W501-2 is now recognized by SGC!

[ValKehl]

Recently, we had this Net54 thread re W575-1 in which there is mention of W501 cards, including a Type 2 version that hasn't been recognized by the TPGs: https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...ghlight=w575-1

At the beginning of January, I sold my raw W501 Type 2 (or W501-2) duplicate of Sam Rice to a collector on another forum. I provided him with all the info I had re the W501-2 cards, especially Rhett Y.'s piece published in Old Cardboard Magazine several years ago. I told him the W501-2 card isn't recognized by the TPGs, but he told me he was going to submit it to SGC anyway. I wished him good luck, but wasn't holding my breath.

Well, lo and behold, this collector has received his card back from SGC, and the label on the SGC slab says "W501-2"! The collector included Rhett's info with his submission to SGC, and he said SGC never asked him any questions about it before slabbing it. Here's this card in its new SGC slab:

[rhettyeakley]

Pretty cool.

Neat to be able to add something to the established ACC.

[theshowandme]

Fantastic stuff Val. Thank you for letting me line up a W501-1 with this card yesterday at the meetup. The image box lined up perfectly. I’ll be asking SGC to review this one soon.

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by theshowandme

Fantastic stuff Val. Thank you for letting me line up a W501-1 with this card yesterday at the meetup. The image box lined up perfectly. I’ll be asking SGC to review this one soon.

Don, it was great to meet and chat with you yesterday at the Net54 get together, and I'm glad that my W501-1 of WaJo was useful in helping you determine that your Sisler card is actually a W501-2 card. I, too, am going to "strike while the iron is hot" and submit my raw W501-2s of WaJo and Sam Rice to SGC at the upcoming Chantilly Show.

[brianp-beme]

Congrats all in finally getting a grading company to recognize overwhelmingly convincing research by Rhett, with a huge assist by Val and that other collector dealing with SGC.

It gives me hope that SGC can also rectify various other old hobby information on their labels, and show PSA how it can be done.

W501-2...a checklist of available cards needs to be created!


Brian

[cliffyb]

I'd like to ask the knowledgable collectors here why you think the W501 cards don't, in my opinion, get too much respect? Is it the grainy photos? Is it that the cards are similar to E121 and W575-1? The W501s have very low pops and a nice selection of all-time greats. Or perhaps they do get their share of respect and I'm incorrect. Thanks!!!

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by cliffyb

I'd like to ask the knowledgable collectors here why you think the W501 cards don't, in my opinion, get too much respect? Is it the grainy photos? Is it that the cards are similar to E121 and W575-1? The W501s have very low pops and a nice selection of all-time greats. Or perhaps they do get their share of respect and I'm incorrect. Thanks!!!

I think it is a combination that they have, since the beginning of hobby times, been classified as strip cards, and the traditional W501 cards (which perhaps now should be referred to as W501-1 cards) were indeed issued in strip form and thus usually have borders top/bottom borders with poor cuts or have been separated by tearing. Another contributing factor is that they have blank backs, which for a sizeable chunk of the collecting world is seen as the plain jane sister of cards that have a bunch of words printed on the back. W501-1 cards do not have grainy photos...in my opinion they are about comparable in photo quality as seen in the E121 set. The W501-2 I believe are a little grainier in appearance. The E122 American Caramel set has very grainy photos, in case you want to see what a real fiber-enriched grainy card looks like.

Both the W501-1 and the newly recognized W501-2 are in my opinion great cards worthy of more collector interest.

Here is a W501-1, for visual reference.

w501ruel261 (249x400).jpgw501ruel262 (242x400).jpg



Brian

[Leon]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Congrats all in finally getting a grading company to recognize overwhelmingly convincing research by Rhett, with a huge assist by Val and that other collector dealing with SGC.

It gives me hope that SGC can also rectify various other old hobby information on their labels, and show PSA how it can be done.

W501-2...a checklist of available cards needs to be created!


Brian

We might already be seeing the way PSA would do it. Nothing wrong with fixing a lot of old mistakes.
.

[cliffyb]

Thank you Brian. And I appreciate the attached pic. I do like the W501 photos. It's cool to see the players in action. It will be interesting to see where future interest in these cards heads. Given the state of the hobby, perhaps it's a positive that interest in these is on the low side.

[ValKehl]

In the very recent Bagger's Auction than ended April 11th, there are 47 lots of individual cards (Lots #46 through Lot #92) that are identified as W575-1 cards in SGC slabs. When I saw these cards, I was quite sure that many of them are W501-2 cards. So, I contacted Dave Schrader and gave him a heads-up plus all the info I had re the W501-2 cards. Kudos to Dave for adding this info to the auction lots he felt are likely to actually be W501-2 cards.

