1934-36 Batter up - to punch out or not?

[Belfast1933]

Am curious what members think of the 34-36 batter up cards - specifically, I’m curious what others think about the look of these cards when they are punched out versus whole/complete.

As a collector, I kind of like the look of these cards when they are punched out and displayed in holders. I think it gives her cool, different look. Probably the point of the card in the first place back in the day!

I realize that from a grading standpoint, this means the card is “poor“. I also like the low price that comes with the “poor“ grade!

Just curious how others feel to collect and display these cards.

(Not my cards below... just a couple that caught my eye on ebay)

[riggs336]

I prefer my Batter Ups unpunched, but you make good points about the look and price of punched cards. Collect them and display them any way that suits you and more power to you.

[Chris-Counts]

I collect the punched out ones because they're affordable and look so cool. Here's a few of my favorites. I've displayed three different styles of Batter-Ups — a '34 made by National Chicle of Lefty Grove, a '36 National Chicle of Phil Cavaretta, and a 1937 OPC Gee Walker. The first two are always lumped into the 1934 set due to the numbering, but it's clear the high numbers came out in '36. I've always felt they should be separate sets.

[brianp-beme]

Being the type of collector I am, I accept punched out Batter-Ups in my corral.

Here are some high number examples

Brian

[leftygrove10]

Originally Posted by Chris Counts

I collect the punched out ones because they're affordable and look so cool. Here's a few of my favorites. I've displayed three different styles of Batter-Ups — a '34 made by National Chicle of Lefty Grove, a '36 National Chicle of Phil Cavaretta, and a 1937 OPC Gee Walker. The first two are always lumped into the 1934 set due to the numbering, but it's clear the high numbers came out in '36. I've always felt they should be separate sets.

I totally agree. The high numbers should be considered a separate set! Should we start a petition? How many signatures do we need? Who do we send it to? Does it have to go to a vote???

[leftygrove10]

Here's how my set started a few years ago. All of them have the backs, although some of them have been opened. I prefer the backs to be still attached, although I can understand getting them cheap with the back missing.

[riggs336]

Originally Posted by leftygrove10

I totally agree. The high numbers should be considered a separate set! Should we start a petition? How many signatures do we need? Who do we send it to? Does it have to go to a vote???

Makes sense to me. Plus the 1936 cards had their own insert, the Rabbit Maranville "How To..." booklets.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by Chris Counts

it's clear the high numbers came out in '36. I've always felt they should be separate sets.

The thing about lumping the 1-80 and the 81-192 together that bothers me the most is that the high numbers are about a 1/4" shorter.

Also, cards number 1-40 are available in 6 tints, 41-80 in 4 tints, and 81-192 in 2 tints. Almost a reason to identify these as 3 sets.

Brian

[brianp-beme]

By the way, the two Batter Up cards that the OP shared from Ebay actually have been trimmed (egads gasp!) beyond their normal diecut configuration, examples of which can be seen in Chris's post.

I think someone wanted the Foxx and Cochrane cards to seem more sexy and svelte.

Brian

[ValKehl]

I'll be a contrarian and say that the 1934 & 1934 Batter Ups are properly classified as one set, despite the color & size variations. I say this because I assume National Chicle intended for these cards to be one set because NC continued the number sequencing. However, I suspect we might be able to better determine this if anyone has an example of NC advertising from a magazine or newspaper for the 1936 continuation.

[riggs336]

Originally Posted by ValKehl

I'll be a contrarian and say that the 1934 & 1934 Batter Ups are properly classified as one set, despite the color & size variations. I say this because I assume National Chicle intended for these cards to be one set because NC continued the number sequencing. However, I suspect we might be able to better determine this if anyone has an example of NC advertising from a magazine or newspaper for the 1936 continuation.

You may be right but the same argument could be used to classify 1933 and 1938 Goudey as one set.

[ValKehl]

Originally Posted by riggs336

You may be right but the same argument could be used to classify 1933 and 1938 Goudey as one set.

Good point. Being as Jeff Burdick assigned the same ACC # for the Batter Ups and two different ACC #s for the Goudeys, I wonder if Burdick explains his rationale in any of his letters, notes, etc. that still exist.

[Belfast1933]

Originally Posted by Chris Counts

I collect the punched out ones because they're affordable and look so cool. Here's a few of my favorites. I've displayed three different styles of Batter-Ups — a '34 made by National Chicle of Lefty Grove, a '36 National Chicle of Phil Cavaretta, and a 1937 OPC Gee Walker. The first two are always lumped into the 1934 set due to the numbering, but it's clear the high numbers came out in '36. I've always felt they should be separate sets.

