1943 M&P Co. Backs

[danmckee]

I have 3 different backs for several players in this issue. Has anyone researched this and has a checklist for all possible variations?

Thanks
Dan Mckee

r337man@yahoo.com

[swarmee]

http://www.oldcardboard.com/r/r302/r...?cardsetID=857

[danmckee]

That doesn't help me at all. I am very familiar with Old cardboard as I have overly contributed to that site.

I need more in depth info on different back variations from the 1943 issue which old cardboard is obviously clueless about.

At least until I educate them about it.

[RedsFan1941]

ted z. has posted about this set. i bet he can help you.

[Harford20]

Dan,
I cannot give you any information regarding the set, but for a player, Ted Williams, there are 3 known back variations (possibly 4) of the 1943 M.P. & Co Ted Williams with ink color variations and spelling errors. All backs are in the same format, just errors or ink color changes that create the variations.

1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEODORE", Blue Ink
1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEODORE", Black Ink
1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEORDORE", Blue Ink
1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEORDORE", Black Ink ? Exists


There also is a VERY COMMON error that is noted with Ted Williams in that there is a 1949 M.P. & Co "no number variation", (meaning no #101 printed on the back of the card) that all the TPGs continue to call a 1943 M.P. & Co. This is NOT a 1943 printing, but a 1949 printing. The 1943 M.P & Co Ted has the company tag line at the bottom and the 1949 does not (at least for Ted Williams), but the TPG companies refuse to accept that there is a 1949 M.P. & Co "no number variation" as it is not listed in any guide. If you have the cards side by side, this variation can clearly be seen as a 1949 card.

Of note, there are also 2 spelling variations of the 1949 M.P. & Co for Ted Williams.

101-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEODORE FRANCES", #101
101-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEORORE FRANCES", #101
(101)-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEODORE FRANCIS", No number

Sorry, can't help out on any other players though.

Dave

[danmckee]

Originally Posted by Harford20

Dan,
I cannot give you any information regarding the set, but for a player, Ted Williams, there are 3 known back variations (possibly 4) of the 1943 M.P. & Co Ted Williams with ink color variations and spelling errors. All backs are in the same format, just errors or ink color changes that create the variations.

1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEODORE", Blue Ink
1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEODORE", Black Ink
1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEORDORE", Blue Ink
1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEORDORE", Black Ink ? Exists


There also is a VERY COMMON error that is noted with Ted Williams in that there is a 1949 M.P. & Co "no number variation", (meaning no #101 printed on the back of the card) that all the TPGs continue to call a 1943 M.P. & Co. This is NOT a 1943 printing, but a 1949 printing. The 1943 M.P & Co Ted has the company tag line at the bottom and the 1949 does not (at least for Ted Williams), but the TPG companies refuse to accept that there is a 1949 M.P. & Co "no number variation" as it is not listed in any guide. If you have the cards side by side, this variation can clearly be seen as a 1949 card.

Of note, there are also 2 spelling variations of the 1949 M.P. & Co for Ted Williams.

101-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEODORE FRANCES", #101
101-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEORORE FRANCES", #101
(101)-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEODORE FRANCIS", No number

Sorry, can't help out on any other players though.

Dave

That's KILLER info there Dave! Tthanks exactly what I was hoping for!

I am setting up at the Philly show with Ole Ted so now we have something to talk about

Thank you kindly!

Dan Mckee

[danmckee]

Originally Posted by Harford20

Dan,
I cannot give you any information regarding the set, but for a player, Ted Williams, there are 3 known back variations (possibly 4) of the 1943 M.P. & Co Ted Williams with ink color variations and spelling errors. All backs are in the same format, just errors or ink color changes that create the variations.

1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEODORE", Blue Ink
1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEODORE", Black Ink
1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEORDORE", Blue Ink
1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEORDORE", Black Ink ? Exists


There also is a VERY COMMON error that is noted with Ted Williams in that there is a 1949 M.P. & Co "no number variation", (meaning no #101 printed on the back of the card) that all the TPGs continue to call a 1943 M.P. & Co. This is NOT a 1943 printing, but a 1949 printing. The 1943 M.P & Co Ted has the company tag line at the bottom and the 1949 does not (at least for Ted Williams), but the TPG companies refuse to accept that there is a 1949 M.P. & Co "no number variation" as it is not listed in any guide. If you have the cards side by side, this variation can clearly be seen as a 1949 card.

