Mystery's of the 1933 Goudey set....and, show us your Goudey's

[tedzan]

Imagine you are in a Time Machine that transports you back to the Spring of 1933. Kids and older collectors were very excited with the new Goudey Gum cards.
You could get colorful cards of Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Jimmy Foxx, Dizzy Dean, etc. But, trying to put together a set of these cards became quite frustrating
because certain lower numbered cards were not available. By the end of the Summer of 1933 you diligently put together a set of 191 different subjects. Plus,
tons of duplicates as the result of spending lots of pennies trying to acquire the missing lower # cards (precisely 22 cards). In September Goudey issued their
9th sheet of cards (#s 214 - 231, and 97, 98, 99, 128, 129, 142). Finally, six of the mysterious lower numbered cards were available. So, 16 more to go.

That brings us to the World Series sheet. The 10th sheet was printed in mid October, the cards were issued in November 1933. The bios on the backs of them
reflect the 1933 World Series between the NY Giants and Washington. From my set, I have arranged these cards to exactly simulate this 24-card sheet..........








This diagram of the 10th sheet tells the story when the remaining 15 (of the 16) mysterious lower numbered cards where finally issued.





And, of course #106 (Lajoie) was issued in the Summer of 1934 to finally complete this 240-card set.

T'was a clever marketing trick that Goudey played in order to sell a lot of cards in 1933......but, it was also a "mean" trick on the collectors.

This Show-n-Tell will hopefully spark some interesting discussion regarding this great Goudey set. Show us some your "oldies-but-goodies" Goudey's.


TED Z
.

[Mountaineer1999]

This is great Ted! Fun read and a nice little Goudey history lesson for me.

[tedzan]

1934 GOUDEY Hi #s (#73 - 96) sheet which includes the #106 Lajoie card.....printed and issued circa Summer 1934.





TED Z
.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Imagine you are in a Time Machine that transports you back to the Spring of 1933. Kids (and older) collectors were very excited with the Goudey Gum cards.
You could get colorful cards of Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Jimmy Foxx, Dizzy Dean, etc. But, trying to put together a set of these cards became quite frustrating
because certain lower numbered cards were not available. By the end of the Summer of 1933 you diligently put together a set of 191 different subjects. Plus,
tons of duplicates as the result of spending lots of pennies trying to acquire the missing lower # cards (precisely 22 cards). In September Goudey issued their
9th sheet of cards (#s 214 - 231, and 97, 98, 99, 128, 129, 142). Finally, six of the mysterious lower numbered cards were available. So, 16 more to go.

That brings us to the World Series sheet. The 10th sheet was printed in mid October, the cards were issued in November 1933. The bios on the backs of them
reflect the 1933 World Series between the NY Giants and Washington. From my set, I have arranged these cards to exactly simulate this 24-card sheet..........








This diagram of the sheet tells the story when the remaining 15 (of the 16) mysterious lower numbered cards where finally issued.





And, of course #106 (Lajoie) was issued in the Summer of 1934 to finally complete this 240-card set.

T'was a clever marketing trick that Goudey played in order to sell a lot of cards in 1933......but, it was also a "mean" trick on the collectors.

This Show-n-Tell will hopefully spark some interesting discussion regarding this great Goudey set. Show us some your "oldies-but-goodies" Goudey's.


TED Z
.

I always liked the look of most of the artwork of the 1933 Goudey cards without the red advertising bar at the bottom, like the cards in the re-creation of the World Series sheet shown by Ted. For such a large set the 1933 Goudey were surprisingly error-free (the only change to the set that I know occurred with card #6 Dykes, which has his age corrected on the back bio write-up).

But they did make a change which makes the set not quite as consistent stylistically as, for example, the Cracker Jack sets. I always wondered what the reason was to drop the red bar, which occurred prior to the issuance of the World Series cards. I personally like both versions, but I can see where some collectors might wince at the difference.

Brian

[tedzan]

This pose of Rogers Hornsby is one of my favorite cards in this Goudey set.

Gee guys, am I the only one on this forum with 1933 Goudeys ?

I don't think so, so let us see some of your favorite cards.


TED Z
.

[clydepepper]

More Great Stuff, Ted!

