Top 3 cards of Ruth, Cobb, and Shoeless Joe

[Yoda]

Joe Jackson: Texas Tommy
Babe Ruth: E121 Throwing
Ty Cobb: T3, T227

[edjs]

I personally like the d304 Cobb. They also seem to be selling well lately.

[T_Hamilton]

Originally Posted by edjs

I personally like the d304 Cobb. They also seem to be selling well lately.

As someone who just picked up a beautiful SGC 20 D304 General Baking Cobb, I could not agree more.

[maximus35]

Originally Posted by edjs

I personally like the d304 Cobb. They also seem to be selling well lately.

Yes, that card has been on my want list.
I am surprised nobody mentioned Joe Jax collins mccarthy.

[Touch'EmAll]

A Ruth card, for sheer eye appeal, the 1926 Exhibit pose is one heck of a card. Classic and just oozes vinatge. Beautiful.

[brian1961]

The best Ty Cobb card of them all is his T-3. There are at least a dozen really beautiful cards of The Georgia Peach, but the T-3 is second to none. --Brian Powell

[orly57]

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

A Ruth card, for sheer eye appeal, the 1926 Exhibit pose is one heck of a card. Classic and just oozes vinatge. Beautiful.

I couldn't agree more. If that card were released in a "standard size," guys would go ga-ga over it. Never mind that everyone adores the enormous T3 and the tiny t206. The 21 Exhibits and the exhibits series of champions are also amazing, and nicer than ANY standard cards released of Ruth prior to the Goudeys. Here is a side by side of a standard card and the exhibit with the same image. Bigger IS better. And since Cobb is included in this thread, I will include him too. The beauty of the image is multiplied 100x over on an exhibit or a postcard. And it's not like these "standard" cards had stat or bio-backs, so that distinction wouldn't fly either.

[brian1961]

Orlando,

Your graphic comparison should be most compelling for the unconvinced, or the tunnel-visioned malcontents that insist "important cards" are only chosen from what was the standard size of that time period. I sometimes term their malady as being "standard-sized card challenged".

The same thing occurs on the post-war side, too.

On the other hand, with the prime focus recently on the Lou Gehrig Exhibit, some collectors are finally starting to think "outside the box". It's not good if we all think alike anyway; variety is the spice of life. Moreover, to the point, if you see the beauty and the refined aesthetics in some of the over-sized cards, and your rivals do not, or are blinded by their own assumptions etc, that means less competition for you in pursuing them. That point is also quite profound.

Orlando, if you wish me to delete this for your own sake, simply PM me.

For now, food for thought. Remember what your Mother taught you, "chew your food well, dear."

I just wish I could afford a T-3 Ty Cobb. What a masterpiece! Even if Ty was the player most often chosen by collectors back in the 1910s, and thus the most "common", think about what the ravages of time, handling, and sunlight did to almost all of them..............

Cheers. ---Brian Powell

[orly57]

Well said! Would have made for a great PM. But, please leave it up. This is a forum, after all.

[Leon]

D304 Cobby was the first card used for a Net54baseball T shirt...for a reason. I still think I like the T205 a bit better but I really like the D304s...

Demand is a bit determinant on price. Everyone wants a Ruth Rookie, and they aren't particularly rare, but they are in huge demand at a certain price and not as much at another. Maybe the better question is posed with price "not" determinant and price determinant? And for some eye candy the D304s I used to own, with Cobby...the bottom Rucker made it back into the current collection...

Originally Posted by edjs

I personally like the d304 Cobb. They also seem to be selling well lately.