Of note, there are also 2 spelling variations of the 1949 M.P. & Co for Ted Williams.

101-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEODORE FRANCES", #101
101-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEORORE FRANCES", #101
(101)-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEODORE FRANCIS", No number

Sorry, can't help out on any other players though.

Dave

Oh and on a friendly note.... I could care less what 3rd party grading recognizes or doesn't as I have been collecting 48 years and all of my sets are raw... I have forgotten more than those idiots will ever know!

[rgpete]

A judgement call on this one it looks like black ink in person

[Harford20]

Ron,
Awesome!. I do believe that variation exists, I just have not seen one to prove it. The subtleties of the color difference often can only be determined in-hand; I have failed at it several times trying to buy variations online.

Dave

[rgpete]

Dave have there been known cards of "THEORDORE", Black Ink to exist

[Harford20]

Ron,
Honestly, I have not found any person who knows enough about the variations to even answer the question. I have been looking at sales af these cards for several years, own 6 of these (between 1943 and 1949), and have confirmed 3 of the 1943 versions and 3 of the 1949 versions with my research. If yours IS black ink, then that would be the first conformation I have seen (I am sure these exist, I just have not seen the variation personally).
Dave

[Leon]

Great info. Thanks for sharing.

Originally Posted by Harford20

Dan,
I cannot give you any information regarding the set, but for a player, Ted Williams, there are 3 known back variations (possibly 4) of the 1943 M.P. & Co Ted Williams with ink color variations and spelling errors. All backs are in the same format, just errors or ink color changes that create the variations.

1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEODORE", Blue Ink
1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEODORE", Black Ink
1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEORDORE", Blue Ink
1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEORDORE", Black Ink ? Exists


There also is a VERY COMMON error that is noted with Ted Williams in that there is a 1949 M.P. & Co "no number variation", (meaning no #101 printed on the back of the card) that all the TPGs continue to call a 1943 M.P. & Co. This is NOT a 1943 printing, but a 1949 printing. The 1943 M.P & Co Ted has the company tag line at the bottom and the 1949 does not (at least for Ted Williams), but the TPG companies refuse to accept that there is a 1949 M.P. & Co "no number variation" as it is not listed in any guide. If you have the cards side by side, this variation can clearly be seen as a 1949 card.

Of note, there are also 2 spelling variations of the 1949 M.P. & Co for Ted Williams.

101-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEODORE FRANCES", #101
101-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEORORE FRANCES", #101
(101)-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEODORE FRANCIS", No number

Sorry, can't help out on any other players though.

Dave

[rgpete]

Here is a different scan, but also the ink is black through a jewelers loupe

[Harford20]

Ron,
Thanks for the conformation on the ink.

Dave

[Estwd]

Originally Posted by Harford20

Dan,

I cannot give you any information regarding the set, but for a player, Ted Williams, there are 3 known back variations (possibly 4) of the 1943 M.P. & Co Ted Williams with ink color variations and spelling errors. All backs are in the same format, just errors or ink color changes that create the variations.



1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEODORE", Blue Ink

1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEODORE", Black Ink

1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEORDORE", Blue Ink

1-M.P. & Co. Hand Cut--"THEORDORE", Black Ink ? Exists





There also is a VERY COMMON error that is noted with Ted Williams in that there is a 1949 M.P. & Co "no number variation", (meaning no #101 printed on the back of the card) that all the TPGs continue to call a 1943 M.P. & Co. This is NOT a 1943 printing, but a 1949 printing. The 1943 M.P & Co Ted has the company tag line at the bottom and the 1949 does not (at least for Ted Williams), but the TPG companies refuse to accept that there is a 1949 M.P. & Co "no number variation" as it is not listed in any guide. If you have the cards side by side, this variation can clearly be seen as a 1949 card.



