1911 Addie Joss Day??? RPPC at Mile High

[RCMcKenzie]

There were some famous players on the 1911 Naps. If you search on Baseball Reference under "1911 Cleveland" or "1910 Cleveland", the site includes portrait photos of many of the players on the roster. Look at the top of the page for the row of photos.

I looked around a little last night. It doesn't really look like Joe Jackson or Nap Lajoie. It's a dark photo of a player with his hat down, so it's hard to see his facial features. Would they make a postcard of Terry Turner, Neal Ball, Jack Graney. etc...?

[Dardevl]

I reviewed the faces as well, and for the reasons you mentioned, a positive ID would be challenging, unless a match was blatantly obvious. I think that Neal Ball has a similar facial structure (of the players pictured), but as I stated earlier, I am not good with faces. And in this scenario, ultimately the question is: Is it Cobb?

This can be accomplished in two ways; By positively IDing the player who is sliding, or by finding enough within the available image to confidently say that it is NOT Cobb.

I think that with the context of the location confirmed to be Bennett Park combined with the fact that the 3rd baseman's uniform matches a Tigers' uniform of the era, the likelihood of it being Cobb are diminishing. And the ultimate conclusion is that it's not from Addie Joss Day, a heavy multiplier in the potential price realized.

I do appreciate your input and engagement.

[Dardevl]

A continued search of an accurate setting and uniform combination reveal what SHOULD be present for any Addie Joss Day image.

Compare the baseman's uniform to that of the subject RPPC. Also the stadium features, from what is visible in this example photo (courtesy of REA), we can see that the stadium layout, structure and paint scheme match that of League Park (image from Leland's). This Addie Joss Day photo catches the end of the 3rd baseline grandstands, in the background. Also note, that there are no stands along the flat outfield wall.

https://bid.robertedwardauctions.com...e?itemid=73480

https://auction.lelands.com/bids/bidplace?itemid=83974

[WillowGrove]

Good catch Deron.

I like puzzles like this and thought I'd add some possible dates the photo could have been taken.

Judging by the stands in the photo being filled I am assuming a large crowd. I chose 9,000+ when searching retro sheet. Also, based on Dressed to the Nines, the uniforms could only be 1909-1911. 1912 Home Tigers uni's had pinstripes and I don't see pinstripes. That said below are the games with large crowds AT Detroit vs. Cleveland from 1909-1911.

I know it's not definitive and based on a large crowd and no pinstripes but - each piece of info can help solve...

Also - Moriarty was the 3rd baseman in every game below. (That is 3rd base yes?)

1909:
Sat 4-17 - 12,649
Sun 4-18 - 18,478
Fri 9-10 (2) - 10.398
Sat 9-11 - 9.279

1910:
Opening Day 4-14- 14,063

1911:
Sun 4-16 - 14,063
Sun 4-30 - 14,156
Sun 9-10 - 9,756

Last thing - I would guess it was opening day because that would be reason to send a photographer to cover the game rather than a random Sunday. But just a thought.

[Dardevl]

Thank you Peter!

I am fairly confident in the 1910-11 date range, due to the lack of available advertisement space in the 1909 World Series panoramic and its lack of existence in known prior images;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1909_W...rld-series.jpg

https://digitalcollections.detroitpu...ndora%3A162949

This would be bookended by a 1912 Navin Field opening date. That would narrow the possible dates significantly.

However, ultimately it boils down to the absolutes within the image.

[Dardevl]

Several board members have asked about the communication with MHCC and SGC.

Prior to starting this thread, I reached out via email to both MHCC and SGC. MHCC is aware of my observations and concerns as they responded with disagreement, then dismissiveness; I have yet to hear back from SGC.

MHCC is also aware of this thread, as Brian called to discuss this with me. He offered no counter to the location issue, other than a Cartesian argument, that I cannot truly know what either ballpark looked like, based on the fact that I have never been to either ballpark. He also "deferred" to the SGC flip.

I can't imagine the drop in someone's stomach, when the inaccurate location information comes to light. Unless, as a friend mentioned when discussing this, the buyer just collects flips.

[T206Jim]

Very disappointing ... to say the least.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Dardevl

Several board members have asked about the communication with MHCC and SGC.

Prior to starting this thread, I reached out via email to both MHCC and SGC. MHCC is aware of my observations and concerns as they responded with disagreement, then dismissiveness; I have yet to hear back from SGC.

MHCC is also aware of this thread, as Brian called to discuss this with me. He offered no counter to the location issue, other than a Cartesian argument, that I cannot truly know what either ballpark looked like, based on the fact that I have never been to either ballpark. He also "deferred" to the SGC flip.

I can't imagine the drop in someone's stomach, when the inaccurate location information comes to light. Unless, as a friend mentioned when discussing this, the buyer just collects flips.

That argument hinging on needing an eyewitness to an event over a century ago to determine anything should be reason enough to dismiss the claim. I can't see why we would think this is anything but a Cleveland player during a game. The facial features are not very clear.


More sadly, I don't know why we would expect graders or auctioneers to be able to defend their claims at all either

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Dardevl

MHCC is also aware of this thread, as Brian called to discuss this with me. He offered no counter to the location issue, other than a Cartesian argument, that I cannot truly know what either ballpark looked like, based on the fact that I have never been to either ballpark.

Photographic evidence of what the ballparks looked like in 1911 are far better evidence than the memory of someone who was at least 10 years old at the time (who would be 120 years old today.) Most of us know what the Eiffel Tower looks like, though a small percentage of us have actually seen it in person.

That response is completely devoid of reason. Hopefully SGC will admit their mistake.