1909 Obak Variation

[Anthony S.]

I was initially considering selling one of my 1909 Obak McCredies to help finance my final push to finish the set when I noticed a small anomaly. One card lists his team as "Port." (short for Portland), while the other card lists his team as "Por" without the "t."

This isn't merely a case of the "t" having been rubbed off the second card, as you can see by the alignment of the font -- specifically the distance the "P" is front the players leg -- that these were two different type settings.

Was wondering if any other Obak collectors have ever noticed this, or seen it on other cards in the set? Also, which McCredie do you own, "Por" or "Port?"

Edited to add: Both cards have framed backs.

[Jacklitsch]

Are the backs the same? Both no frame? Both w/frame. If so then I have no idea.

[pete zouras]

[Anthony S.]

Both have framed backs.

[canjond]

Is there just a spot of paperloss where the "t" should be?

[Anthony S.]

Nope, no paper loss. I looked at both cards under magnification and measured the distance between the "P" in Port/Por and McCredie's leg. It seems to be two different print runs.

Edited to add: The "M" in McCredie extends further to the left on the "Port." version than it does on the "Por" version. If you extend a straight line beyond the left black border on the "Port." version it cuts through part of the "M" in McCredie." However, if you do the same on the "Por" version it doesn't touch the "M" in McCredie.

Originally Posted by canjond

Is there just a spot of paperloss where the "t" should be?

[Matthew H]

It also looks like the gap between the comma and Mgr. is more wide on the "Por" variation.