myriad backs that set has to offer -- is now having to pursue card #92, which sports the same front as my #160.

<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/3ATJzgh2EMU0MbsSis1YjMVoo7wO8BPeGSO7FNPxJt4?feat=e mbedwebsite"><img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-c5ycUJF0Mm8/U6jOHBE5EKI/AAAAAAAAggc/8TR9Mwk4Bl8/s800/160_Gehrig_SGC_60.jpg" height="800" width="495" /></a>

This seems like really lazy printing, if you ask me. Giving Gehrig the same short shrift that Rube Walberg got at cards #145 and #183. Heck, even Ruth got a red and yellow background, to go along with two completely different poses. So, why dupe the Iron Horse like that? Oh, why didn't they have a little foresight and put that amazing 1934 Goudey head shot in the 33 set? C'Mon, Goudey... get with the program...

<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/Zg-X_bd0OHJPe2Z6ulusqMVoo7wO8BPeGSO7FNPxJt4?feat=embe dwebsite"><img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-j6Qx7IiPXFY/U6T5jGK_P4I/AAAAAAAAgPQ/N6QHr-6wybQ/s800/183_Walberg_RAW.jpg" height="800" width="643" /></a>

<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/WxgNJruqIHlPXfVJ6C1oz8Voo7wO8BPeGSO7FNPxJt4?feat=e mbedwebsite"><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-lpqijnJTeqM/UwlL2nLTtXI/AAAAAAAAf0Q/z9YJJO3MlLg/s800/145_Walberg_PSA_5.jpg" height="800" width="475" /></a>

Nice #160 Gehrig. I am still looking for one.

It is hard to make sense of many things in the Goudey set looking at it as collectors 80 years later. We need to look at the choices that were made in the context of that time long ago when baseball cards were neither important or valued other than as an insert for a product.

Another expensive pair. :D:D:D There are subtle differences between each Gehrig and each Foxx.


http://photos.imageevent.com/rgold/r...3gfoxx88_1.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/rgold/r.../33gfoxx88.jpg

Killer Foxxes! I had forgotten that those were dupes, too. Are there any others I missed?

Mine aren't even close to the same stratosphere...

<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/uTfsR5xuNgGSHL1njoMAw8Voo7wO8BPeGSO7FNPxJt4?feat=e mbedwebsite"><img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-DDPbbchgyFQ/U1cO7DZk-2I/AAAAAAAAesk/FU53HYK8jII/s800/29_Foxx_PSA_1%2528MK%2529.jpg" height="800" width="471" /></a>

<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/72CIZBvvtsI7SHb2AXtVHMVoo7wO8BPeGSO7FNPxJt4?feat=e mbedwebsite"><img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-wvPkCXtRQRQ/U6T5a1EA_nI/AAAAAAAAgMI/HidqUttUM78/s800/154_Foxx_RAW.jpg" height="800" width="644" /></a>

I believe those are the only two besides Walberg. Notice the different shade of yellow background on each Foxx. Also, the black outline on his body in the #154 does not appear on #29. Of course the paper stock differs on all low series Goudeys.

I hate the 2 Gehrig thing in this set. If there are any subtle differences, they are too small for me. To me, they look the same. As a Yankee collector, i try to get all the old Yankee team sets, and i have what i personally consider is the 1933 Yankee team set which is all the Yankee cards but only ONE of the Gehrig cards. Being virtually identical, i see zero reason to pay such big bucks for two of them. Cant believe on a major player like Gehrig they couldnt have at least changed the background color. :mad:

+1 ...that would seem like an extremely easy fix to this otherwise obvious issue. C'Mon Goudey... Fix it!

Do Goudey set collectors usually get both Gehrigs? I'm all for completion, but I don't think I could justify the cost of an almost identical card when there are so many other cards out there I want and don't have yet.

My Goudey set is 99.16667% complete. I still need #160 Gehrig and the Lajoie card. I do not consider my set complete without those two major cards notwithstanding the debate on whether the Lajoie should be included or that both Gehrig cards are about identical. There was supposed to be 240 cards in the set and I want them all.

On the other hand, I do not get all bent out of shape if someone collects Goudeys with a different view. I have a friend that has a Goudey "set" without the yellow Ruth and he refuses to buy any of the minor leaguers.

I know Diamond Stars set collectors that refuse to buy the high series which are identical to low series cards. And, I know a few people that collect T206 sets without Wagner and 3 other fellows. :D:D:D

It has been said that there are "minor differences" in the 2 Lou Gehrig cards in the 33 Goudey set.

Can anyone tell me what they are, or even better, show me with scans please? I have Number 160 and have always been negative towards going after Number 92, but now am not so sure. But i really would like to know if there really are differences and what they are if any.

Thanks for any help here.

according to this thread, http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=160120 , the blue backgrounds are slightly different shades.

I still am only missing #160 Gehrig and Lajoie from my set. It'll probably stay that way forever, but I do still watch the #160's that pop up on ebay sail past my "at this price I'll get the second Gehrig" threshold.

...

Thanks. Me too with the #92, if i see a "1" grade (or raw card that would grade "1") that has good eye-appeal i just might pull the switch as i have every other Yankee card from that year.

A Goudey thread resurrected. It's a miracle. :D:D:D

http://photos.imageevent.com/rgold/r...y/gehrig33.jpg

So... I picked up this #92 in Huggins and Scott a couple of weeks ago:

<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/I66eCe98vQ9CoLhcdfFA-sVoo7wO8BPeGSO7FNPxJt4?feat=embedwebsite"><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-Bpey5nXwjnI/U_CoOJnasII/AAAAAAAAigk/Jql35XhURp0/s800/92_Gehrig_PSA_4.jpg" height="800" width="478" /></a>

But then immediately traded my #160 for this T206 Johnson and 33 Goudey Hubbell. It is going to be hard for me to hang on to two "of the same" Gehrigs....

<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/PTsVKhDaEPDCC44bPvRZ1EbbPrYp6YHrRqcN_cfzkkQ?feat=e mbedwebsite"><img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-E6lE9-GGJJY/U_CoUcygMBI/AAAAAAAAig4/DPT2lsTtEYo/s800/Johnson_Hands_At_Chest_PSA_5.jpg" height="800" width="474" /></a>

<a href="https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/reRhi93j1vrSL2KruB_s3cVoo7wO8BPeGSO7FNPxJt4?feat=e mbedwebsite"><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-1mmCcH59stM/U_CoOGwCfTI/AAAAAAAAigg/ma009-hYsEo/s800/234_Hubbell_SGC_60.jpg" height="800" width="496" /></a>

did someone say...seeing double ? I think this fits the description