1921 Shotwell Babe Ruth Discovered
 

The existence of a (currently) unique 1921 Shotwell Babe Ruth card has been verified. It's only the second-known E121-style Shotwell baseball.

Such information as can be pieced together, along with some wild-ass guessing, can be found on the Standard Catalog Update blog by clicking the link at bottom.

Attachment 3465
Attachment 3466

Bob
 

That is a great discovery. Ruth collectors should have a field day....I am sticking to my guns on the designation (W575-1) but it's certainly debatable....

I found the first one in 2007 while sorting through a massive collection from one of our consignor's. He had no idea it was anything great. After that, I dubbed myself "Father of the Shotwell Back" :)

James

W575-1 Ruths
 

Leon,unless someone has found a "new" W575-1 Ruth, the Shotwell doesn't conform to any of the three listed in that checklist.

The Shotwell has his position listed as R.F., with no quotes around BABE.

The three W575-1 are:

R.F. "Babe"
L.F. BABE
w/man and bird "BABE"

As I've looked into these issues more and more, along with the M101-4 and M101-5 and their derivatives, I think there's still a lot we don't know about actual checklists, midstream changes in set composition, etc.

well.....we can make our own catalog but......
 

Hi Bob ..
I am one of the folks who doesn't believe in changing the ACC. Unless this was put out by American Caramel Co., and distributed by a competitor, then it's still not an E121. I could go with E121-Unc, I guess ;).

It seems like 1921 E-UNC Shotwell Manufacturing should be sufficient. I affectionately call all the cards in these sets "E121-like" cards only because it makes it easier to group them all together, just like we usually refer to "M101-4/5" cards by that name even though there are tons of different ACC designations involved.

Bob, I love the SCD book for many issues, but one of the issues whose checklist is vitually meaningless at this point is the W575-1 list. I have covered it several times on the forum (I can find a link for you later), but what people call "W575-1" are actually from TWO completely different sets. One is a high quality photos & paper (some call it E121 blank backs), the other being on crappy paper and really grainy photos. I began calling them W575-1A for the ood quality ones and W575-1B for the grainy ones, and I have seen those designations being used by others so it seems like they have sort of caught on.

What follows is complicated, and confusing, and I have only included the "Reader's Digest" version but here are the distinguishing characteristics of the two sets...

W575-1A - These were NOT hand cut, although some manufacturers who distributed them may have bought sheets and cut them themselves (they weren't "strip-cards" in their distribution. Included under this designation are the Henry Johnson and James Keating sets, as those cards are simply W575-1A's that that particular distributor decided to rubber-stamp on back. The Koester's Bread set would also be included under this umbrella because they have simple blank backs. Generally these are going to be from earlier in the "E121-like" print run, and infielders will USUALLY (not always) be designated as 2nd B., 1st B., etc. while outfielders are designated by their specific positions like R.F., L.F., C.F., and even Outf. on occason, far fewer are cards from this set that have the later (E121-120) designations of 2B, 1B., etc or simply O.F. for outfielders.

W575-1B - These are all hand cut on the top & bottom borders ONLY. These are from the very end of the "E121-like" card distibution period and from all the cards that I have documented (which is quite a few), this set shares a checklist with the W501 set. In fact I would go one step further and say that they are simply a reprint of the W501 just without the card # & "G-4-22" thing at top, the reason being that the photo quality (or lack thereof) is identical and the card stock is also identical between the W501's and W575-1B's. These will ALWAYS have the much more simple 1B., 2B., etc. and O.F. designations.

The problem with the W575-1 listing in the SCD book is that it has included the two distinct sets together for so long that it almost needs to be scrapped at this point to distinguish between the two.

This Holke photo shows the W575-1A ---- W501 ----- W575-1B (in that order)

I'll post the picture on it's own so you don't have to scroll r-l to read what I wrote...
http://starsofthediamond.com/3diffholke.JPG

Rhett:

I've got a ton of respect for your knowledge of the W575-1 and E121 sets, and I don't want to hijack this thread, but I have a question for you.

The cards you classify as "W575-1A" - with respect to the checklists, is it your opinion that the checklist of those sets follows the checklist in the Standard Catalog for W575-1? I ask because my experience is that the checklist for the Henry Johnson cards does NOT follow the W575-1 checklist, and it's much more likely that it follows the checklist for the E121 Series of 80.

-Al

Al, without getting too far into it, you are basically correct that the W575-1A checklist will look very much like the E121 Series of 80 set.

It is a little more complex than that as in order to understand the checklists of the different sets, you have to know what the timeline of the "E121 like" card. The blank backed (W575-1A set was initially produced even before the E121 Series of 80, so there will be players in the W575-1A set that had been dropped by the time the E121 cards (80) were made (they were being made roughly the same time as the Holsum/Herpolsheimer cards) and the blank backs continued through the beginning of when the E121 Series of 120 were being produced. However, the W575-1B cards were all made at the end of when E121 Series of 120 was being produced.

-Rhett

Albie Booth
 

Bob, Not to de rail this thread, but on your blog you have a picture of College Football HOFer Albie Booth. It said that he played in the 1932 season. Here is a plate I have dated from 1932. Front row second from the right (first player) sure looks like Booth. Only problem I see is that he is holding a catchers mitt? Same face shape and same uniform. Is it Booth?

http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m...es/ebay080.jpg

Booth? I don't know.
 