Very Much Appreciated!


Here's the Goudeys I have scans of:

BABE RUTH 1933 Goudey #144 - SGC-70.jpg

BABE RUTH 1933 Goudey #149 - SGC-55.jpg

1933 Goudey BILL TERRY PSA7.jpg

1934 Goudey LOU GEHRIG 37 PSA-5.jpg

1934 Goudey Lou Gehrig no 61 PSA-5.jpg

1933 GOUDEY HERB PENNOCK PSA-8.jpg

1933 Goudey - Tom Zachary PSA-6.jpg

[buymycards]

Hi Ted, I love the 33's. It is difficult to pick a favorite because they are all so interesting. I have about 20 lower grade commons. At one time I was putting the set together and I was up to 108. I sold them and I wish I still had them.

Thank you for the interesting history lesson.

Rick

[Leon]

I need more Goudeys....

[brianp-beme]

A picture is worth a thousand (divided by approximately 8) cards. Slice and Dice 'em, which gets rid of that red advertising bar at bottom, then Rack and Stack 'em for a little artistic flair. A few 1934 cards thrown in as ballast.

Brian

[Shoebox]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Gee guys, am I the only one on this forum with 1933 Goudeys ?

I don't think so, so let us see some of your favorite cards.


TED Z
.

Only have a handful and none better than VG but I have an affinity for this one that apparently some kid used as a tally sheet for something.



I have always wondered if perhaps the success of Goudey's tricks with skip numbering and no card #106 at all didn't perhaps poison the well for them with collectors going forward. Did selling lots of cards in 33 come at the expense of kids/collectors with a sour taste in their mouth towards them in later years?

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

I always liked the look of most of the artwork of the 1933 Goudey cards without the red advertising bar at the bottom, like the cards in the re-creation of the World Series sheet shown by Ted. For such a large set the 1933 Goudey were surprisingly error-free (the only change to the set that I know occurred with card #6 Dykes, which has his age corrected on the back bio write-up).

But they did make a change which makes the set not quite as consistent stylistically as, for example, the Cracker Jack sets. I always wondered what the reason was to drop the red bar, which occurred prior to the issuance of the World Series cards. I personally like both versions, but I can see where some collectors might wince at the difference.

Brian

Hey Brian

Have you ever come across any of the cards from this set's first 7 sheets that have the Big League strip cut off ?

I had a bunch of them [including Ruth (#144)]. I sold most of these cut cards, but I may still have one (or two)
hidden in my archives box. If I find them, I will post them.


TED Z
.

[wolf441]

Here's a few that I've owned:

[brianp-beme]

Ted...I sold most of the stack as seen in my previous post, but did keep these 9 cards. The first four would have had the red advertising bar on the bottom, while the second group of five were issued without that bar. Evidently the original collector of these cut them all to be a consistent size.

Note the outline around Durocher's noggin, the Ott with green background, and the Berg...examples (in my opinion) of the detracting artwork choices seen in some of the 33 Goudey cards. I always liked, however, that dynamic Berg background.

Brian

[LuckyLarry]

I'm about 80% complete with my set needing 46 cards. Here are a couple of my favorites:

[Kawika]

Very interesting post, Ted, and great thread. Thanks for the education. Didn't realize that they distributed cards as late as November. By then baseball would have been in hibernation for at least a month. The '33 Goudeys were one of the first sets I threw together when I took up vintage card collecting a few years back. The cards appealed to me because they depicted many of the players who by the time I was a kid in the 'fifties were the coaches and managers of the day and many others were still household names. I can even lay claim to having seen several of them play if only as "old-timers" at a game in 1959.
I assembled "collector grade" sets of both the '33s and '34s, cracked some slabs and put them into nifty Roop binders. Because I am a bit OC I wasn't going to have a puka in the 106 slot so I found myself a beaterish-verging-on-roadkill Lajoie to get the job done. It's a joy to lay a book of Goudeys on my lap and peruse the pages. The '33s can be seen, quick'n'dirty style, at this link: http://tinyurl.com/jogydhy





I'm so old I saw Wally Pipp play. No lie.

