E121/E122 American Caramel Backs

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

Can someone educate me on the backs found in the E121/E122 American Caramel series. Which backs are most difficult and is there any premium attached to sponsor backs?

James

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

E122 are different in the style of the front so I didnt include them.


I call these E121 style cards...
Here is the list I know of (22 different including variations)

*Very Tough

Candy

E121-80 first line ends in "the"
E121-80 first line ends in "Eighty"
E121-120
E-Unc. Henry A. Johnson Candy (rubber stamped back)
*E-Unc. Keating Candy Co. (rubber stamped back)
E-Unc. Witmore Candy (horizontal back)
*E-Unc. Witmore Candy (vertical back)
*E-Unc. Lou Gertenrich Candy


Bread

D383 Koester Bread (Yankees and Giants blank back handcut)
D327 Holsum Bread (back faces left, "H.Weil Baking Company" narrower than "Holsum Bread")
*D327 Holsum Bread (back faces right, both lines same width)
*D350-3-1 Standard Biscuit "80 to the set."
*D350-3-2 Standard Biscuit "80 photographs."
*D-Unc. Gassler's American Maid Bread
*D-Unc. Haffner's Big Tayto-Loaf Bread
*D-Unc. Cream Nut or Goodie Bread
*D-Unc. Clark's Bread


Strip

W501
W575-1A
W575-1B


Clothing/Other

*H-Unc. Herpolsheimer Boys Shop
*H-Unc. Leader Theatre

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

Interesting. I came across an E122 Jacobson today with a Shotwell of Brooklyn advertising back. It didn't seem familiar to me. Is that known?

James

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

James, Never seen it, Please post a picture.

With the E122 front style cards Ive never seen anything other than American Caramel (E122) and National Caramel (E220) on the back.

Are you sure it has the E122 style front?

They have the name within the box on bottom different from the E121 style cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

Admittedly, these styles are very confusing to me. I will post a scan later today.

James

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

I always view the E122s as the set printed behind a screen.

[Archive]

Posted By: boxingcardman

They are rescreens. They took a first generation photo with caption and reshot it to make the card.

Sic Gorgiamus Allos Subjectatos Nunc

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

I just noticed that the card pictured as an example in the 2008 SCD (Hendrix) is not even in the E122 checklist. It must obviously be a picture of a E220 (like my Cobb above). I always thought the E122 and E220 had the same fronts, but looking now at the examples pictured this is not true.

I just noticed that the E220's have a hand printed caption style (like my Cobb above), and the E122's have the same style caption as the E121 but obviously of a different design, within the thin black line around photo area.

For those that have large numbers of both E220 and E122 is this true for the whole set. If so they may want to change the example photo for E122 in the 2009 SCD Catalog.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

As somewhat of an ACC purist I have always viewed any of these types of cards that Burdick didn't list, with the different backs, as W575-1/X-Unc ......Only if he gave them a number do I give them a number. Haffners, Leader, Johnson Conf, etc.....all are W575-1's to me.....It's sort of like the English language. It's cumbersome but it's what we have. BTW, because I realize that "E121" is more known, I do sometimes list them that way for sale...regards

[Archive]

Posted By: boxingcardman

Burdick was great but he isn't the last word. Sugar added the "N" to N cards, for example. When faced with an issue that Burdick obviously did not fully catalog or analyze, adding to the catalog makes sense. I've identified several varieties of W529 and I've added the "-x" to each one because Burdick didn't cover them all.

Sic Gorgiamus Allos Subjectatos Nunc

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Sugar did a good job in his last revision. Sugar did have some numbers that stuck as you mentioned with N and he had many others too, such as E123 and E125, that Burdick didn't come up with. I do go to Burdick first, then Sugar, then, if nothing....back to "unc" and Burdick....So for me the Haffners are W575-1/D-unc...and so on...I always default to Burdick though...I guess everyone has their own way of doing it....I just find it easier the way I do it ....

[Archive]

Posted By: Al C.risafulli

This thread has developed in an interesting way. I collect the Henry Johnson Confectioners cards, and I've been trying to quantify whether they're actually W575-1s or E121s for a while now. I'm pretty close to drawing the conclusion that they're E121s. Does anyone have a Henry Johnson card that is NOT found in the E121 Series of 80 checklist?

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

To further convey my theory for the "E121" type blank backed cards being classified as "W575-1"/X-UNC let me give the exact definitions from the ACC and the Sports Collectors Bible, which is where almost all numbering has come from (minus T215 Pirates and probably 1-2 others)....


From Jefferson Burdick's American Card Catalog, rev.1960

E121-Baseball Stars (120) rectangular B&W 2 x 3 1/2
1st issue marked (80) many team changes, etc.

W575- Baseball Photos, about 2 x 3 1/4, various sets, blank back, anon
Similar to E121, E122, E220, W501, one has autograph on shoulder


From The Sports Collectors Bible, 4th Edition, Bert Sugar,1983

E-121
Baseball Stars, American Caramel Co (c. 1922)
2" x 3 1/2", unnumbered
This set is definitely more than one series, although gernerally listed as only one set. Some cards are marked as a series of 80, while others are marked as a set of 120.

