[Exhibitman]

IMO whoever did the initial cataloging and dating on the postwar blank backed sets was just making s**t up and the errors have stuck.

Fred [Whiteymet] has done as much as possible to try and figure out which cards were from which years but even he will admit it isn't a precise science. I don't have the patience to scrutinize font sizes on MADE IN USA and the like.

As far as Salutations go, I've long advocated for the view that the post-four-on-one Exhibit baseball cards should be treated as one set with varying SPs, series and subsets. It is just impossible to rationally divvy them up otherwise. I mean, the 1939-46 Salutations thing is a nice fantasy because many cards, like the DiMaggio and Feller pitching, went on into the 1950s and Williams no #9 until at least 1960, and so on. There is even direct information from the company itself that sets spilled over beyond their Hobby-attributed years. I have an image of a 1955 catalog that offers sets of 32 football cards, a set that the FB collectors have long treated as 1948-52. The 1949 catalog offers the HOF set with the Ruth ten bats card depicted, for a set that is attributed to 1948. That catalog also offers 64 baseball cards and depicts the Salutations Boudreau as an example (so much for 1939-46). The company mixed and matched from the earliest days forward. The 1923 catalog offers what are clearly the 1921 boxers, advertising Sullivan through Dempsey, but claims 64 cards in the 1923 set. The reality is that the company always mixed and matched cards in its issues; the advertised 32 or 64 cards per set per year were really a combo of recycled images and/or cards in nearly every year. The only truly new baseball issues were the periodic reboots from the 1920s [1925, 1927], and the move into the 1930s four-on-ones. Otherwise it was a mix and match affair with some updates and some edited artwork [1921 Ruth card w/o borders versus 1923 Ruth with borders; they slapped a white border on the art and reshot it]. Even the four-on-ones have a ton of recycled photos.

But I digress. Turning back to the postwar sets, there are a lot of cards in the blank backed issues that are way easier to find than you'd expect, precisely because they were not cut off after a single year. But some of the cards are just vicious short prints. Johnny Rizzo is a great example in the Salutations set. His mom probably didn't even want his card but collectors chase that card really hard because it is just not an easy find. Almost every active collector of that set that I know has had a devil of a time getting Rizzo. The OP mentioned the HOF set. Same story there. The Ruth 10 bats card is the tougher SP there. I searched for one through the entire National a couple of years ago [and those who know me know that I have show OCD; I hit the show floor at dealer opening and scour through the place until the end of the day] and I found exactly one available, and it was in a set. Took me a while to find a legitimate example to finish my set.

Larry's right about some of those sets. The PC back is my favorite and it just made me want to pull my remaining hair out after a while, which is why I quit trying for the variations. I woke up one day and realized I'd been chasing this set for 25 years and still hadn't gotten close to some of the worst SPs. Needless to say, now that I've dismantled my set I am sure I will stumble across the few I needed in a junk box for a buck...