1921 Herpolsheimers graded w/o mark

[horzverti]

Very amusing thread. To try to keep it entertaining, here are a few theories:

1. Brian is trying to save face – he is remaining firm in his belief the 1921 Herpolsheimer's are fakes because he holds a ton of regret because he didn’t buy the entire lot of 39 cards for about $85 total at the show in 1999.

……or……

2. There were actually 40 cards and the extra card was a second Ruth in better condition. On a whim, Brian bought it for $5. He keeps pushing the thread as a genius move for increased interest in the set, ahead of selling his card for good money. Brian’s post #279, “The "1921" Herpolsheimer cards are fakes, but will probably have more findings in the future. Wow, the possibilities. I'll leave out the incentives for the possibilities because they are obvious.” This is satire...I don't know of more Ruth examples.

……or……

3. Brian never attended that show in 1999 and has never seen the first group of cards before they were sold a while back. The wizard-like, wand-waving “dealer” was just a dream. So just trolling to troll?

……and the truth……

4. Being more serious now….Rhett explained in his post #218 that the checklist of players match perfectly with those included in other similar 1921 sets. The previously unknown subjects (the new 1/1s) which were found in this 39 card group confirm Rhett’s theory. Considering how far the knowledge in the hobby has advanced since the 1970s through the internet, shared resources and die-hard collectors like you; Rhett is also correct that these cards could not have been made in the 1970s. Logically, the cards are original, they date back to 1921 and are pretty rare. “They’re real…and they’re spectacular!”

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by horzverti

Very amusing thread. To try to keep it entertaining, here are a few theories:

1. Brian is trying to save face – he is remaining firm in his belief the 1921s are fakes because he holds a ton of regret because he didn’t buy the entire lot of 39 cards for about $85 total at the show in 1999.

……or……

2. There were actually 40 cards and the extra card was a second Ruth in better condition. On a whim, Brian bought it for $5. He keeps pushing the thread as a genius move for increased interest in the set, ahead of selling his card for good money. Brian’s post #279, “The "1921" Herpolsheimer cards are fakes, but will probably have more findings in the future. Wow, the possibilities. I'll leave out the incentives for the possibilities because they are obvious.”

……or……

3. Brian never attended that show in 1999 and has never seen the first group of cards before they were sold a while back. The wizard-like, wand-waving “dealer” was just a dream. So just trolling to troll?

……and the truth……

4. Being more serious now….Rhett explained in his post #218 that the checklist of players match perfectly with those included in other similar 1921 sets. The previously unknown subjects (the new 1/1s) which were found in this 39 card group confirm Rhett’s theory. Considering how far the knowledge in the hobby has advanced since the 1970s through the internet, shared resources and die-hard collectors like you; Rhett is also correct that these cards could not have been made in the 1970s. Logically, the cards are original, they date back to 1921 and are pretty rare. “They’re real…and they’re spectacular!”

1. Ball one

2. Ball two

3. Ball three

4. Once again from the link in yesterday's post 240 which was originally meant to dispel my argument:

https://archive.org/details/LanstonM...e/n23/mode/2up

A typographical specimen booklet containing borders and ornaments for casting on the Lanston Monotype Composition Caster, Lanston Monotype Type-Caster, Lanston Monotype Giant Caster and Monotype-Thompson Type-Caster. This booklet is from a Lanston Monotype specimen book (binder) bearing the general title "Monotype Type Faces." It is undated, but based on internal evidence elsewhere in the binder it is from the late 1930s or early 1940s.

A set can be faked and by a person who works as a printer.

Thank you for the walk. I enjoyed advancing to first base.

LOL!

Only a little below 29,700 before we reach 30.000 posts for this topic.

[jggames]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

4. Once again from the link in yesterday's post 240 which was originally meant to dispel my argument:

https://archive.org/details/LanstonM...e/n23/mode/2up

It was my post, and you keep bringing it up, so I guess I'll chime in again. It dispels your argument that the disco border was from 1970s.

"It doesn't look like a pattern from the 1920s, but an imitation for the 1970s."