[leaflover]

No need to turn the card over to see what number it is. Too bad.
I wonder if this collector did the same to his other Goudeys.

[clydepepper]

Aside from that mark, that card is in amazing shape for the first card in the set, noting the extensive wear first cards normally are subjected to.

Works of Art

[Mark]

Originally Posted by Kawika

Very interesting post, Ted, and great thread. Thanks for the education. Didn't realize that they distributed cards as late as November. By then baseball would have been in hibernation for at least a month. The '33 Goudeys were one of the first sets I threw together when I took up vintage card collecting a few years back. The cards appealed to me because they depicted many of the players who by the time I was a kid in the 'fifties were the coaches and managers of the day and many others were still household names. I can even lay claim to having seen several of them play if only as "old-timers" at a game in 1959.
I assembled "collector grade" sets of both the '33s and '34s, cracked some slabs and put them into nifty Roop binders. Because I am a bit OC I wasn't going to have a puka in the 106 slot so I found myself a beaterish-verging-on-roadkill Lajoie to get the job done. It's a joy to lay a book of Goudeys on my lap and peruse the pages. The '33s can be seen, quick'n'dirty style, at this link: http://tinyurl.com/jogydhy

]

Great cards, guys. Kawika, having seen Pipp play does date you a little. But at least you never saw Home Run Baker in the field!

[hangman62]

Great info Ted

I always wondered why it took show long to find those #s' in finishing my beat up set

[Kawika]

Originally Posted by Mark

Great cards, guys. Kawika, having seen Pipp play does date you a little. But at least you never saw Home Run Baker in the field!

Baker was in the line-up that day. Can't remember with absolute certainty if he played or not. It was 59 years ago and my memory has a lot of mileage on it. I was more excited by the Rifleman playing than anyone else.

[tedzan]

Hey Guys

Shown here is my real life connection with this Goudey set.

Frank O'Rourke coached our High School BB team (Elizabeth, NJ) during the 1950's.


.


I was a Left Fielder (or Right Fielder) because I had a great glove, and had a strong and accurate arm. My hitting, at best, was intermittent.


TED Z
.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Kawika

Very interesting post, Ted, and great thread. Thanks for the education. Didn't realize that they distributed cards as late as November. By then baseball would have been in hibernation for at least a month.

Thanks, David

The final game of the 1933 WS was Oct 7th. It's my understanding that Goudey designed and printed these 24 cards in two weeks.
So, they may have initially issued these cards as early as late October. But, Goudey did continue issuing them well into November.

Consider the following....in the post-WWII era, we are accustomed to seeing BB cards disappearing by late September and gone by
October because the Gum Co. are issuing their Football cards. This certainly was not the case with Goudey Gum in 1933.


TED Z
.

[PhillyFan1883]

Hi David,

I hope all is well. Would you ever consider selling your Lajoie? Tried to message but no luck. If anyone knows how to reach David “Kawika” from page 2 of this thread please let me know. Happy collecting.

[Kawika]

Hello Connor: No intention of breaking up my '33 Goudey set just yet. As I mentioned in my post from 2016 I'm a bit on the OC side so calling the set "complete" at 239 cards wasn't going to work for me. [Same reason I never undertook the T206 Monster - four mega-expensive holes in the set was a deal-killer]. But there is hope. I'm getting along and one of these years I'll probably cash out of the hobby. The plan is for Al C to drive a U-Haul up to Vancouver Island and auction off the works. There'll be a killer Love of the Game catalog - The Kawika Collection has a nice ring to it - then look for me in the obituaries.

I took the pm function private a couple of years ago due to the persistence of some of the ranks here in trying to separate me from my cards. I like to think of myself as a cordial fellow - I have always enjoyed friendly communications about cardboard but a couple of guys were real dicks and I just got tired of dealing with it.

[ALBB]

HaHa dicks

[conor912]

Originally Posted by Kawika

Hello Connor: No intention of breaking up my '33 Goudey set just yet. As I mentioned in my post from 2016 I'm a bit on the OC side so calling the set "complete" at 239 cards wasn't going to work for me. [Same reason I never undertook the T206 Monster - four mega-expensive holes in the set was a deal-killer]. But there is hope. I'm getting along and one of these years I'll probably cash out of the hobby. The plan is for Al C to drive a U-Haul up to Vancouver Island and auction off the works. There'll be a killer Love of the Game catalog - The Kawika Collection has a nice ring to it - then look for me in the obituaries.

