1933 Lajoie story

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

In re-reading Lew Lipset's recent catalog, lot #1 description, I see that the '33 Lajoie was actually printed as the last card in the last series for 1934. Very interesting - didn't know they waited until 1934 to print it.

I also read somewhere that the '33 Lajoie was only available to people who wrote in asking for it.

These two ideas certainly can co-exist, but does anyone have any other information on the card? Why were collectors demanding a Lajoie card in 1933? Why not Honus Wagner or Ty Cobb? Why did Goudey succumb?

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Scott
If my memory is correct, the complete 33 goudey set could be redeemed for prizes, so If the Lajoie wasn't printed you couldn't complete the set.
I believe this is correct, if not I confused it with the 33 Sport Kings Lindstrom.
sorry, my brain is fried today. be well brian

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd (nolemmings)

Hey Scott,

The card was printed in 1934--it even looks like a '34 Goudey wo/the "Lou Gehrig/Chuck Klein says" message.

As I understand it, the set collectors in 1933 were wondering where card #106 was, so Goudey printed it a year later and, apparently so there was no confusion to collectors of the '34 set and packs, made it available only to those who sent in asking for it.

I always wondered how hard it would have been to recreate the 1933 design for the card, so it wouldn't stick out so much to someone displaying their '33 set. Seems now that's a very minor nuisance in the scheme of things, as most everyone would like to have that problem.

Regards............Todd

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

I've spoken to collectors who were living back in the 1930s and they've all told me roughly the same story. After collecting the "entire" set, they were dismayed to find that there was one card they could never find -- #106 Lajoie. Upon written request, a card was issued to each collector, although it wasn't printed until the following year. The Goudey Gum Company also sent a letter along with the card. I seem to recall a copy of this letter in an auction a few years ago, but I'm not entirely certain.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

The Lindstrom card was part of teh 1932 US Caramel set. There was one found just before I left the hobby. Not sure they are any more around. All I remember is the rediculous 'battle of the $1M cards' between Rosen and Josh Evans, two of my favorite dealers sarcasm off

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian Weisner

Hi Jay
Thanks for the correction. I told you my brain was fried today. People without sleep should not drive or type. later brian

[Archive]

Posted By: Jaime Leiderman

The two Lindstroms are in the Larry Fristch collection.
Don´t remember well, but he was selling them for $175k each.

[Archive]

Posted By: Elliot

The reason for card #106 missing is that Goudey printed two of the #144 Ruth cards, as Ruth was clearly the headliner of the 1933 set.

Also, there exists a proof of Durocher numbered 106 in the set, whereas his card was numbered 147 when the set was actually printed.

[Archive]

Posted By: Paul

I just returned from a card show where the Lajoie was on display. It actually has a 1934 copyright date on the back. I had never noticed this before. But I think it has always been clear that the card was not issued until 1934. Uncut sheets of 34 Goudeys have been found that include the Lajoie. As far as I know, no 33 Goudey sheet with Lajoie was ever found.

[Archive]

Posted By: David

I'm by no means knowledgeable on the subject. I had heard that the Lajoie card was sent to the collector paperclipped to the before mentioned letter. This story continued that that the Lajoie commonly has damage from the paperclip. However, I don't recall the sale of a genuine Lajoie where the description mentioned paperclip wear.