Wagner??
 

Attached is a September 18th, 1908 photo of Bresnahan Catching against a "lefty" batter. Is this the only known photo of Honus Wagner batting left handed? What are your thoughts?

http://i947.photobucket.com/albums/a...agwaterbig.jpg

I'm not a Wagner expert. Was he known to have batted lefthanded?

/

I found this online and assume they were talking about this photo since the photo itself did not come up. Take it for what it's worth:
Larry Larse at a Simnasium.com forum posted this Photo of Hall-of-Famer, Honus Wagner, a right handed hitter, batting left handed. Hall of Fame catcher Roger Bresnahan is also shown in this photo, making it even more disirable. This photo was shown to SABR (The Society for American Baseball Research), where both Wagner and Bresnahan were identified in the photo. Apparently, Wagner did, on very rare occasions, bat left handed out of frustration, when he was having a particularly bad day at the plate. This is the only known photo of the “Flying Dutchman” hitting from the left side. This at bat was captured at the Polo Grounds during a Giants-Pirates game on Sept. 18, 1908.

I found that here: http://www.halfwaytoconcord.com/honu...g-left-handed/

Ben, is this one you just picked up?

Wow, if that story proves true then it's a fantastic piece.

From the side view, the face does look like Hans, but I am surprised that he is that slender across the shoulder.
Great pic Ben.

I was watching this one on ebay. I wasn't sure who was in the photo. I put my bid in at $28. I was sniped. :)

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=221057149168

David..Wags did bat lefty at times.. ck this out..read the last paragraph about Wagner here:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?ni...pg=2047,525889

The same note that a reviewer makes about his biography:

"Although there is a tendency to think that Wagner could hit any pitcher who ever lived, he tells of one hurler, Jack Taylor, who gave him more trouble than any other. So much trouble, that Wagner once turned around and batted left-handed against the right-handed Taylor. Although Wagner says he "swung like a woman" he also punched the ball over the first base bag for a double. Other anecdotes include the time Jack Murray of the Giants made a game-saving catch by a flash of lightning, a bit on the game (and the box score) that clinched the 1901 pennant, Bill Klem tossing Clarke from a game for saying he was "a model umpire," and much more."

Mike.. I did purchase this yes. Either way, it is a beautiful photo I thought. If it is Wagner, then it is really special.

The batter in this photo has been identified as both Wagner and Owen Wilson at different times. I tend to think it more likely to be Wilson, who had a similar nose to Wagner but was also listed at 6' 2", 185 pounds. Bresnahan was 5' 9" 200 lbs, similar to Wagner's 5' 10 1/2" and probably 200-210 lbs. by 1908. Batter looks quite a bit taller than the catcher in this photo (tough to tell because they are both slightly bent over). I do have a photo of Wagner batting left in a pre game photo, but it won't load at this time. Not positive, but I'm giving 3-1 odds it not being Wagner.

Hey, is this the same picture? http://www.retrosnapshots.com/sports...-york-5x7.html

Who identified it as Wilson? Where is it published?

Why's he look smaller compared to other Wagner photos from 1908?

Is it or isn't it? That is the question?
 

What a great photo. Love it! Also love the mystery surounding it, hope
it turns out to be the real thing.

What photos are you referring to?

I am not claiming to be a Wagner expect but after reviewing the photo if I were a betting man I would put my money on that it is not Honus Wagner. If you compare what you can see of the batters face the small amount that you can alongside a more recent card showing Owen Wilsons face the similarities are striking although his nose is similar to Wagners, it has more of a pronounced hook to the tip much like the batter. The other facts that lead me to the conclusion that is most likely not Wagner is a comparison of the batters legs. The photos I have reviewed of full body shots of Wagner show that he has a thicker build broader shoulders as stated by others, but he has thicker calves than the batter as well. Know to be barrel chested if this was Wagner is almost like a pre and post steroid allegation Barry Bonds comparison of the two different players in question. The batters build is simply too small to be Wagner.
Attached are photos for comparison

There are 4 books on Wagner, 3 of which are biographies. Also Lieb's Pittsburgh Pirates, and a couple SABR Pubs. Not sure where I read it, but in one of those, probably 10 or more years ago. I asked one of those authors to chime in with his opinion, as he posts on this board from time to time.