I took the pm function private a couple of years ago due to the persistence of some of the ranks here in trying to separate me from my cards. I like to think of myself as a cordial fellow - I have always enjoyed friendly communications about cardboard but a couple of guys were real dicks and I just got tired of dealing with it.

David, I always enjoy seeing your collection. Consider two Conors interested in your Lajoie!

Hoping to pick one up to "complete" my set before the centennial!

[BBB]

I've always wondered what the 106 Leo Durocher was all about. Haven't even seen a picture of it in years. Heard theory is it was a proof of what was supposed to go to market before the Lajoie scheme was cooked up. Any other theories or awareness if this thing is circulated or in a vault ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hangman62]

ted

how about Eliz bb - lenny green

[mrmopar]

I don't have it yet, but I was finally able to add a Ruth #181 to my collection in a nice, displayable condition, for a budget minded collector. It has a pin hole in it but is otherwise quite nice. It will go well with my pin-holed 34 Goudey Gehrig! Probably the only way I'd be willing to afford either.

I have always been fascinated by this card since I was first introduced to it, probably by a TCMA, Pacific Trading Cards or Renata Galasso catlog.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by BBB

I've always wondered what the 106 Leo Durocher was all about. Haven't even seen a picture of it in years. Heard theory is it was a proof of what was supposed to go to market before the Lajoie scheme was cooked up. Any other theories or awareness if this thing is circulated or in a vault ?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Leo Durocher #106 card is not a "proof" card.

I closely examined this card in 1981, while visiting with George Moll at his home in Holland, PA. He handed me two Durocher cards from his 1933 Goudey
set (George Moll's favorite set). One card had #147 on it, and the other card had #106 on it.

1st for some history...... the George Moll Advertising Agency (Philadelphia) was the force behind all the Play Ball and Bowman Sports & Non-Sports cards
issued by the Bowman Gum Co. (1938 - 1955). Moll employed 12 professional artists who designed all the cards.

In 1938, George Moll convinced Warren Bowman that he should market his popular Bubble Gum product with trading cards. And that led to "the start of a
beautiful friendship".

If I recall correctly, it's my understanding that his Agency produced this Durocher card as a space-filler for Goudey collectors who didn't have a #106 card.


TED Z
.

[brianp-beme]

Great info Ted. That Durocher card has always been a huge mystery within the hobby, and it is surprising that its notoriety pales in comparison to the Lajoie card.

One of the aspects of the 1933 Goudey issue that I think is worth noting is that quality control (or perhaps it can be attributed to more restricted access to production errors) seems to have been much tighter compared to the T206 set. Almost all the cards available are reasonably in register, not missing color passes and not miscut. Cards with printing issues are really hard to come by. Below is one of the few that I have noticed. I imagine there are plenty of others out there, but certainly nowhere near the percentage level of the T206 set.

Brian

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Great info Ted. That Durocher card has always been a huge mystery within the hobby, and it is surprising that its notoriety pales in comparison to the Lajoie card.

One of the aspects of the 1933 Goudey issue that I think is worth noting is that quality control (or perhaps it can be attributed to more restricted access to production errors) seems to have been much tighter compared to the T206 set. Almost all the cards available are reasonably in register, not missing color passes and not miscut. Cards with printing issues are really hard to come by. Below is one of the few that I have noticed. I imagine there are plenty of others out there, but certainly nowhere near the percentage level of the T206 set.

Brian

Brian....thanks for posting your Lefty O'Doul card.

I completely agree with your observation here. Since 1982, I have completed two 1933 Goudey sets; and, I seldom have come across flawed printing in these cards.

Lefty O'Doul is another one of my favorite 1933 Goudey cards. First series card as a Dodger, and his World Series card (post #1) depicts him as a NY Giants player.






TED Z
.

[tedzan]

1933 Goudey BB wrapper



TED Z
.

[Yoda]

I completely agree with your observation here. Since 1982, I have completed two 1933 Goudey sets; and, I seldom have come across flawed printing in these cards.