Of note, there are also 2 spelling variations of the 1949 M.P. & Co for Ted Williams.



101-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEODORE FRANCES", #101

101-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEORORE FRANCES", #101

(101)-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEODORE FRANCIS", No number



Sorry, can't help out on any other players though.



Dave

So is this then a '49?

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Tapatalk

[Harford20]

Estwd,
At least for Ted Williams (as I cannot state that I have done ALL the research for other 1943/1949 M.P.&Co players), the wording format and the letter font used for the 1943 and 1949 card are "distinct". I have never found, nor documented, ANY crossover between the 1943 version and the 1949 version that contradicts this.

As such, based on a few other players with the numbered 1949 version, my research has led me to state that [what I call] the:
(101)-2 M.P.& CO. HAND CUT--"THEODORE FRANCIS", No number
is YES, in fact a 1949 card and not 1943 as listed by TPG's.

I feel that my "other player" research is confirmed that this no-number is a LATER PRINTING than the #101 (also confirmed by having THEODORE and FRANCIS spelled correctly as the only variation). This may have actually been the "last printing" in 1949 with the name corrected.

There are a few exceptions that I am still looking at. One version of Stan Hack has a paragraph format similar to the 1949, but has a "Made in USA" tag at the bottom like the 1943 (as well as he was not playing in 1949). Also, the no-number 1949 variation has been seen in other players, such as Al Kozar, so the no-number "corrected" Ted may have been printed with these variations. No perfect research so far and far from completed.

Dave

[nineunder71]

I’ve been collecting THESE sets for over 10 years. The following are some of my findings and observations. With your help, I hope to further my knowledge of these absolutely crazy sets referred to as M.P.&Co. with the standard catalog designation of R302.

Previous information to date designates two distinct and different sets falling under the R302 category. As of and up to now, these two sets have been differentiated by year, the 1943 set & the 1949 set. However, many examples of these cards have surfaced over time that don’t exactly seem to fit the 1943 set or the 1949 set.

Now, I will discuss the 1943 and 1949 sets for a bit. Both (actually All) of these sets are made up of exactly 24 cards, no more, no less. This is because these sets were printed in sheets. These sheets were made up of three strips of 8 cards each. I know this because rare examples of these 8 card strips have surfaced over time. These 8 card strips are important and we will discuss further as we go. The layout of the sheet, and the three different 8 card strips that make it up, never change as per the positioning of the 24 poses. Now, the names associated to those poses and the dialogue on the back of the card does change, and its these changes/differences which determine the set to which any card falls into.

The cards from the 1943 set are the easiest to determine. These cards ALL have two determining factors which NO card from any of the other two sets have. First, these card’s fronts face to the Right when the dialogue on the back is ‘right side up’. This is opposite (fronts face to the left) on all other cards printed within the R302 category. Note: Again, the dialogue on the back must be ‘right side up’ to determine which way the front faces. Okay, And Second, ALL cards from the 1943 set ALSO have the print:
M.P.&Co.,N.Y.C. Made in U.S.A, on the back at the bottom. These two distinct differences make the 1943 set easy to distinguish from the other R302 cards. Note: Cards from this set exist in both blue and black inked backs and many different print runs appear to have happened as multiple cards from this set can be found in error form as well as in corrected form. (Example: Williams back spelling variation)

