Boston Garter display

[Archive]

Posted By: martindl

I wondered if others have seen these store display pieces fairly intact like this one. Its not mine, but thought it was interesting.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5161072105

I know not all of the cards listed in the Std Catalog have yet to be seen - is Clarke of one them?

Std Catalog talks about a window display piece, but much bigger than this piece. It would be interesting to know who the other player was that was cut from this, assuming there were indeed two players per.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

I'd say.

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

how would you like to be that seller,or just see the look of surprise on their face if they were sitting there watching the auction close.It went from $2100 to the final price in the last 9 seconds.I dont think they knew exactly what they had as far as value

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I don't want to turn this into a "what is the definition of a card" thread but if this would have been one it would have gone for a lot more.....very neat ad piece though.....I am positive many folks emailed the seller so he knew what he had....but like John said, probably not to the extent of the final bid...regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Ben

I was watching with much anticipation as this auction came to a close last night....had a juicy 3k snipe loaded up too, thinking it might be just enough to walk away with the Boston Garter. I'll confess that I was dreaming about winning that auction all week! Card or no card, I think it's a great piece and would love to own one someday (yeah, in my dreams right?).

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Isnt it a card glued to the cardboard ad piece? From what the seller says it is a 3.75" by 7.75" card glued inside the red and blue rectangle. Ive seen about 5 Boston Garter cards on eBay over the years, but this is the first 1912 Ive seen. High book for the Clarke is $27,500.00 NRMT, $13,750.00 EX, $8,250.00 VG So Id say the $6,000+ is about right on price. wonder if he will soak it off or keep the card glued to the ad piece???? Frank

[Archive]

Posted By: ramram

Ok, I'm more into the early images, etc. and not into cards, so, I have to ask - outside of rarity, what on earth would be the draw for "cards" like this Boston Garter? If you were flipping through an old "fashion" magazine and saw this ad you would just crack up and move on. I understand the interest in collecting the true early cards like Old Judge. Particularly the cards with actual images more so than the artwork T-cards, etc. But, when people spend tons of money on "cards" like the Boston Garter, I have to ask...has the collecting world lost their mind when they're buying drawings of people in their underwear!

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

Sort of reminds of of Montomery Burn's vault collection of one of a kind items that includes the the original copy of the Bill of Rights that contains the works "You suckers" and "the only nude photo of Mark Twain" ... In Montgomery Burns-style, somene can claim he owns "the only baseball card of Christy Mathewson in his underwear."

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

David you get 2 thumbs up for the Simpsons reference.

My favorite simpsons reference for baseball cards was the Methuselah rookie card where it listed how many conversions he had the year before

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I believe Milhouse got all excited about the Methuselah card. Anyway, back to the Boston garter: That image of Mathewson is well known, but I've never seen the copy to the right of it. Boston garters did a lot of display advertising; an east coast collector has an accordian with five or six panels, each picturing a different player in the same style as the Mathewson. The accordian would have stood up nicely on a store counter and would have been easily seen by a customer.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

First, it should be noted that TWO people bid over 6K on the piece. About Boston Garters, I like them because they are so different from anything we would put out now. Was it Steve Garvey who did an underwear pose, and causued a great stir? These guys obviously all feel perfectly at ease, advertising a product that all men use, are not embarassed about being seen in their underwear and garters--and the artwork is neat too.

I like them for the way they show how times change...besides that we get to see Joe and Matty in their garters!

When Ben first started rhapsodizing about the piece, I said, in effect "you don't REALLY know what you're getting here " (seller isn't sure it's a card glued to an ad piece. It might just be a replica of a card) but obvuiously, several people thought enough of it to bid enough to get a second-hand car with.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

Julie, I like the 1912 Boston Garters as well.

[Archive]

Posted By: Peter Thomas

Julie it was Jim Palmer

[Archive]

Posted By: Millerhouse

I can answer most, if not all, of the questions raised by this thread. The original advertising piece from which the Ebay Clarke was cut was approximately 14" x 21". A deep blue "Boston Garter" appeared across the top and was cut off. To the right of Clarke and also cut off was a depiction of a garter in a circle; to its right was the front of the card of Chance.

Actual fronts of the 1912 Boston Garters were used and affixed to the ad pieces. If you run your finger across the surface of the ad, this becomes immediately apparent. My guess is that the fronts and backs of the actual cards themselves were printed separately and then attached to form the cards distributed to the Boston Garter dealers. That would make the provision of the fronts to be attached to the ad pieces quite simple.

There are, to my knowledge (because I have one of each), four different player combinations known on these ad pieces. I have only seen one other that did not originate with the group that I acquired, and it was a Clarke/Chance version that was auctioned about ten years ago by a general auction house in Maine. In addition to Clarke/Chance, I can therefore confirm the existence of complete versions of the ads depicting the following player pairs: Chase/E. Collins, Kling/Jennings and Mathewson/Walsh. Given that these four known combinations comprise a fairly random grouping of half of the 1912 set, I'd be surprised if such ad pieces were not made up for the other eight cards. But I've never seen or heard of them.

Hope this helps.