Lefty O'Doul is another one of my favorite 1933 Goudey cards. First series card as a Dodger, and his World Series card (post #1) depicts him as a NY Giants player.
There is a very interesting Goudey Ruth #181 misprint in the current LOTG auction. Surprized it made it out of quality control, given the tough standards Goudey imposed. Perhaps considering who the player was somebody in the sheet cutting room pocketed it before the card could be given a final rejection.





TED Z
.[/QUOTE]

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by tedzan

The Leo Durocher #106 card is not a "proof" card.

I closely examined this card in 1981, while visiting with George Moll at his home in Holland, PA. He handed me two Durocher cards from his 1933 Goudey
set (George Moll's favorite set). One card had #147 on it, and the other card had #106 on it.

1st for some history...... the George Moll Advertising Agency (Philadelphia) was the force behind all the Play Ball and Bowman Sports & Non-Sports cards
issued by the Bowman Gum Co. (1938 - 1955). Moll employed 12 professional artists who designed all the cards.

In 1938, George Moll convinced Warren Bowman that he should market his popular Bubble Gum product with trading cards. And that led to "the start of a
beautiful friendship".

If I recall correctly, it's my understanding that his Agency produced this Durocher card as a space-filler for Goudey collectors who didn't have a #106 card.


TED Z
.

Ted -

You are constantly amazing me with your vast knowledge and experience.

What great stories!!

I consider myself lucky as heck to be here to enjoy it all.

Thank You, Sir - for sharing!

-Raymond

[tedzan]

Hey Raymond

I'll try to continue amazing you....so, stay tuned to my future posts

Anyway, I really appreciate your very complimentary words.


TED Z
.

[tedzan]

Ruth vs Root




October 1, 1932....Wrigley Field was the setting of one of the most talked about scenarios in the history of Baseball......Ruth's called HR.

He drove the ball approx. 470 feet into the centerfield seats. It was his 15th (and last) World Series HR.

Other notable events occurred in this 3rd game between the Yankees and the Cubs.....I'll leave it up to you guys to chime in with them ?


TED Z
.

[BBB]

Originally Posted by tedzan

The Leo Durocher #106 card is not a "proof" card.



I closely examined this card in 1981, while visiting with George Moll at his home in Holland, PA. He handed me two Durocher cards from his 1933 Goudey

set (George Moll's favorite set). One card had #147 on it, and the other card had #106 on it.



1st for some history...... the George Moll Advertising Agency (Philadelphia) was the force behind all the Play Ball and Bowman Sports & Non-Sports cards

issued by the Bowman Gum Co. (1938 - 1955). Moll employed 12 professional artists who designed all the cards.



In 1938, George Moll convinced Warren Bowman that he should market his popular Bubble Gum product with trading cards. And that led to "the start of a

beautiful friendship".



If I recall correctly, it's my understanding that his Agency produced this Durocher card as a space-filler for Goudey collectors who didn't have a #106 card.





TED Z

.

Fascinating stuff! Can barely fathom what it should be worth if one actually hit the market again. I bet it would still be undervalued if compared to Lajoie for rareness. Which is a bit of a bummer as it's part of the same legend as the Lajoie. Thanks for Intel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by BBB

Fascinating stuff! Can barely fathom what it should be worth if one actually hit the market again. I bet it would still be undervalued if compared to Lajoie for rareness. Which is a bit of a bummer as it's part of the same legend as the Lajoie. Thanks for Intel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hi Bryan

There appears to be less Durocher (#106) cards available than there are Lajoie (#106) cards. However, the Lajoie card's story has been "hyped" for decades.
Therefore, this Durocher card's value (plus lower demand) will never approach any considerably high $$$$ value.

Glad to share my Durocher story with you....and, the members of this great forum.


TED Z
.

[tedzan]

The Jablonowski card in my set has the official Copyright stamp on the back of this card.
Does anyone else on this forum have Goudey's with the Copyright stamp on them ?

If so, how's about posting them here.


TED Z
.

[BBB]

Originally Posted by tedzan

Hi Bryan



There appears to be less Durocher (#106) cards available than there are Lajoie (#106) cards. However, the Lajoie card's story has been "hyped" for decades.

Therefore, this Durocher card's value (plus lower demand) will never approach any considerably high $$$$ value.



Glad to share my Durocher story with you....and, the members of this great forum.





TED Z

.

Absolutely agree on logic, but would still guess a Durocher 106 might go for 5-10k. Although it's way south of Lajoie , it should still surpass the yellow Ruth . I could be far off base , but that's my wild guess.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[canjond]

Ted - I always thought the #106 Durocher came from a few early print runs where all of the cards were "misnumbered" - or maybe more accurately - numbered differently before the final sequence was established. In fact, I recall Woody Gelman owned a partial sheet with the misnumbered cards.

[canjond]

Just found an old REA auction description - this may be where I recall reading about the sheet:

"...A small number of similarly misnumbered 1933 Goudey cards have been seen over the years. These cards were never actually issued in packs. All were handcut from the very same early Goudey proof sheet as the famous 1933 Goudey #106 Durocher card. This sheet (actually, partial sheet, as the entire sheet of 24 cards did not survive) was part of the collection of legendary hobby pioneer Woody Gelman. All cards from this sheet had numbers which were different than those actually issued. The one card that was especially noteworthy was the Leo Durocher card, because by chance that card shared the same card number as the famous 1933 Goudey #106 Lajoie, and this one card is very well known...".

http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/...-jack-russell/

[tedzan]

Hi Jon

I have to call Rob regarding that description. It is quite different from my understanding of the source of the #106 Durocher card.


TED Z
.

[jason.1969]

What a great thread for learning about Goudey cards and seeing some nice ones. Here is my favorite Goudey pickup from 2016.

Ted, is it possible the ones missing the red bar had originally been planned for the 1934 set but were perhaps repurposed into the 1933 set? I suppose my conjecture dies if any cards from prior series were bar-less as well.

[prestigecollectibles]

I've picked up almost 40 cards to add to my set. I can't understand why so many sellers on eBay and elsewhere only show scans of the fronts. It is so frustrating trying to buy cards with no back scans.

[Leon]

Great Goudey info, guys.
As for no back scans, It is sellers just being lazy. Many times I pass over auctions with no back scans. It's usually not worth the hassle....

Originally Posted by prestigecollectibles

I've picked up almost 40 cards to add to my set. I can't understand why so many sellers on eBay and elsewhere only show scans of the fronts. It is so frustrating trying to buy cards with no back scans.

[jason.1969]

Originally Posted by tedzan

...By the end of the Summer of 1933 you diligently put together a set of 191 different subjects...

I have seen in a couple places that the first 7-8 sheets were released by early July. However, four cards from Sheet 7 demonstrate that this sheet could not have been out before August.

The most notable of these cards is the Rogers Hornsby, depicting him as the Browns manager (rather than a Cardinals player), a move that took place on July 26. The latest of the four was Bob Smith, who moved from the Reds to the Braves on July 31.

I am not contradicting Ted's story, since the "end of summer" may just depend on where a person lives. However, the Nov 1970 issue of the Ballcard Collector also included a firsthand account of the set that had Sheet 8 (!) appearing by early July.

Depending how much time we allow for printing, cutting, packaging, distributing, etc., Sheet 7 would not have appeared until mid-August.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by jason.1969

I have seen in a couple places that the first 7-8 sheets were released by early July. However, four cards from Sheet 7 demonstrate that this sheet could not have been out before August.

The most notable of these cards is the Rogers Hornsby, depicting him as the Browns manager (rather than a Cardinals player), a move that took place on July 26. The latest of the four was Bob Smith, who moved from the Reds to the Braves on July 31.

I am not contradicting Ted's story, since the "end of summer" may just depend on where a person lives. However, the Nov 1970 issue of the Ballcard Collector also included a firsthand account of the set that had Sheet 8 (!) appearing by early July.

Depending how much time we allow for printing, cutting, packaging, distributing, etc., Sheet 7 would not have appeared until mid-August.

Jason, I enjoyed the write up you did on these. Your research on sheet
7 is in line with the dates King came up with using the copyright
stamps and patent registration cards.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=81615