1934-1936 R327 Diamond Stars

[Leon]

We don't see these colorful, art deco, cards talked about enough. I guess because the set doesn't have some of the biggest names...Ruth, Gehrig...

From the BST a short while ago..always liked this pose

[prestigecollectibles]

One of my favorites sets. I completed it a few years ago.

[GeoPoto]

Charles S. "Buddy" Myer. Second baseman with the Washington Senators in 1925-1927 and 1929-1941. 2,131 hits and 38 home runs in 17 MLB seasons. He had a career OBP of .389. 2-time All-Star. 1935 AL Batting champion. 1928 AL Stolen Base leader. His best season was 1935 for Washington as he posted a .440 OBP with 115 runs scored and 100 RBI's in 719 plate appearances. He was involved in one of baseball's most violent brawls when he was spiked and possibly racially derided by the Yankees' Ben Chapman.

Here's Buddy's Diamond Stars with a back for each year:


Sent from my motorola edge 5G UW (2021) using Tapatalk

[Yoda]

I have never understood why DS are overlooked and undervalued. They are beautiful Art Deco design and perfect for the period when they were issued, I think the Foxx, Hornsby and Grove are wonderful cards.

[cgjackson222]

The Hank "Greenburg" error has been on my want list for a long time.

Here is Wes Ferrell, one of the greatest two-way players ever.

[Bill77]

This reminds me that I need to look for more of these.

[ldrunner27]

My first ever prewar purchase, 30 years ago.

[BioCRN]

Love the set, but I hate it only has 3 Cubs players.

Well, it has 4 if you count Stan Hack having 2 cards with the same front - #34 and #107. The difference is the stat line for 1934 on #34 and 1935 on #107.

At least 1 of the 3 players is a HOF'r.

[brianp-beme]

A few of my favorites from this fantastically great set...

A couple of Hall of Famer cards with interesting, get you right into the action perspectives (Ducky's card has some sort of photo session going on in the background):

distarsduckyandpoison 001 (536x640).jpgdistarsduckyandpoison 001 (535x640).jpg

A couple more action pose charmers with great stadium/cityscape backgrounds, these horizontally orientated:

diamondstarsostermueller 001 (640x537).jpgdistarstrosky 001 (640x545).jpg

A couple with conversations going on behind the player's backs:

distarsfour 001 (1024x624).jpg

A trio each having a whole mess of bats:

distarswithbats 001 (1280x524).jpg

And finally my favorite all-time artistic additions to a card, the Mellilo on the right (not my handiwork...I'm more into stick figures):

DiStarsMellilloversion002.jpg



Brian

[GasHouseGang]

Picked up off B/S/T some time ago.

[Beercan collector]

I need to resume my search for Frisch For my gang bangers set ,
($40-$90 or so)

[bbcard1]

Finished it up last year.Those high numbers were nasty.

I only have one, got this at a card show in Kenilworth, NJ just off the GSP in the early 80's

[FromVAtoLA]

Building a Glory of Their Times Set and found a nice Waner recently. Still need to track down a Greenberg for a reasonable price.

[ValKehl]

Would you expect me to post any other card?

[FrankWakefield]

I've been thinking about these cards a bit, lately.

The R136 Sky Birds by National Chicle... the backs start in 1933 with Series of 48 on the back, only to get big plans with 1934 cards with Series of 144 on the back; yet in total the cards are numbered 1 through 108.

The R327 Diamond Stars by National Chicle, start in 1934, talking of a Series of 240 with green backs, then 1935 dates with a Series of green backs, then 1935 with blue backs, ending with 1936 with blue backs... always mentioning a Series of 240 cards; yet in total the cards ar numbered, wait for it, yes, 1-108.

Sky Birds started first, and was expanded. Diamond Stars started the next year, aspiring to equal the 1933 Goudey's in quantity. Both may well have been printed in 12 card bunches. And both put the brakes on production at 108. Any of you studied this???

I REALLY like this set. I doubt I ever complete it. But I would like to find affordable examples of Ruffing and Bottomley, in about VG, not graded.

[FrankWakefield]

https://www.net54baseball.com/attach...1&d=1704774598

[Johnny T]

I completed mine a couple of years ago. Originally was going to pass on the high numbers since they were scarce, expensive and the same card as the previous issue with a different number on the back...but then as I drew near and found a couple at a "reasonable" price, I finished the whole 108. John Goodman (I'm pretty sure he's on this forum) at the Philly Show convinced me that it wasn't complete without the high numbers...thanks John for setting me straight!

JT

[skelly423]

Originally Posted by Leon

We don't see these colorful, art deco, cards talked about enough. I guess because it doesn't have some of the biggest names...

From the BST a short while ago..always liked this pose

I recognize that Hornsby! Glad you're still enjoying it, the Diamond Stars set is a thing of beauty

[Zan]

My favorite card of Hank's. Fortunate to have 20, including two signed examples in my collection. These are two of the better ones.

[Chuck9788]

Two of my faves from this set.

[raulus]

Here’s my Mel Ott, although he’s a bit left of center.

