any Cracker Jack collectors out there?

[Archive]

Posted By: Ben

I'm considering a few cracker jacks for my collection- I know there are alot of reprints out there, some good, others not so good. Can anybody give me a few pointers on how to distinguish a reprint from the real deal? Any help would be much appreciated. Thank you.

Ben

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Mathewson

Bob-

What I have heard discussed most commonly as being a main indicator/difference between a reprint and the "real deal" is that the borders look more white rather than off-white...

Also, you can see differences in the way the picture/portrait "runs into" the coloration of the border.

Brian Daniels knows quite a bit about these issues, he'll probably chime in when he sees your post.

-dan

(I wish I had the '14 & '15 Matty CJ's...)

[Archive]

Posted By: Julian

If they look like this, buy them, especially 1914's, the background is darker red. Both 1914's and 1915's Cracker Jack's ROCK!

[Archive]

Posted By: jeff s

man, am i jealous. that is a beautiful card.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julian

Thank you Jeff S.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

have very WIDE borders. Since all reprints are sup-posed to have the word "reprint" on them somewhere (not all do, unfortunately), you might look for a "convenient" blemish at a spot where the word "reprint" would likely appear.

I would love to have that Walsh. Or a nice T206 one.
I have a Colgan's "tin top"--with plenty of faults (one takes tin tops as one finds them), and there are a couple in the T202 set that i have...but that's all.

About 1915 backs: they're supposed to be upside down, and some of them are--but I have a 1915 with a rightside up back, that I've been assured is O.K. The clearest distinction is that the '14s say 'set of 144' (or maybe it's '45'), and the '15s say 'set of 176" (or is it "72)? anyway, in the hundred and forties, and in the hundred and seventies.

[Archive]

Posted By: Robert

Also one other thing about the CJ's are that they are very thin especially the 1914. Then you hold both up to the light the 1914 you can see though somewhat where as the 1915 you can not. I have quite a few so if I acn help just ask away. Rob

[Archive]

Posted By: David

The Cracker Jacks are colored releif prints and if you take a handheld miscrope.... ah, forget it, no on listens anyway.

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Heres my 2 cents worth.

1914 will say "144 pictures" on back, the 1915s will say "176 picture" on back

Real 1915 Cracker Jack E145-2's will always have the back printed upside down. (In other words..... the top of the front is the same edge as the bottom of the back). No modern catalogs/guides mention this that I know of. I have yet to see a 1915 reprint that is upside down. Both sets are printed on a porous rough texture thin construction like paper with absolutely no gloss or waxy look to the surface both front and back. Most fakes are made of a smooth modern card stock, and will have a gloss or waxy look to the front. Also on real cards, where the white/light parts of the uniform meets the white border, the picture blends into the border. Fakes will in most all cases have a line where the uniform touches the border (as the borders on fakes are whitened compared to the picture). Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian C Daniels

except for the fact that gloss and thickness of stock is often emphasized on the fakes.The original stock especially on the 14's is not only very thin but rarely white! They are commonly a yellow/white "H" color,as opposed to the bleached George Hober models I purchased six years ago which were "F" color=pure white and caramel free.This is not consistant with most of the 14's!( Except the killer one above and a bunch of graded ones I may post here to compete with that beautiful puppy above!)Remember the 14's came in boxes and the 15's came in both boxes and complete sets so there are many more 15's rolling around as well.Most reproductions are thicker and glossier as mentioned above....this of course is to maintain a high grade image example of an authentic one. lastly,watch "Field of Dreams" where they show the alleged Cracker jack cards at the very begining of the movie!! here is a quiz!!! What are the three mistakes in the card photos they flash???

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

From what I remember reading there were actually some '14's that were sent in for thereby giving them the same "whiter' look of a lot of the 15's.....I am pretty sure I have read, a few times, about these legitimate "sent-in-for" 14's....regards all

[Archive]

Posted By: Ben

Everyone has been very helpful. Man, I am so glad I found this board. Thank you all very much.

Ben

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian H

Ben --
I collect 1914's and high number 15s (#s 145-176). I would recommend steering clear of ay seller of CJs who doesn't seem to know what they are selling and ask questions about the backs (where scan is not shown) to ascertain for yourself if they are 14s or 15s. Lastly, if there is time you can always post a link to the Board and get some (usually very conservative) opinions about the legitimacy of the cards.
(You could also email me I'd be happy to try to help).
Good luck and be careful,
Brian H.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

since you all seem so poitive about the backs. When I first started collecting CJs, I got a '15 with the first paragraph on the back rightsisde up, and the second, shorter paragraph upside down. Mark Macrae said it was fine.. Later, I got Cracker jacks with BOTH paragraphs upside down (Chase, for one), and Mark said THAT was fine. I THINK I then got a '15 with the whole printed back rightside up, and Mark said that was O.K. too. He said the only thing was the "series of 144" on the '14s amd "series of 176" on the '15s. that never changed.