The cards from the 1949 set are also not that hard to distinguish. First, there are 22 different *Numbered* cards in this set. Yes, 22 of the 24 cards in this set have a Number on the back. That makes it easy, ANY R302 that has a Number on the back is from the 1949 set, I promise. Okay, the other 2 cards in the 1949 set are Kozar and Henrich and do not have a Number on the back. Again, I know this because of the confirmation of two different UNCUT 1949 strip panels. I own a 1949 8-card uncut strip panel with all Numbered cards on it, except Henrich is on there with no number. Furthermore, in another N54 post in a different thread in 2014 Leon posted a 1949 partial strip of 4 cards containing a Kozar(No number) along with all other Numbered cards. This also goes along the same premise as other early publications regarding this set, like my 1999 Beckett Alamanc for instance. But wait! Its not quite that simple. While, I believe All Kozar cards are from the 1949 set, mainly because that was his Rookie year, all No Numbered Henrich cards are not from the 1949 set. I discovered that two different No Numbered Henrich cards exist. Note: I just say discover because I’ve never read or heard of this difference mentioned anywhere before. Anyhow, Henrich’s 1949 set card is not numbered and contains 5 lines of dialogue on the back of the card. 5 lines of dialogue on the back is important, because the 1944 set card of Henrich is also not numbered, however it contains 8 lines of dialogue on the back with the same note that he is still in the war as his 1943 card. The 1949 set also contained correctional print runs, where a card can be found with an error and also can be found corrected, just like the 1943 set. (Example: Lemon front team name variation)

I now introduce the 1944 set! As previously stated, for years, cards have surfaced that didn’t exactly fit the mold of either a 1943 or a 1949 set card, as described above. That’s because, I believe there was another set printed in 1944. For a long time I had it narrowed down to 1944 or 1945, but today I’m pretty sure it was 1944. I’m not sure where to start with explaining this set, because its complicated. But here goes:

I have Confirmed to exist all 24 cards with a No Number back in a format that does not fit the 1943 set. These 1944 set cards fronts face left, like the 49 set, and NONE of them contain the M.P.&Co. designation on the back, and again they are all Unnumbered. They are not 1943s and they are not 1949s!

Continuing on, The 1944 set contains the exact same 24 *players* (poses are always the same between ALL R302 sets) as the 1943 set. Now, the 1944 set gets complicated because it appears the 3 different strips of 8 cards each, when printed, were printed in a bit of a different format from each other. Confusing? Let me try and explain. Remember the three strips of 8 cards each that make a sheet? Okay, I have confirmed the 1944 strip of 8 containing(in order): Boudreau, M. Cooper, Williams, Dickey, Foxx, Feller, Ott & W. Cooper to only exist in a printing format that does NOT include the ‘Made in U.S.A.’ designation on the back at the bottom right. So, these are found just blank at the bottom, after the dialogue. Note: Remember if it has the M.P.&Co. designation on the back bottom left it is a 1943 for sure, always. Anyhow, Those 8 cards, from the 1944 set, based on my experience, cannot be found WITH a “Made in U.S.A.” On the back bottom right.

However, the second strip of 8 from the 1944 set, containing(again in order) Mize, Reiser, Hack, Novikoff, Camilli, Ruffing, Hubbell & Greenberg is the opposite of the first 1944 strip mentioned above as that these cards can ONLY be found with the ‘Made in U.S.A.’ designation on the bottom back right when found from the 1944 set.

As if we needed more complication, now comes the third/final 8 card strip from the 1944 set. This strip contains (in order): Medwick, Vander Meer, Henrich, Reese, Danning, Cronin, Bonham & DiMaggio. The odd/confusing thing here, I have confirmed half the strip WITH and half the strip WITHOUT the ‘Made in U.S.A’ designation, with 1 exception. I have confirmed Reese, Danning, Cronin & Bonham to only exist With the ‘Made in U.S.A’ designation, while confirming Medwick, Vander Meer & Henrich(8 line back version) to only exist WITHOUT the designation.

The exception to the third strip is DiMaggio. As, He is the only player I have confirmed to exist within the 1944 set that can contain the ‘Made in U.S.A’ designation or can be found WITHOUT this designation (and a longer dialogue btw). DiMaggio is the only player I have found that contains 4 different print variations of this manner and I can’t explain why at this time. It should also be noted that 4 different variations of the Feller card exist, however this appears to be due to a corrections run within the 1944 set, as we saw happen within the production of the 1943 and 1949 sets (ex. 1943 - Williams spelling error, ex. 1949 - Lemon front team error), in that both versions of the 1944 Feller do not contain the ‘Made in U.S.A’ designation on the bottom back right and the dialogue is similar but shortened in the fourth version that I have confirmed. Note: We see this a lot when comparing the 1943 back’s dialogue to the counterpart card within the 1944 set. Many of the 1944 card’s back dialogue has been shortened or parts have been omitted when compared to the same card’s back dialogue from the 1943 set. Feller is just the only example I have seen of this within a single set year, the 1944 set.