[Gorditadogg]

I like the Art Deco style of this set. I have 11 Diamond Star cards, including this one which hasn't been shown yet.

[Chris Counts]

Thanks to a board member, I was able to obtain a nice lot of Diamond Stars signed with fountain pen autographs a few years ago. Here are the Reds ...

[Shankweather]

I never get tired of seeing this set! In my opinion the Stan Hack is the best looking Cubs card of all time.

[refz]

Very attractive and underrated set. I actually prefer the Ott & Greenberg cards in this set over the Goudey. The condition sensitive card #1 (Grove) will be on my 2024 wishlist. Low grade 😀

[puckpaul]

Love this set. Just completed it last year, though still could upgrade a couple. Also had to drop the grade for the high numbers…those are TOUGH! The set is underrated given the difficulty of the high numbers to complete. Thought about a master set with the different backs but not going for that right now. The Grove, Traynor, Van Mungo, and Greenberg my favorites.

[ajquigs]

32 HOFers

[robinsonmantle]

Fan of this set of baseball cards

[Bill77]

Just one more from me unless I buy some more in the near future.

[hammertime]

One of my absolute favorite cards...

[molenick]

Love Diamond Stars...I am about halfway through towards completing the set. Here are some horizontal ones.

[makav3l1]

New to the forum, loving this thread. I'm a big Diamond Stars fan, and have picking away at obtaining signed DS cards over the years. When I get a chance, I'll try to add a few to this thread.

[makav3l1]

Loving this Gehringer...

[StraightRaceCards]

Diamond stars may be one of the more under-rated sets out there.

Amazing cards, artwork quality work!

[Spike]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

I've been thinking about these cards a bit, lately.

The R136 Sky Birds by National Chicle... the backs start in 1933 with Series of 48 on the back, only to get big plans with 1934 cards with Series of 144 on the back; yet in total the cards are numbered 1 through 108.

The R327 Diamond Stars by National Chicle, start in 1934, talking of a Series of 240 with green backs, then 1935 dates with a Series of green backs, then 1935 with blue backs, ending with 1936 with blue backs... always mentioning a Series of 240 cards; yet in total the cards are numbered, wait for it, yes, 1-108.

Sky Birds started first, and was expanded. Diamond Stars started the next year, aspiring to equal the 1933 Goudey's in quantity. Both may well have been printed in 12 card bunches. And both put the brakes on production at 108. Any of you studied this???

Three ex-Goudey Gum execs incorporated National Chicle as a new company in December 1933, so the similar approaches to printing makes some sense. Confectionery industry magazines and federal copyright data from 1934-36 add some detail.

Chicle's Sky Birds initial "series of 48" kicked off in mid-Jan 1934 and expanded to "series of 144" sometime later that year. They debuted Batter-Up baseball #1-80 in May 1934 and Diamond Stars Gum #1-24 came out sometime midyear. As you noted, Diamond Stars expanded in 1935-36. Jason Schwartz's research for SABR shows that Batter-Up's high series waited until 1936. Chicle's 1934 non-sport sets include Tom Mix booklets #1-24 Sept/Oct 1934, followed by #25-48. It's unclear when Dare Devils #1-24 came out, as the current archive.org data lacks trademark claims for that particular set.

Archive's copyright records _do_ show Goudey and National Chicle often left gaps to trick kids into buying numbers that didn't yet exist. Goudey scattered its 1933 Big League Gum numbers all over the place and then released 1934 Big League Gum #1-3 + #5-24 on May 1 and held #4 for their next series a month later. Running a business during the Great Depression must've been a factor in companies stringing all these pieces along, bit by bit, hoping to get a bit more money.

Customer complaints might've encouraged our government to prevent further "scattered number" schemes. They purportedly forced Goudey to complete the 1933 set in 1934 by providing the newly-printed #106 Lajoie on request. The FTC also hit Goudey with a cease-and-desist on its lottery-like gum sales approaches in 1938, which I'll guess followed some previous investigations. National Chicle went bankrupt and sold its trademarks to Goudey in mid-1937, so lack of competition might also play a role. Hope that's all useful info!

[cfp]

I have almost completed the Sky Birds set, but just have a few Diamond Stars. I have been thinking about putting the Diamond Stars together and this thread might be just the push I need

[puckpaul]

It was interesting to go back over the PSA pop reports on DS. The high numbers are definitely scarce. With 15-40 examples graded, and not jist 97-108 but also 85-96.

But what is the deal with the Lew Fonseca card number 7? Only 7 are listed as graded. Is this a true rarity? I have the whole set so I should know, but i bought 80% of it in one lot and never searched for many of the cards.

My Fonseca is labeled as “35 years old”. There was a thread on this a little back in 2003 that I found searching the forum. Was that a gimmicked card that was issued later or purposely low-printed? Never hear it talked about on these boards.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by puckpaul

It was interesting to go back over the PSA pop reports on DS. The high numbers are definitely scarce. With 15-40 examples graded, and not jist 97-108 but also 85-96.

But what is the deal with the Lew Fonseca card number 7? Only 7 are listed as graded. Is this a true rarity? I have the whole set so I should know, but i bought 80% of it in one lot and never searched for many of the cards.

