Uh, postcard experts, a little help please......

[Brian Van Horn]

So, the other night I saw a couple postcards the piqued my interest. The first one I got blown out on:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/ORIGINAL-191...vip=true&rt=nc

Still, I had one more that I liked and that one I won. If this isn't authentic, someone went through a lot of trouble. The name "Pete" had me concerned in the upper left corner, but player #3 overrode my concerns and the price was right either way. The guy was right on one point. He was a White Sox player, but his name wasn't Ferguson. If this postcard is from the earlier 1920s and its authentic, it's very interesting (thank you, Artie Johnson for this wonderful line from Laugh In). Some Quebec fans had to have had a chuckle when this guy came back under another name:

[the-illini]

who is it?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Assuming by the ears and the tone of the OP someone thinks it's Shoeless Joe

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Assuming by the ears and the tone of the OP someone thinks it's Shoeless Joe

Nope.

[ramram]

Turd Furguson?

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by ramram

Turd Furgeson?

[ramram]

Chick?

Rob M

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by ramram

Chick?

Rob M

Yep.

[ramram]

Does look like him. There's no Furguson on the Wite Sox roster back in that era so that fits. He was from Minnesota so that could fit as to why he would be in Canada. Wiki says he was playing out west after the scandal so is there anything else that would place him playing in Canada?

Rob M

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by ramram

Does look like him. There's no Furguson on the Wite Sox roster back in that era so that fits. He was from Minnesota so that could fit as to why he would be in Canada. Wiki says he was playing out west after the scandal so is there anything else that would place him playing in Canada?

Rob M

Well, he previously played in Montreal as evidenced by his 1912 C46 card.

[Bicem]

I won the other postcard, for not bidding higher I say...

Thank you, Brian.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by Bicem

I won the other postcard, for not bidding higher I say...

Thank you, Brian.

[ramram]

IF it is Chick, then it would fit that 1) A. Martin is another Black Sox player. I see no Martin that played in that period with Chicago. It might be Buck Weaver?

Rob M

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by ramram

IF it is Chick, then it would fit that 1) A. Martin is another Black Sox player. I see no Martin that played in that period with Chicago. It might be Buck Weaver?

Rob M

Not Buck Weaver.

[ramram]

Swede

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by ramram

Swede

Sorry to say, but no.

[ramram]

I'm in a giving mood - I'm stickiing with Swede as No. 1. He is known to have played in Canada after the banishment.

[edjs]

Admiral Martin is listed with the Quebec Bulldogs in 1923 and 1924, which fits the name on the back of your PC as guy number 1.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by edjs

Admiral Martin is listed with the Quebec Bulldogs in 1923 and 1924, which fits the name on the back of your PC as guy number 1.

Thank you, Ed. That is good and bad news. It confirms Admiral Martin, but he didn't play for the White Sox. Now, here are a couple links to the Quebec teams
for 1923 and 1924. Other names on the postcard come up in the links.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/r...gi?id=449092ab

https://www.baseball-reference.com/r...gi?id=81522855

[edjs]

1924 fits most of the guys on your card. No Turd Ferguson, though.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by edjs

1924 fits most of the guys on your card. No Turd Ferguson, though.

[edjs]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

And you know who else I saw in the stands....

[tjb1952tjb]

maybe not.............

[JollyElm]

Keeping in mind these photos aren't exactly to scale and whatnot, the nose seems significantly less prominent and his ears a little too elongated for Gandil. (And, although the hat gets in the way, he doesn't appear to have that wide, alien-looking forehead either.) However, the dark and light areas on the sides of his mouth to his cheeks are somewhat similar.

Here's a comparison...

Gandil closeup copy.jpg

[Brian Van Horn]

Tim and Darren,

Thank you both. I see your points, but there is something in the jaw line and in the way he comports himself in the photo, as well as his size, that tells me it's Gandil. Of course, "White Sox" on the back of the postcard for the ID points me in the Gandil direction, but as we've seen with the first player ID, that may not mean much.

By the way, Tim, I love the reaction of the player sitting next to Gandil in the Washington Senators photo. He's just leaning away as though Gandil just did something offensive.

[Exhibitman]

"Who is Turd Ferguson?"

You have to phrase it as a question.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Bicem

I won the other postcard, for not bidding higher I say...

Thank you, Brian.

Nice. My 3 digit snipe didn't register

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by exhibitman

"who is turd ferguson?"

you have to phrase it as a question.

lol.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by Leon

Nice. My 3 digit snipe didn't register

Whew!

[Brian Van Horn]

Now, if an individual postcard existed. Found these on eBay:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/3817329...477&rmvSB=true

[Bicem]

That's not Gandil. Not even close actually. But neat postcard none the less.

[Bicem]

Originally Posted by Leon

Nice. My 3 digit snipe didn't register

I'll trade you for your Ramly display window.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by Bicem

That's not Gandil. Not even close actually. But neat postcard none the less.

I respectfully beg to differ.

[Bicem]

Well they do say never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

Nice Gandil.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by Bicem

Well they do say never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

Nice Gandil.

Now, that is a left handed compliment!

For what it's worth here is another picture of Gandil on eBay. I know it's a nine year difference.

[ramram]

Well, Admiral Martin is just who it says he is. Maybe he had a sniff from the White Sox at a tryout.

Rob M

Martin.jpg

[Bicem]

Maybe it's Paul Waner.