Anyhow, because I have confirmed all 24 cards printed within the set to exist in a format that clearly does not conform with either of the previously known set descriptions, I’m interested in everyone’s thoughts as to my Proposal of this “newly Confirmed set” = 1944 M.P.&Co. Set!

BTW, in analyzing the dialogue on the back of the cards and more specifically the dialogue CHANGES on the back of the cards from set to set to set is how I determined this new third differentiated set to be printed in 1944. I have found numerous detail omissions and/or additions that help to confirm my 1944 hypothesis within the changes found in the dialogue on the backs of the cards.

While, I could continue on with numerous other subjects regarding these cards further spelling variations, paragraph variations, team variation errors, and so on, I am tired of typing at the moment and am looking forward to any and all HELPFUL input.

As detailed above, at this time, I have confirmed 73 different front/back combinations which, to my knowledge, comprises the Master R302 set. This does not include error variations such as the 1949 Lemon front team variation or the multiple Williams back spelling variations found in both the 1943 & 1949 sets, nor does it include the Feller dialogue variation within the 1944 set as I look at these variations as corrections made within the same print run.

The anomaly I am most looking to explain is the 1944 DiMaggio card. Why is this the only one that can be found WITH and WITHOUT the designation ‘Made in U.S.A’ on the back? If anyone has ANY card that does not specifically fit within the parameters laid out above of either the 1943, 1944, or 1949 sets please contact me. Or if anyone knows of any other ‘1944’ set card that is Confirmed both WITH and WITHOUT the ‘Made in U.S.A’ designation on the back (like I have found the DiMaggio to exist with), Please let me know

I’m hoping this will all make since to someone out there and maybe that person can help me further expound on my current findings. Thanks All,

Colton

[Luke]

This is awesome research Colton!

[GeoPoto]

So, I have five of these cards, all graded. I have two (graded as) 1943 Reisers:
https://net54baseball.com/attachment...1&d=1586460804
https://net54baseball.com/attachment...1&d=1586460822
https://net54baseball.com/attachment...1&d=1586460837
https://net54baseball.com/attachment...1&d=1586460852
The first one (5590) faces right (do I have that correct?) and the back is black ink unnumbered with Made in USA lower right and no M.P.&Co. N.Y.C.; the second one (0210) faces left and the back is blue ink unnumbered with M.P.&Co. N.Y.C. lower left and Made in U.S.A. lower right. The story on the back of these two cards is also type set differently.
I also have three 1949s:
https://net54baseball.com/attachment...1&d=1586460570
https://net54baseball.com/attachment...1&d=1586460500
https://net54baseball.com/attachment...1&d=1586460514
https://net54baseball.com/attachment...1&d=1586460531
https://net54baseball.com/attachment...1&d=1586460546
https://net54baseball.com/attachment...1&d=1586460557
The Doby faces left and the back is black ink numbered with no MPCo/USA; the Coan and the Kozar face right with backs that have black ink no MPCo/USA and the Kozar is unnumbered while the Coan is.

I gave up trying to apply your criteria to all of these cards. The two 43 Reisers face in opposite directions and have quite different backs. The 49 Doby and the 49 Coan face in different directions. I doubt any of this helps you, but I am posting it to find out. Is the second Reiser one of your 1944's?

Originally Posted by nineunder71

While, I could continue on with numerous other subjects regarding these cards further spelling variations, paragraph variations, team variation errors, and so on, I am tired of typing at the moment and am looking forward to any and all HELPFUL input.

I’m hoping this will all make since to someone out there and maybe that person can help me further expound on my current findings. Thanks All,

Colton

[Harford20]

Colton,
As a Williams collector, and one who has studied his card variations, especially with the MP&Co cards, I have long thought that there was a "third" year of production that was undocumented given the distinct differences of Williams. Initially, I thought there was just errors and error corrections for Williams, but the timelines never fit to my satisfaction (i.e. if the error is corrected, why is a new error seen).