My Fonseca is labeled as “35 years old”. There was a thread on this a little back in 2003 that I found searching the forum. Was that a gimmicked card that was issued later or purposely low-printed? Never hear it talked about on these boards.

The Diamond Stars were issued from 1934 to 1936, and many of the same card numbers were issued multiple times with different information on the back depending on the year they were issued. For the Fonseca, it either says 34 years old or 35 years old in the bio information at the bottom depending on if it was issued in 1934 or 1935. I'm not sure why the population count is so low.

[Seven]

Was it ever determined why Gehrig wasn't in the set? Licensing problem? Compensation?

As far as I know the only issues from around this time for Gehrig were his cardboard cutouts through Wheaties, or his rare World Wide Gum issue from 1936.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by jayshum

The Diamond Stars were issued from 1934 to 1936, and many of the same card numbers were issued multiple times with different information on the back depending on the year they were issued. For the Fonseca, it either says 34 years old or 35 years old in the bio information at the bottom depending on if it was issued in 1934 or 1935. I'm not sure why the population count is so low.

And to add on to what Jay said, it is easy to check the issue date for all but the Fonseca card by checking the year listed for the stats on the bottom, and just add a year. For example, cards that have stats for the year 1934 were issued in 1935. Since 1933 was the last year Lew was in the majors, the makers of Diamond Stars left his 1933 stats on his 1935 card, and only updated his age.

Brian

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by makav3l1

New to the forum, loving this thread. I'm a big Diamond Stars fan, and have picking away at obtaining signed DS cards over the years. When I get a chance, I'll try to add a few to this thread.

Welcome Joe.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by Seven

Was it ever determined why Gehrig wasn't in the set? Licensing problem? Compensation?

As far as I know the only issues from around this time for Gehrig were his cardboard cutouts through Wheaties, or his rare World Wide Gum issue from 1936.

Diamond Stars were first issued in 1934, the year in which Lou was prominently featured in the 1934 Goudey set with 2 cards and the "Lou Gehrig Says" on most of the cards, so I assume he had an exclusive contract for that year and perhaps the following years (?) And perhaps since that was the case, as a carryover he was not considered for other later issued Diamond Series cards.

It is interesting to note that he is also not in any other later Goudey sets (1935 4 in 1, 1936 B/W, the R312 or R313 premiums or the 1938 Heads Up. Perhaps a dispute with Goudey?

Brian

[refz]

The crosetti here for whatever reason is one of my favorites in the set!

[Mike Eisenbath]

The background artwork is fascinating on many of the cards. Really grateful for this thread. Has me interested in a set I'd honestly never considered.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by Shankweather

I never get tired of seeing this set! In my opinion the Stan Hack is the best looking Cubs card of all time.

Completely agree, that is a great looking card. I wish Stanley Hack was in the HoF.

[Beercan collector]

Originally Posted by Mike Eisenbath

The background artwork is fascinating on many of the cards. Really grateful for this thread. Has me interested in a set I'd honestly never considered.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

agree the artwork is great on every single card

[conor912]

About 10 years ago a card I had been looking for for a while popped up on ebay as part of a lot. I emailed the seller and asked if he would sell the one card separately. We started talking and it became clear that he didn’t know much about cards. He went on to explain that these were his uncle’s cards and that he had inherited them. We worked out a price and I asked him if there were any other cards from his uncle he wanted to sell and he said “I have these” with a pic of stacks upon stacks of gum cards including a near complete set of Diamond Stars which I ended up buying. The entire story is long and drawn out, so I’ll spare the details for brevity, but when I hear or think about the issue, I am always reminded that it always pays to ask, “what else have you got?”

[puckpaul]

Originally Posted by jayshum

The Diamond Stars were issued from 1934 to 1936, and many of the same card numbers were issued multiple times with different information on the back depending on the year they were issued. For the Fonseca, it either says 34 years old or 35 years old in the bio information at the bottom depending on if it was issued in 1934 or 1935. I'm not sure why the population count is so low.

Thanks. Well, i was looking up other Fonseca cards for sale and clicking through for listings from the pop report there were 4 psa graded DS Fonseca’s on Ebay today alone, so clearly PSA is just missing info and the website pop report is in error.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by puckpaul

Thanks. Well, i was looking up other Fonseca cards for sale and clicking through for listings from the pop report there were 4 psa graded DS Fonseca’s on Ebay today alone, so clearly PSA is just missing info and the website pop report is in error.

The PSA population report has three separate listings for Diamond Stars Cards: 1934, 1935, and 1936. The Fonseca card is listed in both 1934 and 1935, which is accurate, because the Fonseca card was not issued in 1936.

In the 1935 listing, PSA has Fonseca listed without the '35 Years Old' designation, which is perfectly fine, and is possibly their new way of identifying this card on labels. I see 10 total cards graded, 3 with qualifiers.

In the 1934 listing, PSA has two separate Fonseca listings:

34 Years Old: total of 91 cards graded

35 Years Old: total of 84 cards graded


The '35 Years Old' listing in 1934 is incorrect, and should be moved to the 1935 section listing.

Brian