I was going to use this photo for my avatar, great photo! Wish i had seen it come up for auction.

I hear you on the bulkier pics but not the nose. The batters nose looks nothing like wilson's to me. Below is a 1908 Wagner without a big sweater on. His calves look pretty much the same. http://ourgame.mlblogs.com/2012/03/1...etrics-part-i/

This is the only comparable 'left side' photo of Wagner I could find, and it resembles Ben's picture a lot:

http://www.clpgh.org/exhibit/images/gif/flying.gif

Also, from a common-sense perspective, it's unlikely a photographer would have set up on this side for a right-handed hitter, especially Wagner - taking a photograph involved more preparation back then, so the photographer would have wanted to be on the correct side. He was probably expecting Wagner to be batting right-handed and got surprised. Given the 'wrong side' set-up, to me that builds a better case for it being Wagner.

Thanks Scott! This is great feedback!! There are a lot of no votes without reasons. I have seen nothing to dispute sabr's findings thus far.

Can you scan the back of the photo? Looks like they mention Bresnahan but not Wagner, at least from the scan available on the Ebay listing. Looks like "Sul(?) at bat" below the Culver sticker.

Own Wilson was in Wedding Crashers, I don't think that looks like him.....however....

I don't see a date on here, how did u get that?

Does anyone have pix of the Pirates sox from that season, the stripes on it could confirm if it's a Pitt player or not.

That could read "Gill at bat"....although Gill was a righty as well.

The date has been established/ stamped on original photo which also corresponds to sabr and loc.

I do not believe the person in the original photo is Wagner. The batter in question has a larger, more egg shaped head. Look at the distance from his ears to the back of his head... Much more than the picture of Wagner above.

If the date is established then
 

I vote for Wagner....

looks like a terrible stance, so makes sense it's someone who turned around....any of u play ball and flip to the other side.....that pretty much is your stance.

Although in the old days they had some pretty bad stances.....so....

and it looks like the ump & catcher are smirking, maybe laughing cuz Wagner said we are getting swept and I have done nothing from the right side today.

Same photo.. The person writing on photo might not have a clue after it was developed. The library of congress doesn't mention anyone either. I have no idea what that word is.. Not sure if the person Who inscribed it did either.

The picture of the head is facing away in the original vs towards the camera in this.. Completely diff angle when viewing the head and ear.

Yes, I took that into account. The known Wagner is a straight side shot. The unknown is rotated slightly. Not nearly enough to account for difference in head shape, IMO. Look at the difference in how the hat fits the back of his head.

I can see the catcher kind of smirking, but the ump looks like he's shouting something.

I think the batter is too small to be Wagner
 

I think the nose belongs to Fred Clarke.

I can't decide. It's hard to discern the width of the shoulders because it looks like the batter is twisting his body.

Maybe a clue lies in the socks? Does another pic of Wagner exist with similar socks?

Here's a closer view...

How would the shoes decide it's Wagner? I'm sure the socks were issued with the uniforms, so then all Pirates players would have the same type of socks.

And how did the SABR decide it was Wagner?

The socks won't decide it's Wagner, but it could be a clue.

He means the way the socks are worn...some players wore their pants longer, socks down, etc.

Joshua

PS I vote not wagner...sure with I could read the inscription...sul at bat still does not make sense because sullivan is a righty also.

I am trying to be objective(seeing as I have the photo:)). I would obviously love it to be Wagner(no doubt). I definitely see nothing that disputes it being Wagner other than simple opinions. The biggest arument is the batter's build(not sure it is off). Everyone has their opinion but I am sure SABR had some reasoning why they deemed it Wagner.

