NEED HELP with this WASHINGTON SENATORS TICKET STUB 1913-1920 but what year ?

[megalimey]

Originally Posted by Scott Garner

Although that's the way that rainouts are dealt with today,
I would like you to consider the fact that may not have been the way that they were handled prior to WWII.
In my own personal collection I have several early vintage undated tickets that have old vintage fountain pen inscriptions that indicate that a game was played on a different date than the game number indicated on the front of the ticket.
I truly believe that some teams operated on such slim financial margins in the early part of the 20th century that a second ticket would not be issued in order to save money. I know that the Brooklyn Dodgers did this, and I suspect others did as well FWIW.

This is the challenging issue with undated vintage tickets. I really don't personally believe that there were any absolutes IMHO. Just my 2 cents.

unfortunately hand written dates have been fabricated for over 30-40 years
especially when people realized some of the prices they were getting
you ever noticed the games are all significant ??
I still find it hard to accept some one just went to the turnstile with a torn rain check stub , and were allowed admission , imagine the chaos in say Home game 67 where they had been over prior 12 rain-outs and hundred of people showed with all different game numbers on their torn tickets stubs , not even an IBM computer would have been able to sort out that , let alone a underpaid ticket collector how would he know , he would have to get a print out of all the games and doing this with all the people in line , just looking at the logistical nightmare that would cause , Most vintage tickets state "ticket must be exchanged for a future game subject to availability
and all AL and NL teams abide by the same rules due to the Revenue sharing back in the day , and knowing how many paid admission would determine pay out to visiting team. and total paid attendance .
I look it from the logistical aspect and not the emotional right or wrong

[Scott Garner]

Hi David,
Last reply on this & then I'm out.
The rain out scenario that I am referring to is a game that wasn't played at all.
This would create an unused ticket, not a ticket that was torn.

As far as every undated ticket with writing on it being to a historic game, I would have to say that I actually have not found that to be the case at all. Most examples that I have seen in my 45 years of collecting vintage baseball tickets have actually been to meaningless games...

[Hankphenom]

Somebody should write a ticket book, assuming there isn't one. I remember a dealer at the old Ft. Washington shows who was THE ticket guy, might even have called himself the ticket man. Can't remember his name, unfortunately he died many years ago.

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by Hankphenom

Somebody should write a ticket book, assuming there isn't one. I remember a dealer at the old Ft. Washington shows who was THE ticket guy, might even have called himself the ticket man. Can't remember his name, unfortunately he died many years ago.

Hank,
Dan Busby, a good friend, who is another long-time collector of baseball tickets is actually working on an excellent reference book on Washington Senators tickets that should be getting close to completion. He sent me a draft to look over about a year ago.

[Hankphenom]

Originally Posted by Scott Garner

Hank,
Dan Busby, a good friend, who is another long-time collector of baseball tickets is actually working on an excellent reference book on Washington Senators tickets that should be getting close to completion. He sent me a draft to look over about a year ago.

I forgot about that, especially since it's a Washington ticket. He sent me a chunk of the book years ago, very interesting. I assume you picked his brain for whatever help he could offer. I haven't seen many early Nationals tickets over the years.

[icollectDCsports]

Originally Posted by Scott Garner

Hank,
Dan Busby, a good friend, who is another long-time collector of baseball tickets is actually working on an excellent reference book on Washington Senators tickets that should be getting close to completion. He sent me a draft to look over about a year ago.

I remember you mentioning this some time ago. I'm soooo looking forward to this book becoming available. Please let Dan know it's eagerly anticipated.

[nolemmings]

I’m afraid you won’t get far pinning down the date using the sponsor’s name. Holmes was the largest retail baker in the area at the time, and as noted, had been there awhile. Hopefully you can discover that they only placed their ads on the backs of tickets during one season, like they did with the m101-5 cards. Their address was at one time on E Street and First; however, they had multiple expansions around 1912 and thereafter, and the F Street and 1st address is likely part of the same complex. The phone number and street address stayed the same during that time.

It seems pretty clear the ticket was from the 2nd game of the 1913 season against Boston, as observed. I agree that it may not have been necessary for a rain check to be exchanged for a new ticket. I believe this is particularly so given the time of the season. It was only the second game of the year being played. The first attempt at game 2 was not played and likely was never started. Any ticket taker could think back to 12 days prior and remember that other than the opener, no home games had been played. Even if the practice was to redeem and exchange, I could see a ticket taker recognizing the validity of any game 2, 3 or 4 rain check under those circumstances. Moreover, the game was unremarkable, which weighs against any incentive to fake the score notation. Finally, I disagree somewhat with the notion that two other games with the same outcome from the era may have produced this ticket. In both the 1916 and 1919 seasons, home game 2 was actually played as scheduled. I do not see how such a game(s) could have formed the basis of a valid rain check, even if it did not have to be exchanged for a new ticket.

[megalimey]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I’m afraid you won’t get far pinning down the date using the sponsor’s name. Holmes was the largest retail baker in the area at the time, and as noted, had been there awhile. Hopefully you can discover that they only placed their ads on the backs of tickets during one season, like they did with the m101-5 cards. Their address was at one time on E Street and First; however, they had multiple expansions around 1912 and thereafter, and the F Street and 1st address is likely part of the same complex. The phone number and street address stayed the same during that time.

It seems pretty clear the ticket was from the 2nd game of the 1913 season against Boston, as observed. I agree that it may not have been necessary for a rain check to be exchanged for a new ticket. I believe this is particularly so given the time of the season. It was only the second game of the year being played. The first attempt at game 2 was not played and likely was never started. Any ticket taker could think back to 12 days prior and remember that other than the opener, no home games had been played. Even if the practice was to redeem and exchange, I could see a ticket taker recognizing the validity of any game 2, 3 or 4 rain check under those circumstances. Moreover, the game was unremarkable, which weighs against any incentive to fake the score notation. Finally, I disagree somewhat with the notion that two other games with the same outcome from the era may have produced this ticket. In both the 1916 and 1919 seasons, home game 2 was actually played as scheduled. I do not see how such a game(s) could have formed the basis of a valid rain check, even if it did not have to be exchanged for a new ticket.

in 1913 When the Red Sox Came to town it was the first Visit To Washington as World Champions , there would have been a great Demand for the tickets as evident on the 14,000 attendance there were only 3 games all season that got more than 10,000 one was opening day the other two were against the Red Sox

Baseball clubs were not in the business to allow any one with a raincheck for a previously rained out game to just go to the turnstiles and that would cause to much confusion , if presented they would be told to go to the Ticket office and exchange for the game being played subject to availability , to prevent over capacity , also the ticket had already been paid for and if never used it was a win win for the club so that why they made the rule . Home Games 2-3-4-5-and 6 were rained out so when the REDSOX came to town
the demand would have been great , so having 100's or possibly thousands unaccounted for patrons show up with their raincheck would have been a logistical nightmare if same ticket was allowed entry
i have seen 100's of rain checks from pre WWII that clearly state in the event of game not legally played ticket must be exchanged for any future game "SUBJECT TO AVAILABILITY " AND THE MLB teams all followed the same rules , this was done to have accurate revenue gate receipts which the away team would share some of .