N172 Silch New Pose? (Probably Not). Looking for help.

[sreader3]

I have an OJ Silch Denvers that I always assumed was pose 419-3.

But now I don't think so.

(Well -- maybe now I'm really not sure. See second post below).

The example of 419-3 in Joe, Jay & Richard's OJ Bible has a ball clearly visible above Silch's hands. There is another example of 419-3 with the ball clearly visible on eBay at:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1887-N172-Ol...-/150378920951

Note: The OJ Bible and eBay examples are the Brooklyn team variation.

On my card, I can see no trace of the ball. I suppose this could be attributable to photo quality, but after looking at my card under intense light I don't think so.

Perhaps more importantly, my card has distinct waves of grass on the ground below Silch's feet that are not present on the examples of 419-3 in the OJ Bible and on eBay.

I know that the OJ Bible considers cards with / without ball visible as separate poses (see OJ Bible page 131 using Carroll 68-3 and 68-6 as examples). Not sure how added brushstrokes like the grass under Silch's feet on my card treated. So I thought I would raise the issue.

Any help appreciated. Scan of my card below:



Scot

[sreader3]

I found a second example of the Denvers version from the LOTG auction last year:

http://loveofthegameauctions.com/188...0-lot3470.aspx

It does look like a ball may be faintly visible on that example -- so perhaps my card is the same pose as 419-3 but the ball is just too faint to be seen.

But then there is still the issue of the wavy grass at the bottom of my Denver card (and the Denver card in the LOTG auction) which is not present on the OJ Bible and eBay Brooklyn examples of 419-3 . . . .

Seems to me when the team plate was changed from Brooklyn to Denver there was a (not 100% successful) attempt to remove the ball while at the same time adding grassy brushstrokes at the bottom. Thoughts?

[oldjudge]

Scot--interesting card, thanks for posting it. My short answer is that I do not believe that it is a new pose. I think, for some reason, the ball is light/faded on your card. I think I can see vestiges of it on your scan, but I can't be sure. Typically, ball in/ball out poses are a result of cropping differences, not attempts to eliminate the ball from the field of view.
Some have asked why ball in/ball out differences are classified as new poses at all. After all, they are from the same negative. The reason we classified them as such relate to batting poses. A pose where a player is pictured with the bat in a hitting position, with no ball visible, is denoted as "Bat at ready" in the pose description. A batting pose with the ball visible is denoted as "Strike" in the pose description. Because of this difference in language, we thought it necessary to classify ball in/ball out batting poses as different poses, even if they were from the same negative. For consistence, we extended this to catching poses. Grass in/grass out has no similar description difference, and therefore doesn't need separate pose listings (thank goodness).
Without speaking for Joe, I think neither he nor I love the ball in/ball out additional poses. However, by this point, most have been found so there is little need for further adjustments. As for eliminating them, no need at this point to try to put the genie back into the bottle.

[sreader3]

Jay,

Thanks for the clarifying post.

N172 is fascinating for sure. Even within the "same" pose there seems to be considerable variation -- Team X v. Team Y, plate v. no plate, grass v. no grass, etc.

Speaking for myself, the Denver group is particularly fascinating since several of the poses come in many different flavors. For example, some can be found with the handwritten "Denver" with the backwards "N" in addition to with/without nameplate. Also, there were several attempts to scratch out "Milwaukee" (with varying success) on Klusman's uniform in some of his poses.

Scot

[oldjudge]

Scot--No more complicated, and for me interesting, set has ever been produced. It's over 125 years since the Goodwin started issuing these cards, and we are still learning more about the set, still discovering new poses. It's not a set to be conquered, it's a set to be studied and enjoyed.