One more Babe Ruth vs. Rube Waddell 1917 Sports Companion thread

[frankh8147]

..

[Rhotchkiss]

I know nothing about this stamp and I was unaware of the debate. Just two quick takes: (1) Rube Waddell was dead by 1917 (not sure if that matters), and (2) kind of looks like Rube Marquard to me. Note also the thing on the sleeve, which could have been a NY symbol?

[BobC]

I also thought this had been determined to be Rube Marquard (not Wadell) as well. For a while the SCD catalogs even stated that the image on the stamp was taken from and identical to a known photo of Marquard, more or less definitively assuring the identification. The same photo Frank was showing in his post.

[frankh8147]

Sorry all, I meant Marquard in the original post.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by frankh8147

Sorry all, I meant Marquard in the original post.

No problem Frank, easy mistake. LOL

And I also have one of these stamps, and wish it was Ruth as well. I noticed that though close, if that photo you originally posted an image of is the same photo referenced and mentioned by others as being the source and an identical match to the image on the stamp, it is not exactly identical and the same after all. And as you said, there is a somewhat similar type of resemblance to a young Ruth's face in that stamp's image. I can also see a bit of a resemblance to Marquard's face as well, when comparing it to the photo Ryan had in post #3. That stamp's facial image alone is just too obscure and unclear to make a definitive identification match though. I had never seen a copy of the photo that was claimed to be used for the stamp's image, and if that one you posted is it, it does leave room for doubt after all that maybe the stamp was supposed to be a depiction of Ruth, someone else, or even no one in particular and just truly a generic figure after all. Sadly, with no other confirming information, evidence, and/or provenance about the image used on the stamp, I think we're stuck with the current thinking and opinion that it is not Ruth after all, or at best, just a generic image. Still a very neat item.

[Leon]

I can't find it right now (someone will) but that is the exact same picture clearly identified as Marquard in another place. IT is 100% Marquard. No question once that picture will resurface.

I think I found it....


.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Leon

I can't find it right now (someone will) but that is the exact same picture clearly identified as Marquard in another place. IT is 100% Marquard. No question once that picture will resurface.

I think I found it....


.

Ah, thanks Leon. There it is, that is the exact same image proving it is Marquard. Though that photo the OP initially posted was surprisingly similar.

[frankh8147]

Originally Posted by BobC

No problem Frank, easy mistake. LOL

And I also have one of these stamps, and wish it was Ruth as well. But The photo you mentioned and showed, isn't just close, it is pretty much an exact duplicate of the image on the stamp. Also, take another look at the photo of Marquard that Ryan added in post #3, and then go back and look at the photo you posted. Would be nice if it was Ruth, but sadly, I don't think so.

I get what you are saying but I've been looking at this comparison and I still just don't see it for some reason! I look at photo of Marquard he showed, and still see a thin face with features to go along with that. I look at this stamp and see Ruth.

[Rhotchkiss]

Frank, I am sorry, but unless you are this guy: https://www.ebay.com/itm/13408201502...=20001&mkevt=1

It’s Marquard!