As far as the writing on the back goes, I crossed that to everyone batting in those two games and nothing makes sense. Therefore, I dismiss it completely as anyone in culver after it was taken could have guessed/made a mistake etc. Again, the Library of Congress doesn't even say who it is. It would have been much easier if the names would have been engraved in the negative like many of the BAINS. Oh well.. the controversy continues. Thank you all for your thoughts and opinions.

Clarke
 

Personally, I think it looks like Fred Clarke. Clarke batted left handed and was on the Pirates in 1908 (in my experience - the simplest and most likely answer is usually the right one).

I have included a picture of Clarke batting (unfortunately - it is from his front side). To me the stance looks the same as the original photo - left arm tucked in, leg position, and he has a prominent nose as well.

I hope it can be proven to be Wagner for the owner - that would be a cool item.

But in my opinion its Fred Clarke.

Andy

+1

Having been involved in photo ID for a number of relatively recent SABR publications, I can tell you that in the past SABR has misidentified many photos.

That said, there are a few specific facial similarities between the batter and Wagner that can be pointed out, so it may be him. With the reference photos I have at hand, I can't be sure. Some very clear high quality profiles of Wagner would help.

No - the difference in angle is substantial. It would be very difficult even for a forensic expert meaningfully compare the ear-to-back-of-head distances in those two photos.

I am not sure if these will help for reference or not but I will post them.

The post regarding Fred Clarke has some weight to it, I felt it was possibly Wilson but here is a high quality of Clarke batting and it also has alot of similarities. This is a little bit higher quality than the small photo of Clarke batting.

I would make a case that the batter can be Wagner as follows, though I will admit it bothers me that the batter's belt buckle is way over on his right side - not common for Wagner. In any case, there is no indication from feature comparison that he's not Wagner.

I'll also add that the poll question is flawed - there is no check box for "it can be Wagner."
http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s.../Wagner2-1.png

It appears that Wagner had a prominent bridge, which I don't see in the photo in question. How about Roy Thomas? Or Lefty Leifield? Or the switching hitting infielder with a high OBP Charlie Starr?

The prominent bridge is just below the orange arrow in all 3 photos.The change in slope that occurs at that point as it moves towards the spot between the eyes is visible in the center photo. It doesn't (and shouldn't) look exactly the same as in the other two photos because the viewpoint is very much below and behind his head.

The Thomas and Leifield noses don't match. I don't have a good enough image of Starr for comparison.

How about adding one choice;

voted for Wagner now thinks it's Clarke.

100% it's clarke now the ear lobe confirms it and the nose is closer to his as well. Not to mention Wagner had a lot of gray hair.

CLARKE!

I thought it would be obvious enough from what I posted, but the batter vs. Clarke noses are markedly different in both size and shape. Both Wagner and the batter had enormous noses. The batter can't possibly be Clarke.

Hey Ben. Cancel that request for adding one more choice to the poll.

There's an old saying with baseball photos (which means I said it once three years ago). It goes 100% sure is, and 90% is the same as isn't. This in particular applied to 1800s tintypes and such where the question was was that anonymous guy in a baseball-like uniform really a baseball player. There were cases where we'd say "If he was holding a baseball and a bat we'd be sure he was a baseball player, but he isn't so we can't be sure."

You dismissed my comments regarding the apparent size and shape of the back of the head and the distance from the ear to the back of the head because "the angles were so different even a forensic person could not tell."

Yet, would not the same apply to the apparent length and depth of the bridge of the nose? No need to answer... It's a rhetorical question.

It's only a rhetorical question if you think there is no answer.

I dismissed your comment based on rational geometrical considerations and also having compared thousands of faces over the past 6 years. The specific type of comparison you were trying to make is known as anthropomorphic comparison (comparing the distance between features of faces at very different angles) and is well-known to be very difficult to execute. I can send you references offline this evening if you like. The comparing nose size and shape would be referred to as morphological comparison.

