Jason,

I don't know who, or what, you know over at TCDB, but I see the correction to the S74-1 white, ad-backed silk checklist has now been made as well, and the five non-existent player/team silks removed from their checklist. Thank you!!!

I'm assuming the fact that Bob Lemke and his SCD staff had previously noted that these five particular silks were questioned as ever existing, and the additional fact that no one had ever been able to supply even a single image of one of those five silks to be shown on the TCDB site as pretty conclusive evidence those five never existed. The correction to the S74-2 colored silk checklist properly naming Tony Smith instead of Happy Smith is much easier to prove simply by looking at the silk itself, and the Baseball Reference site pages for Tony and Happy. It is also interesting to note that this similar error was made in other TCDB set checklists, as pointed out by Todd/nolemmings, that mistakenly named Happy/Hap instead of Tony, in the PX7 Domino Discs and P2 Sweet Caporal pins checklists as well. The SCD catalogs and the Pre-War Cards site checklists for these two sets (PX7 and P2) also show the same error naming Happy/Hap Smith, instead of the correct Tony Smith. In these cases though, the error was not duplicated on the OBC site checklists.

Jason, since you're so good at getting these changes made, here's another inaccuracy (or at least an omission) I had reported to the TCDB site for the S74-1 white, ad-backed silk set as well, also involving Tony Smith. The white, ad-backed S74-1 silk set checklist on the TCDB site accurately shows a white silk for Tony Smith with the Brooklyn Superbas. However, the set also includes another white, ad-backed silk using the exact same Tony Smith image and name, but this time showing his team as the Boston Rustlers. This is an uncorrected error as Tony Smith never played for the Boston Rustlers, but my guess has always been that someone putting the set together to begin with mistakenly mixed-up Tony with a third different person/player named Smith, in this case Harry Smith, who did play for the Boston Rustlers in 1910. The TCDB site should list this Smith-Rustlers white silk in their Error/Variation section for this S74-1 set I would think. And here's the Baseball Reference page and image for Harry Smith as evidence and proof that a third, entirely different ballplayer named Smith existed back then.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/p...mithha03.shtml

If you can get the TCDB site to also look into making this correction/update to their S74-1 set page, that would be super as well. Oh, and in regard to the previous correction TCDB made to their S74-1 set checklist in removing the five player/team silks that actually don't exist, can you let someone know they also need to change the total number of silks they show as being in the set then, from the 92 they previously listed, down to the correct total of only 87 different white, ad-backed silks in the S74-1 set? Thanks.

Hey Jason, if you have someone's ear over on that site, then great. Always best to have the correct, updated information out there, for the benefit of people looking to use such sites. Thanks again for you help.

The BBREF entry for Harry shows him with the Boston Doves in 1910, but no Smiths at all with the 1911 Boston Rustlers. Not sure of the lineage of the teams, but in either case, I added a UER note to the card.

A change request has been submitted to adjust the set total.

Yes, I knew that Boston was referred to as the Doves in 1910, just a Freudian slip on my part in referring to them as the Boston Rustlers in 1910 as well. But whoever was creating the set probably realized that Boston changed to the Rustlers name after the end of the 1910 season, and may have just mistakenly noted someone with the last name of Smith had also played for the Boston team in 1910, and erroneously switched the team name to the Rustlers assuming the player was going to be with the Boston NL team in the 1911 season then as well. In fact, the name change of the Rustlers pretty much cements the fact that these S74-1 white silks were not issued until 1911. The former owner of the Doves team had died in 1909, and his family finally ended up selling the team following the end of the 1910 baseball season. And then a month later, on December 17, 1910, the team was again sold to a group headed by William Hepburn Russell, who was the one that changed the Doves name to the Rustlers. It seems literally impossible that even if Russell had announced the team's name change to the Boston Rustlers the same day he bought the team, that the people creating and issuing the silks would have been able to make the team name change and still been able to get the silks out into distribution before the end of 1910. From the December 17th purchase date till the 31st would have only given them two weeks, at most, to learn of and show the team name change on the silks, and still get them out before the end of 1910. Given the Christmas and New Year's holidays along with the extremely short period of time that otherwise remained in the year, I don't see how the S74-1 white silks could have possibly been created and shipped prior to 1911. Yet when you look at some other sites for cards, like the OBC or the Pre-War Cards sites, they still continue to erroneously show the S74-1 white silk set as being issued in 1909-10. They clearly could not have been issued that early, based on the timing of the Doves to Rustlers name change. TCDB accurately lists the S74-1 white silks as a 1911 issue. Regardless of whether the team was named the Doves or the Rustlers, the Tony Smith - Boston Rustlers white, ad-backed silk is a definite error, and should be correctly shown as such. Thanks for submitting this additional change.

And thanks for also submitting the additional correction to the revised number of silks comprising the S74-1 set as 87, instead of the incorrect previous number of 92, which erroneously included the five white, ad-backed silks that actually never existed.