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

I think it is a combination that they have, since the beginning of hobby times, been classified as strip cards, and the traditional W501 cards (which perhaps now should be referred to as W501-1 cards) were indeed issued in strip form and thus usually have borders top/bottom borders with poor cuts or have been separated by tearing. Another contributing factor is that they have blank backs, which for a sizeable chunk of the collecting world is seen as the plain jane sister of cards that have a bunch of words printed on the back. W501-1 cards do not have grainy photos...in my opinion they are about comparable in photo quality as seen in the E121 set. The W501-2 I believe are a little grainier in appearance. The E122 American Caramel set has very grainy photos, in case you want to see what a real fiber-enriched grainy card looks like.

Both the W501-1 and the newly recognized W501-2 are in my opinion great cards worthy of more collector interest.

Here is a W501-1, for visual reference.

Attachment 618817Attachment 618818



Brian

Brian, IMHO, both the W501-1 and W501-2 cards are grainy in appearance, an E121 card has a slightly grainy appearance, and a W575-1 card is not grainy in appearance.. For a visual comparison, below are my WaJo cards from these sets:

[ValKehl]

The Standard Catalog of Vintage Baseball Cards lists two variations for W575-1 cards of Sam Rice - an "E. C. Rice" and an "E. S. Rice." I've been working on a master set of Rice's cards for many years, and I've never come across the "E. S. Rice" variation. I now believe that the "E. S. Rice" variation is actually a W501-2 card that has long been mis-cataloged as a W575-1 card. Below are my W501-1, W501-2, and W575-1 cards of Rice. The Standard Catalog shows two variations for several other players, and I suspect that one variation for each of these players is actually a W501-2 card.

[theshowandme]

I got to show off my Sisler and tell its story a few times this weekend at the Strongsville show

I do plan on trying to get SGC to reholder it under the W501-2 classification in Cleveland this summer

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by theshowandme

I got to show off my Sisler and tell its story a few times this weekend at the Strongsville show

I do plan on trying to get SGC to reholder it under the W501-2 classification in Cleveland this summer

Way to go, Don! I submitted my raw W501-2 and W575-1 cards of both WaJo and Sam Rice to SGC at the very recent Chantilly Show. I'll try to remember (I have the world's worst memory!) to let you know the results when I receive my slabbed cards.

[rhettyeakley]

Good to see some life in this thread and these cards in general.

As for the W575-1 cards that parallel the E121 Series of 120 set...they do exist but are VERY TOUGH to find and easily 90-95% are actually W501-2 cards that are labeled W575-1.

That being said, blank backed cards of the same quality images and otherwise identical to E121 Series of 120 cards are out there and they are confirmed as such by the better quality image, card stock, & the fact that they are on the same thinner card stock that E121 Series 120 (which is pretty obvious when holding a Series of 80 an Series of 120 in your hand at the same time)

So hate to be the bearer of bad news Val but you still need the Rice card.

I chose 2 "not so totally random" W575-1 (Series of 120) cards from my album to show what they look like & show the image quality vs Val's Rice he showed above

[ValKehl]

Rhett, it isn't clear to me what you mean by your comment, "So hate to be the bearer of bad news Val but you still need the Rice card." Are you telling me that the card I have identified as a W575-1 card is actually a W501-2 card? If so, I disagree. Not only is the card stock different for my W501-2 and what I believe to be my W575-1 of Rice, but the rectangular box containing Rice's image is slightly smaller in both width and height on my W501-2 (and W501-1) card. These same differences also exist between my W501-2 (and W501-1) and my W575-1 cards of WaJo. Rhett, have you ever compared the sizes of the rectangular boxes for the W501 cards vs. the W575-1 cards, and if so, did you find the sizes to be different, as I did?

Rhett, I also find it interesting to note the differences in Sam Rice's name and field position found on the "E121 and related cards" in my Sam Rice collection, as detailed below:

"E. S. Rice" and "O. F." - E121-120 A.m. Caramel, W501-1, and W501-2.

"E. C. Rice" and "C. F." - E121-80 Am. Caramel (with Type 1, Type 1 - reverse, and Type 2 backs), Clark's Bread, Gassler's Bread, Witmor Candy (horizontal back), Henry A. Johnson (purple back stamp), and what I believe to be my W575-1 card (shown above).