[edjs]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

"Who is Turd Ferguson?"

You have to phrase it as a question.

"This song from a 1999 animated film about censorship had a word censored from its Oscar performance."

"What is the Love Ballad of Turd Ferguson?"

This was done on the real Jeopardy.

[packs]

Everything I've ever read about Gandil after 1919 has him staying in either Southern California or playing briefly in the Southwest. I don't remember reading he ever returned to Canada or ever playing under an assumed name. In fact, I would think that for a guy like Gandil, his name was all he had if he wanted to earn some money as a ringer.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by bicem

maybe it's paul waner.

lol.

[Shoeless Moe]

Concur, not Gandil, sorry wish it was.

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

I respectfully beg to differ.

Brian - You have again shown yourself to be remarkably bad at this. JollyElm (post 24) got it exactly right and saved me the trouble of finding the perfect comparison photo. You have demonstrated a combination of really bad facial recognition ability (something you can't help) combined with a refusal to even consider that there is actually some science behind the right way to do this -- this perhaps you could do something about, though even that requires some aptitude for comparing complex shapes as seen in photos. If you weren't otherwise a knowledgeable and well-known collector this would be less important, I guess. Nothing personal. All the best, Mark

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

Brian - You have again shown yourself to be remarkably bad at this. JollyElm (post 24) got it exactly right and saved me the trouble of finding the prefect comparison photo. You have demonstrated a combination of really bad facial recognition ability (something you can't help) combined with a refusal to even consider that there is actually some science behind the right way to do this -- this perhaps you could do something about, though even that requires some aptitude for comparing complex shapes as seen in photos. If you weren't otherwise a knowledgeable and well-known collector this would be less important, I guess. Nothing personal. All the best, Mark

At last sweet mystery of life I've found you!

I was wondering when you were going to show up.

Good to hear from you. I disagree of course, but feel free to chime in with your ear analysis. I welcome it.

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

...there is something in the jaw line and in the way he comports himself in the photo, as well as his size, that tells me it's Gandil.

The jaw lines don't match (yes I know you can't perceive that). And, "the way he comports himself" - what the heck does that mean? As to his size - what can you tell about his size unless you know the size of the players next to him? 3 strikes in one post - yer out!

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

The jaw lines don't match (yes I know you can't perceive that). And, "the way he comports himself" - what the heck does that mean? As to his size - what can you tell about his size unless you know the size of the players next to him? 3 strikes in one post - yer out!

I have asked you for your opinion and you insult me. Not good. As for being very bad at this, I have successfully identified in previous posts of items Roxy Walters:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...highlight=Roxy

Fritz Mollwitz:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...light=Mollwitz

Bill Carrigan, Ray Collins and Johnny Evers, although I miscounted and I'll give you credit for the proper counting in IDing Evers:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...light=Carrigan

Yeah, I really suck at this. An admission. Please note that I have not insulted you at any point in this post . I may be wrong on the Gandil, and you may disagree with me on the Waner, but it is Paul Waner.

[seablaster]

I think a poll on that Waner would prove most interesting.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by seablaster

I think a poll on that Waner would prove most interesting.

Feel free, Karthik. I have never minded being in the minority.

[bmarlowe1]

Brian - Any insult would have been in my first post -- at that point you didn't seem to take offense. The second post emphasized what I think was at best very fuzzy "thinking" as to your reasons for the Gandil ID. If you are offended by that I don't care.

Thanks for posting your facial ID resume. As a consultant on this particular subject (sometimes even paid) for major AH's, grading companies, Library of Congress, Boston Public Library, Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum to name a few (and even for non-baseball folks such as at the Harriet Beecher Stowe Museum), and having published literally a few hundred pages on the subject for SABR, I can tell you that people who have problems with this don't get them all wrong - they get a fair number of them right. The problem is that they can't tell the difference between when they get it right vs. when they are asserting an ID that is beyond ludicrous. Your Mollwitz ID was nicely done, but Your Gandil and Waner IDs are beyond ludicrous. If you are offended, I can live with that.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

Any insult would have been in my first post -- at that point you didn't seem to take offense. The second post emphasized what I think was at best very fuzzy "thinking" as to your reasons for the Gandil ID. If you are offended by that I don't care.

Thanks for posting your facial ID resume. As a consultant on this particular subject (sometimes even paid) for major AH's, grading companies, Library of Congress, Boston Public Library, Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum to name a few (and even for non-baseball folks such as at the Harriet Beecher Stowe Museum), and having published literally a few hundred pages on the subject for SABR, I can tell you that people who have problems with this don't get them all wrong - they get a fair number of them right. The problem is that they can't tell the difference between when they get it right vs. when they are asserting an ID that is beyond ludicrous. Your Mollwitz ID was nicely done, but Your Gandil and Waner IDs are beyond ludicrous. If you are offended, I can live with that.

We agree to disagree on the Waner. As for the Gandil, I may be wrong. Still, on other fronts, even with all the care that can be taken, even the most studied and precise of men can be wrong. Not an insult, just an observation from experience.

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

We agree to disagree on the Waner. As for the Gandil, I may be wrong. Still, on other fronts, even with all the care that can be taken, even the most studied and precise of men can be wrong. Not an insult, just an observation from experience.

So we trade study and precision for your gut feeling which you can't support in a clear manner? That's OK for religion, but not for this.