1931 Chicago Cubs Team Issue - John Seys question

[SMPEP]

Is anyone out there an expert on the 1931 Chicago cubs Team set? I have seen many partial sets of these auctioned before - but every single one of them is missing John Seys. In fact, I can't find a single photo of his card from this set anywhere. So I was pleased recently to pick up a "1931 Chiacgo Cubs Team Issued John Seys" (scan below) on ebay.

When I got it though ... I noticed ... it's the same width, but about an 1/8" shorter than the commonly seen ones (Hack Wilson, Hartnett, Cuyler, etc.). Also the paper is white versus a sepia color, and the stock seems a bit heavier (hard for me to tell based on the "quality" of the ones in my collection, but pretty sure it's a smidge heavier.)

So, is this legit card? Is this a 1931 team issue or maybe another year? Did they print a few of these in a different year which is why there is some discrepancy in the checklists in various Standard Catalogues? Does anybody know anything about the John Seys card which seems to be very elusive in this set?

Thanks,
Patrick

[Leon]

It seems photo pack "cards" are one of the last bastions of uncharted waters. They can be great collectibles and most aren't a bundle of money. Maybe one of our lurker members will know and pm or email about it? Good luck and congrats on it.

[triwak]

This is the only one I've ever had - I purchased it for a friend of mine - Arthur John "Bud" Teachout's grandson. One of only a few cards he appears on. This one does have more of a sepia colored border, than your Seys card. As I recall, the stock was fairly thin, but not paper-thin - definitely cardboard. Interesting and cool set, I think. Nice pick-up!

[oaks1912]

Patrick... It may be a case of a checklisting error. Although Seys has the border, like the 1931 sepia set, the size is consistent with the 1932, black and white (mostly) borderless set. Although there is a slight range in size for these, most '32's are about 1/4 inch shorter including the Seys example that I have

[SMPEP]

Thanks Mark. I do think that perhaps theer is a checklist error. Everytime you find sets of these, the same 4 are missing. I suspect they got misidentified at one point and are now in the guide.

THANKS!