[nolemmings]

I’m afraid you won’t get far pinning down the date using the sponsor’s name. Holmes was the largest retail baker in the area at the time, and as noted, had been there awhile. Hopefully you can discover that they only placed their ads on the backs of tickets during one season, like they did with the m101-5 cards. Their address was at one time on E Street and First; however, they had multiple expansions around 1912 and thereafter, and the F Street and 1st address is likely part of the same complex. The phone number and street address stayed the same during that time.

It seems pretty clear the ticket was from the 2nd game of the 1913 season against Boston, as observed. I agree that it may not have been necessary for a rain check to be exchanged for a new ticket. I believe this is particularly so given the time of the season. It was only the second game of the year being played. The first attempt at game 2 was not played and likely was never started. Any ticket taker could think back to 12 days prior and remember that other than the opener, no home games had been played. Even if the practice was to redeem and exchange, I could see a ticket taker recognizing the validity of any game 2, 3 or 4 rain check under those circumstances. Moreover, the game was unremarkable, which weighs against any incentive to fake the score notation. Finally, I disagree somewhat with the notion that two other games with the same outcome from the era may have produced this ticket. In both the 1916 and 1919 seasons, home game 2 was actually played as scheduled. I do not see how such a game(s) could have formed the basis of a valid rain check, even if it did not have to be exchanged for a new ticket.