It wasn't, it was from at least the 30s or 40s. It's why I put that paragraph in the post.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by jggames

It was my post, and you keep bringing it up, so I guess I'll chime in again. It dispels your argument that the disco border was from 1970s.

"It doesn't look like a pattern from the 1920s, but an imitation for the 1970s."

It wasn't, it was from at least the 30s or 40s. It's why I put that paragraph in the post.

The dealer in May 1999 indicated they were printed in the 1970's. They still look like disco dance floors. Disco dance floors were designed in part after the dance floors of the 1930s and 1940s. Last time I checked discos were from the 1970s and thank goodness died out shortly after. Yes, they held out until past 1980. I remember "We are Family" from the 1979 Pirates. Couldn't stand their theme song or their loud uniforms, but I was a fan of the team despite the disco overload. Better dressed since, but no World Series.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

The dealer in May 1999 indicated they were printed in the 1970's. They still look like disco dance floors. Disco dance floors were designed in part after the dance floors of the 1930s and 1940s. Last time I checked discos were from the 1970s and thank goodness died out shortly after. Yes, they held out until past 1980. I remember "We are Family" from the 1979 Pirates. Couldn't stand their theme song or their loud uniforms, but I was a fan of the team despite the disco overload. Better dressed since, but no World Series.

Brian, perhaps you are suffering from "Saturday Night Fever."

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by Yoda

Brian, perhaps you are suffering from "Saturday Night Fever."

Saturday Night Fever on a Tuesday morning. Oh, now that is not illness, but a horror movie.

For those from Pittsburgh, this would have scared Chilly Bill Cardille. For the rest of you look him up. I miss him as well from 1250 am.

[molenick]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

I have been waiting for this response from you. You have the Holsum which has been known for years. That eliminates it from your argument.

Now, as for the Herpolsheimer "back" similarity on the website link:

https://archive.org/details/LanstonM...e/n23/mode/2up

A typographical specimen booklet containing borders and ornaments for casting on the Lanston Monotype Composition Caster, Lanston Monotype Type-Caster, Lanston Monotype Giant Caster and Monotype-Thompson Type-Caster. This booklet is from a Lanston Monotype specimen book (binder) bearing the general title "Monotype Type Faces." It is undated, but based on internal evidence elsewhere in the binder it is from the late 1930s or early 1940s.

So:

1.) An honest dealer waiving his hand over the case in May 1999 indicating the cards are fake.

2.) The pattern on the back that looked and still does like a disco floor or coffee table (also from the 1970s) pattern.

3.) Reference to above:

It is undated, but based on internal evidence elsewhere in the binder it is from the late 1930s or early 1940s.

4.) First fakes of pre-WWII ever. No.

5.) Possibility of a person who works as a printer who has knowledge of cards including a love of Pre-WWII back in the 1970s. What a concept. A printer who collects cards and the thought of producing a group of the cards with a pattern which he may have seen on a disco floor which inspired him. The guy would have access to paper from the 1920's. Still, paper from the 1920's and pattern from the late 1930's or 1940's. Oh, we have the basis of a movie here. Alan Alda, however, is too old and Mr. Mint can no longer sue him. Oh, but I digress. My accurate memory despite a cold and Stage 2 Astrocytoma (Brain Cancer) doesn't get in the way.

So, to be clear, the Holsum Bread cards are real even though the pattern was found in a binder from the 1930's-40's because they have been known for years (I guess longer than the 24 years the Herpolsheimer's cards have been known).

The Herpolsheimer's cards are fake because someone in the 1970's decided the best way to make fake 1921 cards was to use a pattern from the same binder which looks (to you) like a disco floor.

Plus the dealer said they were fake (you said "waiving" again, so I guess I will stop asking you to stop). Plus it is possible for a printer to make fakes. Plus fakes exist of other sets.

I guess we are back at an impasse.

And I hope you were kidding about having brain cancer (that would be in bad taste, but at least you wouldn't have it). But if it is true, I only wish the best for you.

[molenick]

I hate to ask again, but can you please explain why someone finding a matching border specimen from 1930's-1940's means the cards are fake?

