Worch? Wheaties?

[timn1]

I WILL LEAVE MY ORIGINAL POST UP FOR REFERENCE, BUT PLEASE SEE THE SUBSEQUENT POST "WORCHES FOR SURE" FOR THE CORRECTION AND SOME CLARITY ON THE ISSUE.
__________________________________________________ ________________________________________

I'm not sure that anyone really knows who put out these cards of the Minneapolis Millers in 1932. For a long time they were listed as "Wheaties" and then people started describing them as a 1932 Worch set (which would make them the initial Worch set, with additional issues from the cigar company in 1933 probably all the way through 1935. Looking through the "Worch Cigar Project" thread I notice a lot of folks posted scans of these cards and called them Worches. My SCD calls them Wheaties... VCP avoids them altogether. But I still don't really know what to call them...

Anyone have definitive info about them? If so please divulge. In the meantime, at least we have a pretty stable checklist, unlike with the Worch sets proper. It's also clear that these cards are a lot easier to find than the 1933-35 Worches-

One reason I'm posting them all here is to try to un-conflate them from the Worch 1933-35 set(s), which I am trying to build a better checklist for. The most obvious difference is that these 1932 cards have a facsimile script name rather than the weird little block letters of the 1933-35 Worches.

So if you think you have a Worch and see it here, then - you might have a 1932 Worch, but not one from the set I'm working on.

1932 Worch?/Wheaties? Minneapolis Miller CHECKLIST
J. G. "Rube" Benton
Donie Bush
Andy Cohen
"Pea Ridge" Day
Ray Fitzgerald
F. P. "Babe" Ganzel
Wes Griffin
Spencer Harris
Joe Hauser
Frank J. "Dutch" Henry
Phil Hensick
Bunker Hill
Joe Mowry
Jess Petty
Paul Richards
"Bill" Rodda
Harry Rice
Art Ruble
"Rosy" Ryan
Al Sheehan (announcer)
Eddie Sicking
Ernie Smith
Hy Vandenberg
E.R. Vangilder

[timn1]

The remainder of the images.

Most backs are blank but occasionally postcard backs are found.

[rhettyeakley]

Tim, I found some still in the original Worch envelopes years back, not sure if I saved the scans or not. Prior to that I had called them "Wheaties" cards. Not sure if there is a direct connection to Wheaties (I have never seen one in a Wheaties envelope or anything just that they had been cataloged as such). Being that Wheaties was a Minneapolis/Minnesota based company it may not been a large leap to assume they had something to do with the cards.


Similar to the V94 cards having been called "Canadian Butterfinger" until it came to light that they had been found in envelopes bearing the O-Pee-Chee name, confirming that that was the actual distributor.

[timn1]

Thanks Rhett- if you have the scans of those envelopes, that would be tremendous. I have a couple of Worch mailing envelopes but the cards were separated long ago, so that doesn't help here-

Tim

[timn1]

My friend and hobby sage John Esch reminded me that the question I posted has been answered definitively by him in the Old Cardboard Spring 2012 issue. John found a complete set of the 24 Minneapolis cards complete with envelopes with Worch all over the place. Thanks John!

the Old Cardboard reference section clearly states this (the only thing is that they give 146 cards in the set, while the actual number is 24 - Lyman, if you see this...)

http://www.oldcardboard.com/t/worch-...cardsetID=1532

So in other words, I should have done more homework before my OP...


Write me with any questions or additional info you have about the Worch sets!

Tim

[MikeGarcia]

...just came from the linked Old Cardboard article with the checklist of " 24".....the easy one is it's " Harry Rice" , not "Harry Rose"....Tim has it correct , the Old Cardboard list of 24 also used "Harry Rose".....the roster for the 1932 Minneapolis Millers has a "Harry Rice" stopping by for a cup of Joe

..I'm showing also another version of "Dutch" Henry which I believe is part of the '32 set ; oddball in that he's in a Chicago uniform and in an action pose whilst all the others are mug-shot portraits......but the size of the photo/card (exact same size ) and the font of the cursive name and the fact that it was part of a large collection I bought leads me to believe that it's 1932 Worch Millers....???


...

[MikeGarcia]

...It's obviously not a "1933" but over time we've all learned to just roll our eyes and ignore PSA label writers ; but the "Frank J. 'Dutch' Henry'' is identical . I won't use "whilst" again for the rest of the month ; there's a quota , you know....



...

[timn1]

Mike,
Interesting point about the Dutch Henry. It's definitely an oddball in that it doesn't have all the earmarks of a 1932 or 1933 Worch, and has him in a major league uniform - Cubs, right? What's even stranger is that Dutch never played for the Cubs, he played for the White Sox through 1930, but that sure looks like a Cubs uni to me...

Also, Dutch never pitched in 1933 with Minneapolis, he was let go after 1932. But it's definitely the same guy, Frank John Henry.

I still hesitate to count the Dutch pitching as a 1932 Worch for sure, though, since it is such a different pose from the other portraits. But the timeline does suggest 1932.

[timn1]

Yes, Mike is right, Harry Rice is the mysterious "Harry Rose" in the 1932 Worch set. Not much of a mystery, really. Harry appears in the 1933 MLB set after going to the Reds after his year in Minneapolis. Although Worch apparently thinks Cincinnati is in the AL... - actually in 1933 they were more like a middle-of-the-road American Association team.

[Leon]

It's the ears Love all the portrait cards....

Originally Posted by timn1

Yes, Mike is right, Harry Rice is the mysterious "Harry Rose" in the 1932 Worch set. Not much of a mystery, really. Harry appears in the 1933 MLB set after going to the Reds after his year in Minneapolis. Although Worch apparently thinks Cincinnati is in the AL... - actually in 1933 they were more like a middle-of-the-road American Association team.