Added: I should say "different spellings of Francis" as Ted Williams middle name is actually Samuel--not even sure where the Francis/Frances came from. I would have to confirm, but I think the 1946-47 W603 Sports Exchange is the first card with "Samuel" (not the 1954 Topps #1)

As it was Williams, who was in military service during most of the 1943 season and out completely in 1944-45, I "assumed" the "third" MP&Co distribution year was likely 1946 or 1947. I tried to use some other cards to confirm my suspicions, but without the information of the strip data, I found this to be futile as I could not "make" a 24-count sheet.

Your data is awesome. I own a DiMaggio, but cannot give you a reason for an outlier. I DO AGREE that a third year MP&Co does exist. The unnumbered "1949 vs 1944" card still has "Theodore Francis" spelled correctly, and the numbered version with both "Theodore" and "Frances" incorrect. Would your data support any other year other than 1944 (especially AFTER 1949) so my brain can grasp the name change timeline for Williams?
David

Will have to look at my Williams "facing direction" as this is not something I have noticed

[nineunder71]

Dave,
I understand your question and your reasoning makes since, however to answer this logically, you must look at the 1944 set as a whole, read all the backs, and then compare that back dialogue to the back dialogue on the 1943s, then you begin to understand (in many examples) why the changes were made. The changes, not always, but in many instances, were made to reflect actual changes that occurred between the time of the first print and the second. As in, player trades, and more cool/notable in this set, notes regarding players entering and/or returning from the war.

Further, the simple fact that the 1943 set was printed with errors, then printed correctly, and then the 1949 set was first printed with errors again defies your logic that once corrected, it was corrected for good going forward....right?

Also, think about this: Why was the M.P.&Co. designation removed after the 1943s? Could it be because the future runs were not done by Michael Pressner and Company? This may explain why we see the same/similar errors re-occur in the early 1949 print runs that we saw in the early 1943 print runs? (Williams misspelling for example) Just a guess there.

I will put together a summation of the dialogue differences in which lead me to believe the set was printed in 1944 in a future post, I don’t want to miss any of the numerous examples that led me to this print year, more to follow...

George,
The direction that the front of the card faces (When the back is right side up) is determined by in which direction the card front would be read. As in, which direction you would read the players name from. Not in which direction the player on the card is facing. I know its confusing, but I hope this helps. Otherwise, yes, all of your examples are ones that I have confirmed and fit the descriptions outlined. Thanks for your interest

Also,
Thanks for everyone’s responses. I have also received a very interesting PM that may confirm a new card for me, which is what I was hoping for! THanks again and I will continue to update with findings

Be Safe ALL,
Colton

[GeoPoto]

Do my two 43 Reisers "face" in opposite directions?

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[nineunder71]

George,
Yes they are opposite, the one read from the left is a 1944

If it helps, all of your 1949’s fronts are also read from the left

[nineunder71]

Also, your Kozar is from an early 1949 print run, as it has an error on the back that I have found corrected in later runs.

This set is more fun than most know!

[nineunder71]

In regards to why I believe the new set was printed in 1944 here is some more information.

First, it is very clear that the 1943 set was printed after the 1942 season ended, as a few cards mention the champions from 1942, but also before the 1943 season begins as the 1943 Novikoff card reads on the back that 1943 should be a good year for Lou. So our timeline for when this set was printed is pretty clear.

Back to the 1944 set, No way it was printed after 1949 because Multiple of the players from this set didn’t play that long in their career, they were retired long before 1949, many of them. Remember, the 1949 set is comprised of 18 different players than both the 1943 and 1944 sets. The 24 players comprising the 1943 and 1944 sets were from a bit of an earlier generation, check out the 24 players we’re dealing with here again.

Moving on, 2 different cards in the 1944 set read, on the back, that the player is gone to war (this gives us our first time reference) the Henrich (8 line version) and the Greenberg. So, the set was printed when both these guys were gone to war. Okay, we know Greenberg served 47 months, most of any Major Leaguer. He returned to MLB July 1, 1945 for good from the war, and played the rest of the 1945 season.