All it means is that the border did not originate in the 1970's.

It does not mean the border could not have existed earlier.

I understand that a set can be faked. Any set can be faked. I am just asking why you think this set is faked (besides the fact that someone else said they were fake).

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by molenick

I hate to ask again, but can you please explain why someone finding a matching border specimen from 1930's-1940's means the cards are fake?

All it means is that the border did not originate in the 1970's.

It does not mean the border could not have existed earlier.

I understand that a set can be faked. Any set can be faked. I am just asking why you think this set is faked (besides the fact that someone else said they were fake).

Here's the math:

1930s-1940s minus "1921" equals upper teens to low twenties in years difference from when the design first existed and the argument for the card's year.

In other words, fake set

[calvindog]

Brian,

Why would you destroy your reputation in the hobby over something as dumb as this? It’s painful to watch. Please stop.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Brian,

Why would you destroy your reputation in the hobby over something as dumb as this? It’s painful to watch. Please stop.

Jeffrey,

I apologize, but if ruining my rep saves people from getting ripped off so be the matter. Just a reminder to you about your accusations about Bill Mastro, the criticism you received by the masses on this board and the fact you were correct.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Jeffrey,

I apologize, but if ruining my rep saves people from getting ripped off so be the matter. Just a reminder to you about your accusations about Bill Mastro, the criticism you received by the masses on this board and the fact you were correct.

Except I had clear anecdotal evidence which was immediately corroborated by the FBI who contacted me. In your case you have laughably weak, decades-old hearsay “evidence” from an unknown source — which has convinced no one. To suggest these two sets of circumstances are even remotely similar suggests to me that you’re having some kind of break from reality. And at this point you are not concerned about saving anyone from fraud, as I was as I had no prior axe to grind with Mastro. You’re just being George Constanta driving Susan’s parents out to his fake Montauk house. You always struck me as a decent and honest guy. This thread clearly is eroding that perception. Your choice I guess.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Brian,

Why would you destroy your reputation in the hobby over something as dumb as this? It’s painful to watch. Please stop.

In all sincerity, and as someone who has had positive dealings with Brian in the past, this is where I am now as well. Just as a matter of epistemic humility, I would hope that anyone could acknowledge that any particular one of their beliefs has some non-zero probability of being incorrect, regardless of whether there is mounting evidence on the other side of the scale. As trivial a matter as baseball cards are in the grand scheme of things, this has been genuinely upsetting to behold.

[raulus]

Can’t speak for the rest of the group, but the posts from this morning have helped to eliminate a lot of my confusion.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

In all sincerity, and as someone who has had positive dealings with Brian in the past, this is where I am now as well. Just as a matter of epistemic humility, I would hope that anyone could acknowledge that any particular one of their beliefs has some non-zero probability of being incorrect, regardless of whether there is mounting evidence on the other side of the scale. As trivial a matter as baseball cards are in the grand scheme of things, this has been genuinely upsetting to behold.

Glenn,

First, Happy Holidays. I am sorry you feel that way, but from what i have experienced with the cards, although brief, they are fake, and I stand by that assertion.

[molenick]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Here's the math:

1930s-1940s minus "1921" equals upper teens to low twenties in years difference from when the design first existed and the argument for the card's year.

In other words, fake set

You are adding the words "first existed" when no one is claiming that. We are just saying that it existed, which means it was not a 1970's disco pattern.

We all agree that the 1921 Holsum Bread cards are real and from 1921 (don't we?). And yet that border pattern is in the book as well.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by molenick

You are adding the words "first existed" when no one is claiming that. We are just saying that it existed, which means it was not a 1970's disco pattern.

We all agree that the 1921 Holsum Bread cards are real and from 1921 (don't we?). And yet that border pattern is in the book as well.

Please click the link and read the paragraph in the white below the book page:

https://archive.org/details/LanstonM...e/n23/mode/2up

A typographical specimen booklet containing borders and ornaments for casting on the Lanston Monotype Composition Caster, Lanston Monotype Type-Caster, Lanston Monotype Giant Caster and Monotype-Thompson Type-Caster. This booklet is from a Lanston Monotype specimen book (binder) bearing the general title "Monotype Type Faces." It is undated, but based on internal evidence elsewhere in the binder it is from the late 1930s or early 1940s.


