Brooks Robinson and the Baltimore Orioles

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by Chstrite

Day 157 – 6 June 2024
Today I am showing you a few of my 1975 Clarance Mengler Baseball’s Best 3x5 inch unlicensed post cards for signatures. This is a 125 card set that the MLBPA went after Mr. Mengler as the cards were not sanctioned by the MLB. Mengler created these cards for signatures but ran into legal challenges by the MLB so he stood down with the set. MLBPA was upset with other companies, too, such as TCMA. I believe he created as many as 125 cards each in a set and sold 100 sets and kept 25 sets for himself. I have Frank Robinson with the Indians. Included in the first picture is also McNally with the Expos but this one is an original hand drawn in pencil by Mr. Mengler’s artis, Mr. Neil Patterson. At the time when the set was created, Patterson was a student at a Chicago Art School. The 1st picture shows Brooks, Blair and Singleton are are part of the set but not originals. You can tell if the card is an original if stamped on the back like the second picture. The next picture are originals of Grich, Singleton, May, Belanger and Blair. These are part of the set but original hand drawn. The Bumbry at the top left is not part of the set. Mr. Mengler told me he planned another set in 1976 but he did not get to it based on the MLBPA legal challenge. The last picture shows these are originals with the markings on the back. I had several conversations with Mr. Mengler and was able to get these originals and the insights above. He sent me a photo copy of an article published about his sets in 1975. More on this set tomorrow.

There is some good information here, but I am confused by how you are defining original. I have read this several times and I think this is how it parses.

1. There are hand drawn originals. These would be the 1/1s you show in a different post.
2. Original printed versions, which would be identified by the print mark on the back.
3. Not originals, which lack the print mark on the back.

With the history of only having produced 125 sets before stopping, I am assuming these 125 are part of "#2 - Original printed versions". If that is true, I don't understand what "#3 - Not originals" are. If he stopped printing, then the "not originals" would be reproductions printed at a later time?

I also don't understand what you meant by the Bumbry not being part of the set. Is it a proof that was created but not part of the set that was eventually printed?

Thanks in advance for any clarity here. I still lack one of these for my Paul Blair player collection and when I see one I want to be sure I understand what I am looking at.