Need Help Identifying Series

[Archive]

Posted By: Mike

Hi; Can anyone tell me what year and series this player is from? Thanks, Mike

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

1896 N301 Mayo's Die-cut Game Cards


BACK Year(s) Published: 1896
ACC Designation: N301
Set Name: Mayo's Die-cut Game Cards
Card Size (inches): 3/4 x 1-1/2
Number of Cards in Set: 28
Est. Value (common; VG): $30

[Archive]

Posted By: Glen V

1888 R & S Die Cuts

http://www.oldcardboard.com/n/r&s-die-cuts/r&s-die-cuts.asp?cardsetID=685

[Archive]

Posted By: DR

Yep!

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I always get these confused.... R and S it is.....when looking at backs it's very easy to tell the Mayo ones as they say that on them....

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Hornish

Ah, I had a few of these years ago and never knew what they were. In 1981 I traded them for some shiny stuff as I recall, although it may have been some Brooklyn Dodger cards. Longtime mystery solved!

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Lindholme

These entries from Old Cardboard seem to indicate that R&S diecuts are 50% more valuable than the Mayo. The "cards" are similar but it seems to me that R&S pop up more frequently for sale. I know there is a limited market for these, but whats the consensus on which is rarer and is the rarity what would determine value on these? Also is 30 to 45 dollars each realistic?

Thanks
Brian L
familytoad

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

Mayo game pieces are much more rare and more valuable. Artistic are common as dirt, I have owned a dozen + sets of 10 and sold 2 full sets in Cleveland this past National.

[LHaggarty]

Interesting to note in another thread that these are actually Raphael Tuck and Sons oblaten (scraps), not sure why they are referred to as R&S.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by LHaggarty

Interesting to note in another thread that these are actually Raphael Tuck and Sons oblaten (scraps), not sure why they are referred to as R&S.

maybe R & S is -

Raphael Tuck and Sons

[LHaggarty]

You're right, and what I think is that when people look at the logo, especially on the oblaten, they mistake the T for the ampersand (&) behind it, or think the T is part of the ampersand for some reason (or someone did once, and now we all call the little baseball guys R&S.)

Here's the logo from another set of scraps I have:



Which as you can see, the printing is not clear.

Here's the logo from a postcard:



Clearer to read, but the T is still somewhat obscured by the ampersand. I can see why this happened (does anyone know when?) and find it all very interesting (I have many, many Tuck postcards in my inventory.)

Laura