As to the nose size of the batter, since we are viewing him from somewhat behind the head, this would make his nose appear to stick out a bit less far than would a straight profile view. Also the drooping tip would be somewhat less evident when viewed from below than in a straight profile view. Yet his nose still sticks out more than either that of Clarke or Wilson, and, the drooping tip is clearly evident in spite of the angle.

A comparison of the nose bridge that might help you understand is shown below.

Anyway, this is just rhetorical, no need to answer.

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s...e1/Wagner3.png

but the ear isn't Wagner.


Unless he had plastic surgery of course

Based on what? What can be discerned appears to match. In addtion to the ear similarities pointed out previously above, here a few more around the earlobe:

Yellow arrow - earlobe crease; Red arrow - blob of flesh above earlobe crease; blue arrow - shape of ear opening just above earlobe
http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s...owe1/wag-1.png

:) to quote brian fantana: "60 percent of the time, it works every time"

Ear lobes
 

This is more of an educational question for Mark - as he has infinite more experience in photo recognition than me.

As for the ear comparison, to me there appears two differences in the photo comparison.

To me the bottom of the lobe in the "left handed batter" original photo looks like the lobe attaches to the neck downwards versus the lobe in the known Wagner appears to turn back up to the ear canal. I hope I explained that well - essentially, to me, it looks like the lobes attached to the neck differently in these two pics.

Also, it appears that the ear is different above the ear canal in the two pics - left handed batter with skin flap and Wagner with no inner ear flap above his ear canal. This could definitely be a difference from the picture angles.

Thanks for the info.

Andy

Andy - I agree the earlobe issue as you explained it is a good point. With respect to the earlobe, you are saying that Wagner's earlobe appears to be somewhat detached, while the batter's earlobe appears to be attached. I looked at this photo a while back for someone and that is also how I originally saw it. However, the other similarities made me look at it more carefully.

Keep in mind that comparing ears when one is viewed from the back and the other is not is very difficult (and rarely comes up). For this one it's not only from behind, but also from considerably below. For the batter in this case it seems that the viewpoint is sufficiently behind and below such that the bottom of earlobe is almost pointing straight at the viewer. That, IMO for this unusual case, makes it very difficult to discern the angle at which the lobe joins the head. I believe that the batter's "fleshy blob" (red arrow) is the closet point to the viewer and that the angle at which the lobe joined the head can be the same for the person(s) in both photos.

As to the "skin flap", it's not clear to me what you mean there. If you can draw arrows over the photos, I'll try to answer.

unintentional double post

Pic
 

Mark -

A picture is worth a 1000 words - no idea why I didnt do this in the first place. I made a circle in both pics to illustrate where I was discussing. To me in the known photo of Wagner there looks like there is no skin here - just open space; however, in the left handed batter it appears that skin folds down at this point.

You did understand my point correctly about the lobe. The various angles of these pics definitely make it tough to compare.

I also included another pic I had of Fred Clarke, I tried to blow it up. To me, his ear looks more similar to the left handed batter and the nose looks similar to the left handed batter.

Interesting discussion.

Andy

Initially i also thought they were two different earlobes. But if you look at the closeup of Wagner, he has somekind of tissue under his earlobe which could almost be similar to the questioned photo.

never mind, I don't think we'll ever know 100%.

My response to the "open space" question is below. I used an image of Wagner where the ear details aren't lost in shadow.

You used the same pic of Clarke that I used (yours is colorized).


http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s...lowe1/wagx.png

Mark,

Is there a way to measure the width of the sideburns or the distance from ear to sideburn etc. I know this would not be an exact science because people could trim how they want to etc.

Just curious if this is something you have ever done or is even worth trying?

The width of the sideburns matchup in some of the photos and different in others...

