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

[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 .

[nolemmings]

"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 "

And yet this stub bears no such language. Hmm.

[Scott Garner]

Not the same year, but note the exact language that the Washington Senators use with regards to ticket use

[megalimey]

Originally Posted by megalimey

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 .

here are some examples of what most Rain checks stated including world series during the same period
this was an accepted exchange only policy used through out the MLB and not always clearly identified on some ball clubs tickets ,
MLB was the only game in town so they made the rules to be adhered to
the "Montgomery Biscuits" may not had the same policy for their 23 patrons

[nolemmings]

"here are some examples of what most Rain checks stated including world series during the same period "

Yet none of them states "SUBJECT TO AVAILABILITY", as you claim is mentioned on hundreds of prewar stubs. Hmmm. Maybe not such uniformity after all.

It seems you have established, at least in your mind, that what you have is not the ticket stub from an actual ballgame played in 1913. After all, since you maintain that a rain check can never be used for admittance but instead must be exchanged, then what you have could not have been used in 1913.
Game 2 was never played due to rain, so it is in effect a dead ticket if from that season, or it was issued in a later year. Someone must have mistakenly or nefariously wrote the score of what just happens to be the result from the second game played in Nationals Park during the 1913 season to remind everyone of that Dutch Leonard-Bob Groom iconic 8-3 game for the ages.

Good luck in your quest.

[megalimey]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

"here are some examples of what most Rain checks stated including world series during the same period "

Yet none of them states "SUBJECT TO AVAILABILITY", as you claim is mentioned on hundreds of prewar stubs. Hmmm. Maybe not such uniformity after all.

It seems you have established, at least in your mind, that what you have is not the ticket stub from an actual ballgame played in 1913. After all, since you maintain that a rain check can never be used for admittance but instead must be exchanged, then what you have could not have been used in 1913.
Game 2 was never played due to rain, so it is in effect a dead ticket if from that season, or it was issued in a later year. Someone must have mistakenly or nefariously wrote the score of what just happens to be the result from the second game played in Nationals Park during the 1913 season to remind everyone of that Dutch Leonard-Bob Groom iconic 8-3 game for the ages.

Good luck in your quest.

I would willing except the date however, but it has nothing concrete to identify the year other than notation Having Game 2 throws it off for "me", I know it could be over a hundred years old which is the only reason I wanted it , this may have passed through several different hands , I would loved to have seen it in a scrapbook with some other items that had possible related dates but that did not happen .
one thing is certain it stirred a few pots and provided some great insights
as to its age , thanks for every ones input and it did not get ugly as sometimes it can get when there is a disagreement/opinion .