W575-1
Baseball Series, Blank Back (1922)
2" x 3 1/4", unnumbered



So, from the above information, from the 2 most used guides at classifying cards, I submit that, unless Burdick gave a number to a different "E121" style of card then they should be W575. He says W575 are "various sets". That is key to me. He doesn't say that about E121. A back that has a confectioner/candy ad on it should be W575-1/E-Unc, one without a category of advertising should be W575-1/H-Unc, one with a bakery ad should be W575-1/D-Unc etc...I use the same scheme for E135 style cards, whereas my Sunrize card I classify as E135/D-Unc.....

Just some thoughts on an early Saturday...
regards
(I need to put Holsum as D327)

[Archive]

Posted By: Al C.risafulli

Leon, I really need to buy one of those H-Js from you.

I can see your point, but I also think that the W575-1s have a definitive checklist, and so do the E121s.

Sor, for example, if I were ever to find a Henry Johnson card of Cecil Causey, William (not Wm.) Fewster, or Aaron Ward, then the Henry Johnson set would follow the E121 Series of 80 checklist and not the W575-1 checklist, since Causey, Fewster, and Ward are in the E121 set but not th W575-1 set.

Right now, each of the H-J cards that I have are, unfortunately, in both the Series of 80 and W575-1 sets, so I can't offer any conclusive proof, despite the fact that W575-1 cards are hand cut from vertical strips, and E121s are machine cut to a fairly uniform size on heavier stock, and all the H-Js are machine cut (despite what PSA's flip says).

The only POSSIBLE proof I have at this point is in the Pep Young card. The E121 of Pep Young is printed as "Pep" Young, with quotes around the player's first name. I believe the W575-1 of Young does not use the quotes. My H-J of Young has the quotes around the first name, like the E121.

On the other hand, if someone could produce an H-J of a card that is NOT in the E121 set but IS in the W575-1 set, that would be interesting. Thus far I've never seen one, though.

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: Scot Reader

Frank,

How do E135 Collins-McCarthy and D350-1 Standard Biscuit (or -2, can't remember which are the the larger ones) fit in to this equation? Are these two sets wholly unrelated to the E121s? And if so, what differentiates the E135s and the D350-1 Standard Biscuits from the E121s aside from earlier production? Thanks.

Scot

[Archive]

Posted By: Rhett Yeakley

Al, here is my "Pep" Young with a Johnson back, although as you can see the first " is missing.
-Rhett

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark L

Leon
I see that you have two Gassler's Bread cards. How many different fronts have you spotted?
Mark

[Archive]

Posted By: Al C.risafulli

Thanks, Rhett - I've got a Young with a Johnson back as well, missing the same quotes.

Anyone got a W575-1 Young?

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: Rhett Yeakley

Al, I have been working on an article about the E121 family of sets. It is still early and I still have a bit more to write for it. In it I will describe several new back variations of makers currently known to exist, example being the 3rd back type for E121 series of 80 that I reported to the board a year or two ago. I have an excel spreadsheet with cards from all known sets listed and any variations that I have seen on individual players, I only include cards that I personally have seen scans of or have concrete proof that they exist (front & back scans). I am not currently planning on including this list with the article but I may change my mind as time goes on. There are some new variations not currently catalogued to point out (one example is one we have kinda talked about in Pep Young--his E121 Series of 80 cards can be found both with and without the first quotation mark). It may be some time before I have all the t's crossed and i's dotted, but I have enjoyed it.
-Rhett

[Archive]

Posted By: Al C.risafulli

I just wanted to bump this thread so it doesn't get forgotten - it has the makings of a good thread.

Rhett, do you consider Henry Johnsons to be W575-1s, or E121s?

-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Which Henry Johnson of mine do you still need? I have Johnston and Hooper. Both are listed as W575 and E121....I still revert back to what Burdick classified them as, with all information given so far. I love talking about cards. Arguing....not so much.....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Rhett Yeakley

I definately would consider Henry Johnson's to be W575-1's beacuse that is essentially what they are (same with Keating backs), the main reason being the application of a rubber stamp being all that distinguishes them from a W575-1. Also, Johnson's are definately a "Series of 80" era issue as opposed to "Series of 120" era set. The main way to tell this is I am yet to see a legitimate Henry Johnson back with the front positions as either O.F. or the shortened 1B., 2B., etc. (they are all R.F., C.F., 2nd B., 1st B., etc. if the position is applicable to this rule) These positions were changed from the Series of 80 and earlier series of sets to the shortened versions in the Series of 120 series of sets.

Admittedly, I think it is confusing to call everything that wasn't designated by Burdick or others as W575-1 because that issue is confusing enough as it is, without throwing the other issues in there. My opinion (admittedly just one mans opinion here) is that if the back was printed on the card (and not just a rubber stamp) they should be given their own designations (some are D350-3, D327, etc.) or simply called D-Unc, H-Unc, or E-Unc.

Also, there are 2 distinct sets being callled W575-1 pretty much interchangablty (which has made the W575-1 listing in SCD essentially worthless if you ask me), I believe this is a mistake as one of the sets would be more correctly called W501 Type 2. This is an area I will cover in the article.

-Rhett