Sweet looking punch outs! I’m with you.... LOVE the look of these cards!

[Belfast1933]

Originally Posted by leftygrove10

Here's how my set started a few years ago. All of them have the backs, although some of them have been opened. I prefer the backs to be still attached, although I can understand getting them cheap with the back missing.

Excuse my while I drool... wow! I’m not a set builder but I can see why you would want to be looking at yours.

[Belfast1933]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

By the way, the two Batter Up cards that the OP shared from Ebay actually have been trimmed (egads gasp!) beyond their normal diecut configuration, examples of which can be seen in Chris's post.

I think someone wanted the Foxx and Cochrane cards to seem more sexy and svelte.

Brian

Ok, thanks... yeah, I am just getting familiar with the set so I did not realize that the Cochrane and Foxx were not just punched out but trimmed as well

That changes things a bit for me - I still like the look punched out, but I would prefer one that is punched out, as originally designed

Is there any way to see a clean punch out vs trimmed? Just by experience or benchmarking other cards punched out?

Thx for the tip -

Jeff

[leftygrove10]

Here are the six color variations for the Grove card. It took me a while to find all of these. It is not always easy to see the color through a phone or computer monitor and some of the colors seem to be harder to find than others.

[leftygrove10]

Originally Posted by Belfast1933

Is there any way to see a clean punch out vs trimmed? Just by experience or benchmarking other cards punched out?

Without going through all of my batter-ups, I believe that all of the punch lines are horizontal through the middle of the card. I am guessing that the idea was that you could fold it over and the card would be able to stand up on its own.

[leftygrove10]

Here are a Cochrane and Foxx from eBay with the fold lines labeled.

[Belfast1933]

Originally Posted by leftygrove10

Here are a Cochrane and Foxx from eBay with the fold lines labeled.

Awesome... thx Brad

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by leftygrove10

Without going through all of my batter-ups, I believe that all of the punch lines are horizontal through the middle of the card. I am guessing that the idea was that you could fold it over and the card would be able to stand up on its own.

Brad is correct - all of the punch out lines are horizontal near middle of card. The additional trimming on the Foxx and Cochrane remind me of the Middy Bread cutout set.

Brian

[LuckyLarry]

I am the seller of the cards mentioned in the original post. And I have four more of these little beauties lol. Although I did list the cards as "punched out" and in "poor" condition, I didn't realize that instead of the cards being punched out and cut out straight across, the previous owner cut the cards at an angle rather than straight across. (They do look good lol) At the bottom of the card measures 2 3/8 inch as listed in the Standard Catalog and do appear to be full size at the bottom compared to the one whole Batter Up card I have in my type cards. So the cards are trimmed at an angle from the fold outs and should be straight across, I dont think the edges are trimmed since they appear to be the correct 2 3/8 inches at the bottom and compare well with another original I have?

I contacted the buyers and let them know in case they want to void their purchase. I havent heard back from them yet. If they are collecting this set maybe they knew these cards were "trimmed" from the fold to the edges.

Larry

[Belfast1933]

Originally Posted by LuckyLarry

I am the seller of the cards mentioned in the original post. And I have four more of these little beauties lol. Although I did list the cards as "punched out" and in "poor" condition, I didn't realize that instead of the cards being punched out and cut out straight across, the previous owner cut the cards at an angle rather than straight across. (They do look good lol) At the bottom of the card measures 2 3/8 inch as listed in the Standard Catalog and do appear to be full size at the bottom compared to the one whole Batter Up card I have in my type cards. So the cards are trimmed at an angle from the fold outs and should be straight across, I dont think the edges are trimmed since they appear to be the correct 2 3/8 inches at the bottom and compare well with another original I have?

I contacted the buyers and let them know in case they want to void their purchase. I havent heard back from them yet. If they are collecting this set maybe they knew these cards were "trimmed" from the fold to the edges.

Larry

Hey Larry - sorry! Had I known you were a Net54er I would have given you a heads up that I borrowed your card images for my post here!

I actually still liked the cards, even though I learned they were trimmed a bit. No worries from this bidder (I lost the Cochrane by $0.50!)

Jeff

[Belfast1933]

And if anyone has any punched out HOFers they’d like to sell, please PM me!

I’ll post in the BST as well.

Thanks again for all of the advice - as always, I learned a lot about this cool and interesting set.

Happy weekend, all

Jeff