The last time I checked late 1930s or early 1940s eliminates 1921 in origin.

[molenick]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Please click the link and read the paragraph in the white below the book page:

https://archive.org/details/LanstonM...e/n23/mode/2up

A typographical specimen booklet containing borders and ornaments for casting on the Lanston Monotype Composition Caster, Lanston Monotype Type-Caster, Lanston Monotype Giant Caster and Monotype-Thompson Type-Caster. This booklet is from a Lanston Monotype specimen book (binder) bearing the general title "Monotype Type Faces." It is undated, but based on internal evidence elsewhere in the binder it is from the late 1930s or early 1940s.


The last time I checked late 1930s or early 1940s eliminates 1921 in origin.

The binder was from the late 1930's or early 1940's. That does not mean that every pattern in the book was new to that binder. In fact, some patterns, such as the 1921 Holsum Bread pattern, were around since at least 1921.

Are you also saying 1921 Holsum Bread cards are fake? Because that pattern is in the book, which using your logic means it eliminates 1921 in origin.

[steve B]

Here's a few thoughts I have on them.

I've seen a few things related to memory and how two people can recall the same event differently, or a person can combine memories into a single inaccurate one.

I think that's what we have here.
Were there fakes of that group of sets made in the 1970's? Yes, I own one.

Is it possible a dealer would have ended up with a bunch of them having thought they were real? Yes.

But here is where it gets odd. The 70's fakes didn't have Herpolshimers backs.

Given those facts, a few possibilities
A dealer had a bunch of the fakes, and a later dealer sold a group and those were remembered as the fakes, but it was two different lots
Or
A dealer had a big lot of Herpolshimers, but not finding them in any references, believed them to be fake. (I used to really like dealers like that.. "it's not in Beckett so it's fake or worthless")
Or
Someone had a bunch of blank backed cards either fakes or originals, and added an ad back.
Or
Someone outright faked a set in small quantities.

All are possible, The first two seem somewhat likely.
The last..... I think is highly unlikely.
Fakes/reprints in general have been poorly made. Wrong stock, wrong process, wrong inks etc. To fake this set, you'd have to have all that stuff right. Plus
Youd need to know the checklist. Which as it's been pointed out isn't precisely known and certainly wasn't in the 70's. (My fake is both poorly made, and has the wrong back... )
Hardest perhaps would be having originals to copy.
Is it possible to make a typography plate that's a duplicate of the original, right down to the exact halftone so the dots in the pattern would match up? Yes
Is it likely a hobby printer could do it at home? Or that a professional would spend the required effort on making plates for 30-80 individual cards (likely at least a few days work. Then only print a handful of sets?

AND
Have the presence of mind to produce imperfect cards with deliberate offset transfers?

That would be some world class fakery at any time. And someone with the ability to make that work back then would be better served to produce the same quality fake for a smaller group of cards. Or a different set entirely.
Not a fake of a very obscure set made in the single digits and doled out over the course of decades. and somehow inserted into very different situations in different places.
Consider what similar cards went for back then.
My fake cost me $2 RETAIL in 1978. I'm still amazed someone thought it was worth the effort.

It makes no sense in any way.

The border...
While the design book may be from the 30's-40's, the actual type elements could have been around for a very long time.
Type is similar to industrial hardware.
While I was at the hydraulic place, I worked on stuff that was fairly old. One jack was made in 1945, and that model could still be bought new well into the 1990's.
A common bicycle hub was first offered in 1938. Had a minor change a year later, then no real changes until 2000... 62 years with only minor cosmetic changes, Parts bought new in 2000 would fit a hub from 1936. (also a fine example, as I recalled the intro date as 1935)

I would not be at all surprised that that border type was much older than 1920's.

There's so much that says these are real, I have to think one of the options where the memory of the dealer involves other cards, or that the dealer was mistaken seem to be very likely.

And a very appropriate card.