Sorry to report I don't know enough about Booth or Yale baseball to tell one way or another.

I wonder why some of the jerseys have a 1935 date on them? Booth was out of school several years by then.

W575-1, W575-1A, etc.
 

Rhett, and all,

I'm sure you're onto something here, but darned if I can foresee ever having the time to straighten that out on my part-time status.

If somebody can make it easy on me by providing suggested checklists and correlations between Series of 80, W575-1, W575-1A, Johnston, Herpolsheimer, etc., we might get something accomplished.

Bob, I do have a spreadsheet where I keep track of all "E121-like" cards I have visually had evidence of, but it is still very much a work-in-progress. I have only included cards on it that I have 100% knowledge that the front corresponds to the back of the card.

I also have a roughly 10 page article that I have written about the E121-like sets and all the known backs that are included under that umbrella. I had originally planned on having it published in Old Cardboard (Lyman & I spoke about it briefly) but I haven't shown it to Lyman as of yet. I just want it to be as comprehensive as possible before it gets published.

I am constantly adding new info to both of them as more players are found and I'm beginning to see a pattern emerging as to an overall timeline of when each set was produced (at least the sequence when the sets were produced in relation to one another).

-Rhett

Thanks for the reply Bob, Some of the players would have graduated in 1935. They were probably freshman or sophmores on the team. Our thinking was this plate was made for the Yale team after it played in Japan in 32. I'm still stumped about the name "Punkies" on some of the uniforms. I like mysteries.

Bob, the Henry Johnsons are the set that I corresponded with you about over on the SGC board. I've been collecting them for years, and I can say with relative certainty that the checklist does not mirror that of the W575-1s. However, like Rhett, I'm not prepared to make unequivocal statements about the checklist until I have all the cards.

At this stage I have a fairly substantial collection of these by most standards, but I don't have them all. Eventually I'll feel more qualified to make a judgement on the checklist, and not until I discuss it extensively with Rhett, who I consider to be the expert on these.

-Al

Hi Bob, here is another back thats just as rare if not rarer than the E121 style Shotwell.

E135 style (1917) Merchants Bakery

http://centuryoldcards.com/images/1917merchantsruth.jpghttp://centuryoldcards.com/images/19...hantsruthb.jpg

Thanks, guys
 

Since neither Rome nor the Standard Catalog was built in a day, I don't feel any compunction to rush a correction of the W575-1, H.A. Johnson, etc. listings into print.

If Rhett, Al and any others who are compiling data will continue with their work, I'll try to tap that knowledge down the road when time allows.

Is anyone aware of any other E135-type Merchant's Bakery cards other than Frank's Ruth?

here ya go Bob
 

I have this one and I think I might have seen 1 more.....but won't promise...:)

http://luckeycards.com/pe135sunrize.jpg

FKW

I remember that card-my friend still has it.

Rhett,

Do you think the Jesse Burkett card is specific to Koester Bread, or that it should be found in other W575-1A sets?

Paul

Paul, I don't want to get too into the Koesters thing here but there are only very few cards that are described as "Koesters" that one can feel confident that they actually have a Koesters card. However, among those likely exclusive to the Koesters set is the Burkett.

I have found absolutely no difference between the vast majority of "Koesters" cards and the players corresponding W575-1A, despite what many collectors & dealers have claimed. Thus, unless the player (or pose) is unique to the Koesters set, then the card should be assumed to be simply a W575-1A -- This isn't going to be too popular with those that have paid high amounts for people like George Kelly, Dave Bancroft, Hugh Jennings, etc. thinking that they had a Koesters bread card.

Here are two more cards "exclusive" to the Koesters set...
http://www.geocities.com/rhettmatthe...rsferguson.JPG http://www.starsofthediamond.com/koesterscunningham.JPG

-Rhett

Thanks.

Koesters
 

Is there any back identification on them?

blank back
 

they are blank backed...

http://luckeycards.com/pd383koestersbreadbancfroft.jpg

I may have unearthed another 1921 Shotwell E121 version. When I found this card, your blog about the Ruth was my first real background to the issue, Bob. Anyway here is the card I found: George Dauss. It is on it's way to SGC now, as PSA said they couldn't grade it due to not having enough information about the issue and believing that the only two that exist are the Ruth and Jacobson.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...eorgeDauss.jpg

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...eDaussBack.jpg

nice find
 

Nice Find. I guess that is the 3rd one that I am aware of. The other two being the Ruth and this one pictured here (pardon the other scans). Even though the new one found is trimmed it's very desirable and valuable. How much? Would have to go to auction to see but 1k might not surprise me....under $500 would surprise me.

http://luckeycards.com/pw5751gasslshotqueen3x.jpg

I love threads like this. Outstanding research Rhett

I'm assuming Leon owns that Shotwell Ruth by now...:)

No, not me. Someone else is the lucky owner of it. Generally one type is enough......though I admit to having multiples of a few series. I love type collecting because there are no rules and the variety is great.

Spence owns the Shotwell Ruth. It's listed in his Registry set.

Has Bob Lemke moved on to the Net54 in the sky? He has not posted here in over 2 years

Died a little over two years ago.

A bad day for the hobby.