Baseball Magazine supplements : 2017 different.

[insidethewrapper]

Love that Walter Johnson Supplement. It states he throws the ball 122ft/sec. That equals only 83 mph. He must have throw it harder than that or he would be considered "slow " today.

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by insidethewrapper

Love that Walter Johnson Supplement. It states he throws the ball 122ft/sec. That equals only 83 mph. He must have throw it harder than that or he would be considered "slow " today.

OT, but you can imagine that the methods used to measure Walter Johnson's fastball were shaky at best. WaJo likely threw in the mid-high 90's from all accounts.
WaJo himself commented that Smoky Joe Wood threw faster at his peak.
Amos Rusie "The Hoosier Thunderbolt" likely was extremely fast as well based on all accounts.

FYI, fastball measurement didn't really get sophisticated until the 1970's when the aerospace industry used radar to gain more accurate measurement.

In 1974, aerospace industry leader Rockwell Intl. used their accurate radar equipment to measure Nolan Ryan's fastball. Measurement of speed was calculated as the ball passed the plate, not out in front of the mound like today's measurement. For the record, Nolan Ryan's fastball was clocked at 100.9 MPH which is still the record in the Guinness Book of Sports Records.

[akleinb611]

Doug:

Sorry to be joining the conversation late. As always, your collection is eye-popping. And I still insist that your collecting the minor typographical variations is nuts. But in a good way. But really, nobody on the planet has a basic set of M114. And you're shooting for a MASTER set?

I haven't picked up anything new in some time. A combination of laziness and tight finances. But there's always tomorrow...

And if anyone has any inside information about the set that they'd like to share, you have my blessing to revive a thread I started a couple of years ago. I'm still looking for someone who has new additions to the woefully incomplete checklist provided by the SCD Master Catalogue.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by akleinb611

Doug:

And if anyone has any inside information about the set that they'd like to share, you have my blessing to revive a thread I started a couple of years ago. I'm still looking for someone who has new additions to the woefully incomplete checklist provided by the SCD Master Catalogue.

Hi Alan -

A pleasure to hear from you, and perfect timing :

The catalog has one listing for Joseph Moore, but today I received a second version, and it's not a goofy font variation that nobody really cares about but me, it's a completely different picture.

There's a bit of a story behind it, to be filed under "good things come to those who wait" or possibly "don't stress, there is always going to be another one".

There is a seller on ebay who has a group of 30 m114s that he has had listed for months. There were 5 in the grouping that I am interested in, and I have made him multiple offers starting with fair, and later better than fair, but he doesn't want to split up the group. The Moore "portrait version" is in the group, and I had never seen it before, so I has understandably anxious to acquire it, but not by purchasing the entire (highly) overpriced group.

Then, another one popped up a week or so ago, I made a fair offer and now I have added it to my collection.

With 13 others I have picked up recently, this one puts me at 1,052 different m113 / m114 issues.

Doug "hey collectibles_1, I still want 4 from your group of 30" Goodman

[akleinb611]

Very interesting about the Joe Moore variation. The checklist I use (which is not based on the SCD Catalogue checklist, but rather on a much older list that ran in Baseball Card News in the 80's) shows two entries for Joe Moore, for 1936 and 1954. I have the swinging bat version and it makes perfect sense for 1936, as many of the other posters released that year use a similar pose (Baseball Magazine often released their posters with the same or similar type of pose in a given year). 1954 for the second pose makes absolutely no sense, as Moore was out of the majors by the start of WWII. That second pose is one I may have seen here and there, but I didn't pick it up because I may have believed that I already had it. It very much resembles the poses used for Luke Appling and Mel Ott in their only M114 entries. Both of those date from the mid 30's as well.

Hard to say why Baseball Magazine would have replaced the one pose with the other, especially since both poses clearly date from within a few years of one another. No team change, as Moore spent his entire career with the Giants.

So, the 1954 entry for Moore is clearly a mistake. A typo for 1934, perhaps? All in all, just another illustration of how so much of this set makes little sense, and also of how little we really know about it.

Alan

[akleinb611]

Further on Mr. Moore - on the VERY DAY I read Doug's account of the Moore variation, I was (naturally) motivated to search through Ebay for M114's - something I hadn't taken the time to do in some time. Wouldn't you know it - someone else had the Moore variation for sale, as well as three others that I needed! The price was a bit high, but after trading offers and counteroffers, I got the lot for a somewhat reasonable price.

I guess it shows that you should NEVER give up the search. And I guess it means, as we approach this year's holiday season, the true message of wisdom and life philosophy is - we should really, really spend MORE time on Ebay!

I guess I'm not much of a philosopher...

Alan

[doug.goodman]

Congrats to whoever just sniped me on the Newcombe portrait variation. I thought I had put in a crazy high bid with 8 seconds remaining, and you beat me fair and square.

Doug