"E. C. Rice" and "R. F." - Herpolsheimer's Boy's Clothing, D327-1 Holsum Bread, D327-2 Holsum Bread, and Queen City Cigar Store.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by ValKehl

Rhett, it isn't clear to me what you mean by your comment, "So hate to be the bearer of bad news Val but you still need the Rice card." Are you telling me that the card I have identified as a W575-1 card is actually a W501-2 card? If so, I disagree. Not only is the card stock different for my W501-2 and what I believe to be my W575-1 of Rice, but the rectangular box containing Rice's image is slightly smaller in both width and height on my W501-2 (and W501-1) card. These same differences also exist between my W501-2 (and W501-1) and my W575-1 cards of WaJo. Rhett, have you ever compared the sizes of the rectangular boxes for the W501 cards vs. the W575-1 cards, and if so, did you find the sizes to be different, as I did?

Rhett, I also find it interesting to note the differences in Sam Rice's name and field position found on the "E121 and related cards" in my Sam Rice collection, as detailed below:

"E. S. Rice" and "O. F." - E121-120 A.m. Caramel, W501-1, and W501-2.

"E. C. Rice" and "C. F." - E121-80 Am. Caramel (with Type 1, Type 1 - reverse, and Type 2 backs), Clark's Bread, Gassler's Bread, Witmor Candy (horizontal back), Henry A. Johnson (purple back stamp), and what I believe to be my W575-1 card (shown above).

"E. C. Rice" and "R. F." - Herpolsheimer's Boy's Clothing, D327-1 Holsum Bread, D327-2 Holsum Bread, and Queen City Cigar Store.

I was making a joke Val, I probably should have been more clear.

The E. S. RICE (O.F.) I showed in my post is a W575-1, which is the one I believe you need.

I believe you have yours all identified correctly.

There are two different known W575-1 Rice cards.
-You pictured a W575-1 of E. C. RICE (C.F.) which is correct
-The E. S. RICE (O.F.) that I pictured
(possibly a 3rd of E. C. RICE with R.F. but I haven't seen it)


The order which the RICE cards were made is as follows...

1920 (Holsum Type 1) & early 1921 Releases "E. C. RICE" with "R.F."
1921 Bulk of the releases "E. C. RICE" with "C. F."
1922 releases "E. S. RICE" with "O.F."

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

I was making a joke Val, I probably should have been more clear.

The E. S. RICE (O.F.) I showed in my post is a W575-1, which is the one I believe you need.

I believe you have yours all identified correctly.

There are two different known W575-1 Rice cards.
-You pictured a W575-1 of E. C. RICE (C.F.) which is correct
-The E. S. RICE (O.F.) that I pictured
(possibly a 3rd of E. C. RICE with R.F. but I haven't seen it)


The order which the RICE cards were made is as follows...

1920 (Holsum Type 1) & early 1921 Releases "E. C. RICE" with "R.F."
1921 Bulk of the releases "E. C. RICE" with "C. F."
1922 releases "E. S. RICE" with "O.F."

Rhett, thanks for explaining your comment - sorry that I didn't catch your joke. I'd been hoping there was no such W575-1 card with "E. S. Rice" and "O. F." existed. Should you ever decide to part with your example, please keep me in mind. Thanks also for the info regarding which years the different Rice variations were issued.

I note that you didn't respond to this question in my earlier post, " Rhett, have you ever compared the sizes of the rectangular boxes for the W501 cards vs. the W575-1 cards, and if so, did you find the sizes to be different, as I did?" Every W501 nad W575-1 card in my collection has this rectangular-box size variance, but I have very, very few of these cards. With all of your experience with these cards, have you found this size variance to be a consistently true differentiator?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by ValKehl

Rhett, thanks for explaining your comment - sorry that I didn't catch your joke. I'd been hoping there was no such W575-1 card with "E. S. Rice" and "O. F." existed. Should you ever decide to part with your example, please keep me in mind. Thanks also for the info regarding which years the different Rice variations were issued.

I note that you didn't respond to this question in my earlier post, " Rhett, have you ever compared the sizes of the rectangular boxes for the W501 cards vs. the W575-1 cards, and if so, did you find the sizes to be different, as I did?" Every W501 nad W575-1 card in my collection has this rectangular-box size variance, but I have very, very few of these cards. With all of your experience with these cards, have you found this size variance to be a consistently true differentiator?

Great info, Guys!
Hopefully Rhett (hey Rhett) will see your question. I just thought I would add some W575-1s taken out of their pack..All are pretty close to 100% the same size, when stacked up.
And a Nicely cut, W501 Waite Hoyte with Bagby's name on it.
.