m101 Sisler

[smtjoy]

I was a bidder but didnt go all in because of a recent fake I purchased that looked about the same, its the best fake of an m101 I have seen and could not even tell until I had it in hand under a loop.

[nolemmings]

Are "rookie" cards really that big in pre-war, or is the Sisler more scarce than other M101-4, -5's ?

Not scarcer from a production standpoint--maybe just less turnover.

[chaddurbin]

the card hardly come up in lower grade. i had a snipe but imo it sold for what it should have. i also consider all the m101 his rookie, but prefer the "P" designation more than the "1b".

[Bocabirdman]

I had the high bid on this card for most of the day. I just threw a twenty spot at it and lo and behold it was the high bid. I knew that it wouldn't hold up. I intended to bid again later. Kinda slipped my mind. I was here reading threads. When I found the outbid notification in my inbox, I went over to check and it was sitting at like 59 bucks. I stepped away from the computer for a butt and to decide what bid to make and when I returned, it was over. For the record, I didn't realize it was his RC. I was out-gunned.

[h2oya311]

Yep - I won this one...have been looking for a low grade example of this "rookie" card for a while now.

sorry to disappoint other board members. I was hoping it would finish lower than $300, but couldn't pass it up at that price. I've seen far too many go for > $500.

I hope it's legit. I haven't received it yet.

Also, one member mentioned that the M101-5 is "older" than the M101-4. Why, then, does the M101-4 show #164, but the M101-5 shows #166. It would seem logical that M101-4 is older, then? Are there other threads here that suggest the M101-5 pre-dates the M101-4?

[JasonD08]

M101-5s came out a few months prior to the M101-4s. M101-5s are blank and some 4s are blank I believe. Correct me if I am wrong.

[nolemmings]

I was a little careless in my first post--the m101-5s predated the m101-4s by only a few to several weeks, not as far as three months. M101-5 could not have been released before February 20, 1916. M101-4 was likely ready for release by April 6, 1916; i.e. 47 days later. The actual dates that these cards were printed is likely even closer in time.

The card numbering is irrelevant to which came first, as Mendelsohn made player changes that affected his attempt to number in alphabetical order. It is logical to assume that Burdick would have designated the lower number m101-4 as earlier in time to the m101-5-- why he did not is unknown. The changes in the two sets makes clear that Mendelsohn was updating the cards' accuracy in m101-4; e.g. changing #2 Agnew's team from Browns (m101-5) to Red Sox (m101-4) to reflect a trade to Boston in December '15--thus m101-4 came later. BTW as Quan noted, the m101-5 Sisler identified him as a pitcher (same pose) rather than the 1b captioned in m101-4.