Oh. I never got a '14 with anything but a straight rightsideup back. And some of my them are quite white, and since I've had them for at least 10 years and they aren't falling apart, and never smelled like bleach, I assume they were white-bordered to begin with.

The best-conditioned card I own is a Cracker Jack 1915 Brown, which i happened to get from-- the only catd I ever got from him--Alan Rosen!

[Archive]

Posted By: Ben

[Archive]

Posted By: deputy dog

NO!!! it is an obvious reprint, the borders are too white and slick. and the background is too maroon not red.

just trying to help

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

edges also look odd, as if the fat boarders of a reprint were trimmed down. then again, it may just be the odd angle.

What is up with people taking pics at such odd angles?

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian C Daniels

REPRODUCTION... check for thickness as I described. Usually,the knock offs are thicker to preserve the grades!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: stutor

Unfortunately, these aren't mine. BCD asked that I post them...here goes

</p>

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Easy one....... The Johnson is 100% reprint, you can tell for sure because of the back being NOT upside down. The card pictured is a 1915 E145-2 reprint (from the 1980/90s), not a real 1914 like the sticker indicates. Notice the second line of type in bottom paragraph begins with "Ball"(thats if you can't read the "176 picture" line). That back is only on 1915s. You can tell by the single screw at top that the back is normal, not upside down like all real 1915s.........= reprint. The guy that put the sticker on it has no clue about CJs...... as he didn't get the year right......Thats a red flag

Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: Brueso

I recently had the brainstorm that it was fun to get reprint sets of some favorites to keep in a handy binder for easy viewing vs. keeping the valuable originals easily accessible to the devil's hands (I mix them up with some of the other more current sets that I like like the last Fleer Tradition set, which had current players depicted in the style of the Goudey 30s cards). I don't have any original CJs but I did just get parts of a reprint set- it's a beautiful set, by crikey!

By the way, I checked my copy of Golden Age of Baseball Cards, and at least in the 1914 set, there's no Casey Stengel card. Since he was playing for Brooklyn in 1914 and 1915, I would've thought he would've been in one or both of the series- did I miss him or if I didn't, does anyone have any thoughts as to why he would've been left out?

[Archive]

Posted By: Eric Angyal

[Archive]

Posted By: Cy

Eric,

I think that the CJ Wagner is the nicest card out there, bar none. I have told you before that that is one sweet lot you won.

Cy

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

[Archive]

Posted By: Ben

I had my heart set on this 1914 Cracker Jack Wagner and was sniped at the last second:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1580854541&rd=1

the auction ended at $270: still a good price for that card I think, but a little out of my range. Sigh.

[Archive]

Posted By: Robert

Snipping is now part of life, if you want the card bad enough you will snip it. Regards Rob

[Archive]

Posted By: Brueso

You can set the snipeware at auctionstealer.com to bid for you with 3 seconds left in an auction. It would take very nimble fingers to type a counter bid within 3 seconds. As discussed in other threads, sniperware can definitely save you money. If you make your highest bid an hour or even 3 minutes before an auction ends, you give someone else the chance to decide whether they want to go higher. When they have only 3 seconds, most people can't regroup that quickly. You'll still lose is someone put down a massive bid earliar that is larger than yours, but that doesn't happen a lot of the time. I definitely feel like I've saved money using snipeware. I even use it if its for an auction where I AM in front of a computer, because I don't want any possibility of user error or computer error to mess up my bidding when its that close to the end. It's actually kind of fun to just keep recycling the computer and watch your bid come in and- if you have it set for 3 seconds- see if anyone tops it.

If you want to try it out, I think auctionstealer.com lets you do a few snipes per month for free.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ben

I am going to start using their free service. Do you a subscription for 8.99 a month is that necessary? I mean, it allows you to snipe with 3 seconds left instead of 10 seconds which the free service provides. But I can't see myself sniping more than a few items per month...

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

I have saved thousands this year by forgetting about auctions until after they ended. I haven't regretted too many of them, and it allowed me to afford a good bottle of wine for last Thursday night while I bid on Lew Lipset's auctions. BTW, alcohol and live auctions do not mix!

[Archive]

Posted By: Brueso

priority service is $5.99, not $8.99. If you only do a few items a month, you can stick with the free. But if you even end up wanting to do 4 over a weekend, for example, you can use up all the free snipes they let you have pronto.