1921 Herpolsheimers graded w/o mark

[Al C.risafulli]

To my (and, I think, everyone else's) knowledge, every one of the known 1921 Herpolsheimers originated from one of two finds: the 2004 find of 69 or 70 cards, or the Band-Aid Box find.

EVERY 1921 Herpolsheimer in either of those two finds had a pencil notation.

The original 69 or 70 cards had a price written in pencil on the reverse. All of those cards that were originally graded either had a low grade from SGC, or a higher grade with an MK qualifier from PSA.

Eventually some of those cards had the pencil removed, and were regraded in higher-grade holders.

This new 39-card find also had pencil notations on the reverse, but they were a DIFFERENT kind of notation - each of these (including the Ruth, which didn't receive a qualifier from PSA) has the faded marking of what appears to be a card number on the bottom of the reverse (i.e. "No. 104"). Those marks are faded and in some cases difficult to see, but they're there.

-Al

[Rhotchkiss]

This is one of those rare cases where writing on a card is desired.

And, the Herpolsheimers in LOTG are so cool.

[Brian Van Horn]

Still overjoyed to not bid on the lots. I refer back to my story at the old Robert Morris show in Moon Township in Pittsburgh in May 1999. There, a gentleman who had the first cards from this "collection" waived his hand over the cards in the case and stated the prices on the back of the cards were because they were not original.

[molenick]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Still overjoyed to not bid on the lots. I refer back to my story at the old Robert Morris show in Moon Township in Pittsburgh in May 1999. There, a gentleman who had the first cards from this "collection" waived his hand over the cards in the case and stated the prices on the back of the cards were because they were not original.

I am not sure what to make of this post. Are you saying that 1921 Herpolsheimers were known in 1999 (before the 2004 find, which supposedly is when they were first discovered)? And that find or the LOTG find (or both) are not original cards?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by molenick

I am unclear what to make of this post. Are you saying that 1921 Herpolsheimers were known in 1999 (before the 2004 find, which supposedly is when they were first discovered)? And that find or the LOTG find (or both) are not original cards?

I don't think I would take much stock in 24 yr old hearsay. I have handled quite a few from that first batch and, just as the TPGs think they are real, so do I and every other sane collector.

Here's my Herpolsheimers back, with some others, from my 1st collection.
.

[frankbmd]

Is John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt in the Herpolsheimer set?

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by molenick

I am not sure what to make of this post. Are you saying that 1921 Herpolsheimers were known in 1999 (before the 2004 find, which supposedly is when they were first discovered)? And that find or the LOTG find (or both) are not original cards?

Just relaying my story once again and the cards I mentioned were eventually auctioned on eBay by another party. The thread on the matter should be able to be found. It should also be noted the guy who had them was at the first Cleveland National after 1999.

[Brian Van Horn]

Here is a post that has me responding on December 24, 2004. I have responded the same way in other posts. By the way, happy upcoming 19th anniversary on our difference of opinions on this matter and Happy Thanksgiving to you and all other members:

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...=herpolsheimer

[Brian Van Horn]

Not trying to embarrass Leon, but just pointing out history of the two posts. The first has him mentioning.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...=herpolsheimer

10/26/2004

It was 12/24/2004 he disputed me on it being real.