Help identify this ball player

[slidekellyslide]

Not a professional player IMO. Just a gag card like this one.

[53Browns]

I agree, just a novelty item.

[T206Jim]

The AZO four triangles up was used from 1904 to 1918.

Mathewson earned his highest salary of $10,000 a year in 1910.

You guys might want to take a closer look at those photos.

[scooter729]

If they were looking to capture Mathewson in 1910, they wouldn't offer up a pose of him holding a bat. Why wouldn't it be a pitching pose if it were to be an image of Matty?

[vintagesportscollector]

Given the picture and the caption, it makes sense it would be meant to depict a professional ball player, so if not Mathewson, who else? I am honestly starting to see Mathewson in the photo (or my brain playing tricks). The menacing grin is no making it look like Mathewson.

[Kawika]

Originally Posted by T206Jim

You guys might want to take a closer look at those photos.

Not even close. Ear lobes are all wrong for starters.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Kawika

Not even close. Ear lobes are all wrong for starters.

Agree, to me it's clearly 2 different people.

[JTysver]

Not Matty at all.
Sideburns lines are different. Hair part is different. Jaw shape is different. Chin is different. Brow is different.

[Kawika]

Originally Posted by JTysver

Not Matty at all.
Sideburns lines are different. Hair part is different. Jaw shape is different. Chin is different. Brow is different.

I should have mentioned that when I cobbled together the two photos I reversed the Matty image so their countenances would be in the same alignment. Therefore the different parts in their hair should be discounted. Everything else you have enumerated is valid.

[frankbmd]

Originally Posted by Kawika

Not even close. Ear lobes are all wrong for starters.

Yeah, those are definitely a closer's ear lobes.

[packs]

It would be the same as if I put my head on a body and had them type up $30,000,000 a year man. Just because someone made that amount of money in 1910 doesn't mean that person must be the guy on the postcard.

[darwinbulldog]

People see what they want to see. Whenever we have one of these posts, we have a couple of people pointing out a couple of minor similarities between the anonymous person's features and those of a famous ball-player. You don't need to do that when it actually is a picture of the famous ball-player. You just look at it and say, "Hey, cool picture of Wagner you've got there." We have very intricately evolved facial recognition adaptations. My guess is most people here are as good at telling if something is a picture of Christy Mathewson's T206-era face as they are at identifying recent pictures of their own family members. If the group is saying no, the answer is no.

The only ambiguous one I can recall is the possible Joe Jackson in the T202 center panel, and that is the proverbial exception that proves the rule as it's such a poor image for identification purposes that I wouldn't feel confident identifying my own father in it (or rather, in a photo of similar quality).