Shawn - I don't see a way for that to help. The sideburns seem consistent between the batter and the Wagner images, that's all I can say.

Very interesting thread with a lot of good opinions both ways.
I'm torn -- many of the facial features do look like Wagner's, but I keep coming back to the body -- the calves and shoulders just look too small to be Wagner's.

One point that I haven't seen raised is this -- do we know for sure that the catcher is Bresnahan? If the person who wrote on the back has the catcher identification correct, why would we be so quick to dismiss the hard-to-read batter identification?

Greg

Look at the image of negative on loc site. They state date and bres

You can do a reasonable ear match of the catcher to Bresnahan.

Also, the upper deck facade is pre-1909, and the catcher's socks match the Giants 1908 socks in the HoF uniform database, for what it's worth.

It would be easier to rule Clarke out if you had a photo from slightly behind and below his right shoulder. Wouldn't such an angle tend to make the features seem elongated? As in the photo?

No - there is no viewing angle that will make a nose appear elongated. A nose will appear to stick out from the face the most if the view is a straight profile - as in the Clarke photos I posted (unless the nose is substantially bent right or left). For any other angle it will appear to stick out less.

In light of a few emails I received and the way the poll questions are posed, I want to be sure my position is understood. I am saying that I can't eliminate the batter being Wagner based on facial feature comparison (maybe someone else can), and that the batter is very unlikely to be Clarke or Wilson.That's it, and that is why I did not vote in the poll.

I would hesitate to recommend that someone buy the piece based on it depicting Wagner - it may be him, but there is a risk.

The comments on stature do seem reasonable. To me the waist seems narrow - but he may just have his belt pulled tight - I don't know.

Mark - below are the batter's nose and Clarke's nose. I have re-sized them so that the nose sizes match, as does the angle of the bridge. You could now say that size doesn't matter. It should be obvious that thse are two different humans.

http://i581.photobucket.com/albums/s...1/Wagner22.png

After some research I think I have this figured out pretty definitively - will post tomorrow night.

Photo from "Honus Wagner, A Biography" DeValeria. Note- Batter and catcher closer to same height in this photo than photo in question. (Yes, I know knees bent, etc. make it harder to tell).

I am guessing this is a different day right? Maybe not, I do not not know? Definitely some differences...

None of the fans sitting on the field & different umpire. Those things could change during a game though - I guess.

Any chance this is Warren Gill? I ask this based on the fact that the photo from eBay posted in message #8 appears to have "Gill at Bat" written on the back, Gill did bat in the second game that day as a pinch hitter, and, from the attached photo, he appears to have similar features to the batter, including a large nose and connected earlobes.

On Baseball Reference, Gill is also listed as a right handed batter, but, with only 27 games in his career, I suppose it would be possible that he was actually a switch hitter. Or maybe he sensed that his career was about over and decided to do it for a lark.

Jason

[QUOTE=jsousa1213;1024592]Any chance this is Warren Gill? I ask this based on the fact that the photo from eBay posted in message #8 appears to have "Gill at Bat" written on the back, Gill did bat in the second game that day as a pinch hitter, and, from the attached photo, he appears to have similar features to the batter, including a large nose and connected earlobes.

This seems like a reasonable question/assumption. Bresnahan is correctly listed on the back of the photo, so is there any reason to doubt that this is Gil batting?

I think it is a reasonable enough question that at the very least Gil needs to be eliminated.

Nice catch on that writing on the bottom of the photo - I only looked at the back briefly.

What's funny is that I identified Gill in that photo posted above for Library of Congress, but at this point I can't say whether the batter is or is not Gill. I have another nice clear shot of Gill from the front, but no profiles.

The only way is to try to compare Gill's right ear from the front to the mostly back of the batter's ear. Not easy.

Mark, are you a detective?

Great work Mark!!! This has been a great thread!

I vote no based on what Mark had to offer, glad I didn't read this thread until now.