Here is where I start to narrow down the timeline for when this set was printed. With Greenberg and Henrich back from the war and both resuming their MLB careers by 1945, we can rule out the set being printed in 1946 or after.

Now, how do we know this set wasn’t just a variation print run of the 1943 set?
I know because of the specific dialogue changes made from the 1943 version to the 1944 version. Many of the card’s dialogue changes appear irrelevant and/or that they were made simply to shorten the verbiage (save ink), brief omissions per say. Some appear to just remove bad grammar, good call to remove that William Cooper “catched” for the Cardinals, haha.

But, one card really stands out. The Camilli card’s changes specifically stand out to me. While most of the changes made from set to set were simple omissions of say 2 or 3 lines printed at the top or the bottom of the dialogue, the Camilli card specifically removes that he now plays for the Dodgers at the top, then later on in the dialogue it is changed from “has been with Brooklyn since 1938”, to saying “has been with Brooklyn” (As in, past tense) This is significant because he was traded in 1943. I believe this quasi-cover up shows that this set was printed after 1943, because the printer knew Camilli had been traded and was trying to correct the card to read more accurate.

The Vander Meer cards are similar in that the 1943 reads he is “with the Reds today”, then on the 1944 card this statement is gone. Again significant because he went into the Navy in early 1944 and missed the entire season.

[tedzan]

Hi Colton

Thanks for clarifying the date, the Vander Meer card on this strip reads....“with the Reds today”. I acquired this strip back in 1981.



v................................................. .... original uncut 8-card strip (21 1/2 inches long) .................................................. ....v





Enlarged strip (split scan)







I think the other two 8-card strips were printed as such.....am I correct ?

Strip B........

MIZE - REISER - HACK - NOVIKOFF - CAMILLI - RUFFING - HUBBELL - GREENBERG


Strip C........

BOUDREAU - M. COOPER - WILLIAMS - DICKEY - FOXX - FELLER - OTT - W. COOPER



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[nineunder71]

Hi Ted

Yes, you have the sequencing of the 3 strips correct. I am a fan of your Uncut strip as I have the same uncut strip of 8, however mine is the 1949 version, and I’m assuming yours is the 1943 version. I also have another 8 card uncut strip from the 1943 set, the strip containing Williams. I have seen multiple uncut strips in the past, besides the two I own, however I have never seen an uncut strip from the 1944 set.

UPDATE:

Further, with the help of another board member here, I have made another discovery regarding the 1944 set, a new exception has been found to my previous post. More to come on this new discovery........

[nwobhm]

Originally Posted by nineunder71

UPDATE:

Further, with the help of another board member here, I have made another discovery regarding the 1944 set, a new exception has been found to my previous post. More to come on this new discovery........

Bump…. Any news on the new discovery?

[todeen]

Discussion of this set is on Twitter. @Collector_Logan is asking about paper stock and why different stock was used. Any information is appreciated. I am assuming from previous posts that these cards are suspected 1944 versions dince they are misding the company name in the bottom left corner?

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[nineunder71]

Thanks for the follow up, sorry I forgot

So, Carl Hubbell is now confirmed within the 1944 set as only the second player with both, along w DiMaggio. I still can’t explain this unfortunately. And the positioning of DiMaggio vs Hubbell makes it worse (less explainable) But, the more info we have the better, let me know if you have other questions,
good luck

Colton

Originally Posted by nwobhm

Bump…. Any news on the new discovery?

[nineunder71]

I will have to look back through my info and stats, however the light colored paper stock is much more difficult per my memory

Originally Posted by todeen

Discussion of this set is on Twitter. @Collector_Logan is asking about paper stock and why different stock was used. Any information is appreciated. I am assuming from previous posts that these cards are suspected 1944 versions dince they are misding the company name in the bottom left corner?

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[todeen]

There is another R302 thread, as linked, with a Joe Dimaggio "white" back that appears to be the 1949 set.

https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/top...ink_source=app

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk