It's Standard Catalog cover time again

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob Lemke 

It worked so well last year, I'm again seeking the forum's help in deciding on cards (and getting their image) for the cover of the 2005 Standard Catalog of Baseball Cards. This year's cover theme can be summarized as two-player game-action pictures on cards. The central image will be the 1953 Bowman Pee Wee Reese. I've got a great 2004 card from UD and a Kalamazoo Bats card to flank the Reese on the front cover. For the back I have a minor league card. What I need now are cards with that type of action in the following genres: 1) any era regional; 2) 1990s or 2000s chase/insert card 3) Topps card of 1950s-1980s, and 4) any 1930s card. Your suggestions are most welcome.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay Miller

Bob--I have a great image for you. It is an unlisted two player SF Hess California League card(the photo type--I don't remember the number). I'll post it tonight if I get the chance.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jay Miller

A beauty, eh!

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike Williams

ala E93, 94, 98.

[Archive]

Posted By: Glen V

Not the prettiest card. Maybe someone out there has a nicer one...

[Archive]

Posted By: Reid

A large percentage of people may not agree, and the date is a year or two prior to the "1930's" designation, but I really like the Churchman's Ruth card for something like this.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe_G.

That is one beautiful SF Hess card!

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

T202 Cobb sliding into Jimmy Austin center panel

1936 Fine Pen of Mack and McGraw playing that game with the bat handle where you try to end up holding the bat's knob (what's that game called?)

[Archive]

Posted By: JC

How about:

1933 Zeenut Dimaggio or anybody with coupon?
Postcards are getting HOT (Rose,Novelty,Dietsch etc..)
1953 Briggs (Mantle)
Maybe a nice 19th Century team Cabinet or Horner PIC.
A-Rod Minor League Auto cards (Classic)
Caramel cards are HOT maybe E107 or E94 (W/overprint)

Bob if you need any PICS you may use them from my gallery...

http://www.zmotive.com/gallery/jccards

[Archive]

Posted By: Cycleback

Jay, that is indeed one fine card.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

[Archive]

Posted By: ramram

They don't get much better than that!

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony N.

Usually I'm content to lurk, but have to say Jay's Hess is one of the nicest cards I've ever seen.

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris

Awesome card!!!

[Archive]

Posted By: Kevin O

Ditto. The card is remarkable, Jay! Please pardon my ignorance, but do you or anyone else know the year?

[Archive]

Posted By: Kevin Cummings

Bob:

Geez, nothing could top Jay's, but......

there are a bunch of nice cards from the early 1970s Topps sets that might be good (World Series or playoffs), but in the Pee Wee Reese vein, there is an action shot of Cookie Rojas in the 1971 set that has him leaping over a sliding runner.

Kevin

[Archive]

Posted By: ty_cobb

71 black borders are the cards I collected as
a boy, I always liked the Thurman Munson action
card.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

regional Issue 1947 Homoginized Bond Bread Jaqckie Robinnson set:

Japanese college card, c. 1930:

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

Where is the second player in that Jackie Robinson card? My eyesight is getting worse as I get older.

[Archive]

Posted By: Nickinvegas

I love that Rojas card! 71' topps!

Also, I was going to suggest the 38'Diamond Star Al Lopez card.

Nick

[Archive]

Posted By: Patrick McMenemy

Here is my vote for a beautiful 2 player card:

Chief Meyers at Bat Horizontal Turkey Red:

[Archive]

Posted By: John Spencer

One of my all-time favorite 2 player cards, even though it was posed in a studio and not on the diamond, is the Old Judge of Billy Nash and Hoss Radbourne.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

1) There IS no second player. I cheated.
2) Good thing I don't want that card or anything...

[Archive]

Posted By: J Levine

I personally love that Hess...

There are several '70s cards like the Rojas action shot. Someone mentioned the Munson which I like too.

For the '30s, some of the Goudeys might be nice like the one with Hack Wilson sliding into home.

Here is a thought though...do the prices of the cover cards tend to go up a little (more so than their set coutnerparts?) every year if they are featured and gain noteriety? Just a thought.

[Archive]

Posted By: brian p

A couple of 1930 two player cards that I have always thought were cool are both Diamond Stars--#70 Hal Trosky and #96 Lew Riggs. Actually they are both two players plus an umpire, but no one said there couldn't be a monkey in a suit present.

I currently am only able to provide an ebay link to one of the cards--the Trosky (scanner difficulties on my end). Even though it is a lower grade copy, I think it gives a better idea than a couple of other examples currently on ebay of this unusual action card because the colors are much bolder.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2793635281&category=31722

If I get things up and running I will post scans of nice examples of both of these cards.

Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob Lemke

Thanks much for all the great suggestions. I will definitely try to find a spot for the newly discovered Hess. Others that seem to fill the bill are a T202 center panel suggested by Adam, the 1971 Rojas and the Diamond Star Lew Riggs or maybe Buddy Myer, though I know I had a good scan of a Riggs around somewhere. If anyone can think of a good new insert/chase card with a two-player action photo, that would about complete the list. Thanks again!

[Archive]

Posted By: brian p

Ok, here is a decent example of the Riggs card.



Brian

[Archive]

Posted By: David

Mr lemke,
with the proliferation of mondern sets to the point where 2003 cards can easily take more printed space then all the pre 1950 sets combine will the catalog eventually be broken up into volumes?

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

1) It's not cost-efficient.
2) You can always tear it apart itself, and heal its wounds.

I always keep mine whole--you never can tell when you're going to want to look up a Ben Greve rookie, or something. Most likely or something.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

At some point in the near future the catalog will be too thick to include everything, so a decision will have to be made as to where the "cut" is made.

For me, the ideal guide would have all sports in one volume, but would only include pre-1971. (baseball, football, hockey, basketball, boxing, track...no golf)

[Archive]

Posted By: david

that was pretty much my point. at some point, probably in the near future, the big book will be too big and it will have to be broken up

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob Lemke

Unless something changes drastically in the hobby book market, don't look for the Standard Catalog to get much larger than the current 1,700+ pages. That's about all you can print and keep the price under $40. Until the card companies quit flooding the market with new stuff, cuts will have to be made. Look for modern "non-card" items to go first, along with one-card "sets," Broders, etc. The master plan is to migrate this type of collectible to the Standard Catalog of Sports Memorabilia; an every-other-year title. I've got a couple of other tricks up my sleeve but I don't want to tip off the competition.

[Archive]

Posted By: Cycleback

I very much like Scott's idea of having vintage multi-sports in one volume-- baseball, football, boxing, hockey, etc.

[Archive]

Posted By: Reid Bruce

What would really be nice is a "made to order" version of the SCD in which you could order sections of the book to fit your collecting needs...or if a company could ever figure out how to prevent electronic duplication, you could even order it over the web and download it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

I hope I'm not too late. I'd like to nominate the R312 Vaughn/Wagner for the 1930s category. It shows Pirates Hall of Fame shortstop Arky Vaughn sliding into, and being tagged by, Pirates Hall of Fame shortstop Honus Wagner (then a coach). I believe a black & white version of the card is also available in the R311 leather series.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

Gee, I've found it three times now...the third time, admittedly, was much harder. I dislike locks, erasures, hidings, and other unnecessary rules and regulations. If there were no reason for my complaint, why not just let it stand and look ridiculous?

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

...is to keep the forum cleaned-up. Communication is enhanced when all threads contain semi-relevant information, and when that information is posted accurately, author id'd, and in the proper spot.

Lately, Julie, your posts haven't conformed to any of the above, which is I'm sure why Bill got rid of it.

Thanks Bill

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

You never think my posts are relevent to ANYthing, so THAT'S no news! The reason my last post seems so irrelevant is that Bill erased 4 posts, one of his own, one of Bob Lemke's and two of mine that preceded it!

I know, if you had your way, I would be permanently gagged and thrown out of here. That's no news, either!

Actually, I wouldn't mind all that much--in a Forum where you can't say something relevant and true about an important person, it hardly seems worth
contributing anymore, anyway...
So go ahead if you want; ban me for life. I'll miss all of you, sometimes!

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

I have to go with a T202 card all the center panels are great. I also vote for the Riggs card. %0's Card has to go to 56 Topps Billy Pierce #160, It shows a bunt being played, how often to we see that. The 56 set is full of great action in the background.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bill Cornell

Julie-

Get a grip. Bob posted here to solicit ideas for photos - you somehow warped that into a personal affront over the format of the SCD catalog. He didn't call you a fool or anything else. Your posts, my response, and one of Bob's asking for clarification were all deleted, since the source of them was completely mistaken.

This is a link to the post you keep referring to: http://www.network54.com/Hide/Forum/thread?forumid=153652&messageid=1073482359&lp=1073859698. Bob stated exactly the same things he did here about the catalog.

Bill

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

I'm sorry. It's not important enough to keep FIGHTING about, --and for you to say it didn't exist, after I gave you the link, either. The link you just gave me is the same thread that "Jan 7, 2004, 5:47 P.M." gets you! For Bob to deny that he said it was sort of dumb, too--I mean, there it is!

Whether Bob is now less firm about the posibility of change in the format of the 2005 Catalogue--I really don't care anymore! He'll do with it what he or the people with the dough want him to, and I'll beep buying it, because it's the best guide there is.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

I don't always follow it myself, but in theory it should work: type up your post, then walk away from your computer....

dum de dum de dum ...... fix a sandwich ..... pour a drink .......


Go back and re-read your post. Does it still make sense? If not, then delete it.