Millerhouse

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

So if I get it straight it looks like there were 2 pieces to each 1912 Boston Garter card? This front was glued onto the ad display board and the back probably IS blank? I am still in need of a '12 and '13 for my collection if anyone has a spare one? When I find one I will probably opt for front and back though..... ( I know I cheated )....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Koteles

I emailed him ,these are my biggest wants and by the way Leon I have a Boston Garter tree for sale ...its just missing all the branches.

If that was a card, 3 Cobbs C-jacks or something would have gotten sold to get it.

There is a guy in Boston who has a hoard of em and nm ones , 10 in fact and I heard he wants 100k, nothing less and I have a # to the guy that knows him, if I had the money they would have been mine. The Cobb, Jackson and Johnson 13's were included and supposedly were nicer then the Jax and Cobb that sold in Mastros I believe last year.

The ones in Mastros fetched 54k together and these are nicer and there are 8 others...wow...I wish...uh, I just wish they were mine !

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

..Just one.

[Archive]

Posted By: millerhouse

Leon, if I understand what you wrote, anyone trying to pry the Clarke off of the front of an ad piece, hoping to obtain a complete H813-1, would be disappointed. The thickness of the card material attached to the ad piece is noticeably thinner than an actual 1912 Boston Garter card. Moreover, the actual 1912 cards are not blank-backed.

One other comment that bears mention from Barry Sloate's reference to the accordian-type multiple cards that have been found: A number of individual 1912s that have been offered over the years show roughness on the sides -- which is indicative of cards that were originally issued as part of a multiple-card accordian. They're reminiscent of separated T202 side panels.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ben

I agree with Leon and Millerhouse, this "card" glued within the frame is not the standard Boston Garter, you can tell by the tiny line of printing on the bottom border right under the picture. The ad piece from the ebay auction doesnt have it. Here's an image of the ad piece next to a genuine, untrimmed '12 Boston Garter Clarke (note extra line). Image courtesy of our very own David Rudd @ cycleback.com).



ramram, how can you not like these cards? I would rarely say this about baseball cards for the most part, but this set is the exception: they truly are "a work of art". Not only do you get a detailed and accurate depiction of the player en scene, but you also get a great sense of the setting, with the clubhouse in the foreground, a layer of baseball scene outside, and a skyline of an industrializing American city with the buildings and smoke stacks looming in the background. I think the overall quality of these cards stand out especially when compared with contemporaneous t and e card issues, where there is no comparison in terms of detail and imagination. I guess some dudes get uncomfortable seeing other dudes in their garters. I'm sure these guys didnt think twice about it back then


Millerhouse, I appreciate your posts and the info on these cards. I think this set, and this year of it in particular (1912), is a true relic in the universe of prewar cards. Someone must have written an article for VCBC for this set already, right? Here's a two card panel, as was mentioned earlier by millerhouse. Image also courtesy of David Rudd:

[Archive]

Posted By: martindl

I think these things are spectacular. They absolutely evoke the period and that makes them that more appealing to me.

Thanks for the information. Nice job on the background Bill.

[Archive]

Posted By: Pcelli60

Fred Clarks head comes right off his T205 portrait( used in other issues as well). But it looks weird on that body. Clark was not a very large man..Regardless, these pieces are fantastic!!

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Koteles

Should F.Chance sox been black, being a color expert am wondering .

Isnt it amazing the likeness of the players in the Boston Garter series ?

Man, would I like to have just 1 1912 B.G !

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Looking at the Rucker and Chance cards, are these guys wearing longjohns fora game? If so, that had to be one hot, sweaty uniform to wear between those and the flannel uniform.

I don't know how many people have actually worn a vintage flannel uniform, but let me tell you, I can't imagine how these guy played in these things without losing 10 pounds every game. I would wear one from my collection every once in awhile when I set up at shows I would sweat profusly just standing behind my table. I can't imagie what it would have been like to play a game wearing it.

Jay

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

I always thought the player in the background of the Chance card was getting his pockets run by the guy dressed in black holding a club(black bat? couldve been Joe Jackson)

Also the players in the Fred Clarke seem to be playing ball to close to that window.Be careful boys,glass windows that size are hard to replace,especially back in circa 1910

I really add nothing to this forum do i

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

To answer another question AND add to the weight of clothing, I think the Chance garters are the underneath "pads" (as per the top of the ad), so probably the outer garter would be black, like Rucker's

Jay, you mean they wore flannel ALL YEAR ROUND? But you never see photos of anyone sweating--even action, or semi-action shots (that appear to be spontaneous, not posed).

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I know Brooklyn had silk uniforms one year, but as far as I know, all uniforms were flannel until they went to the polyester knits. I am sure there are more knowledgable people on uniforms out there, but all pre-1970s jerseys I've ever owned were flannel

Jay

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming --- WOW, What a ride!

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

Of note, the guy who had the examples Ben posted said they belonged to his grandfather who was a traveling salesman in Texas in the early 1900s. Though he wasn't sure what his grandfather sold, we both assumed he must of hawked the Boston Garters. The way the grandfather/traveling salesman originally had them was with the cards attached to each other in panels. In fact, the above image shows two still attached to each other. Can't remember how many there were to a panel, perhaps four or five.

I have a decidedly varied selection of pages/sections on my website, from Harper's Woodcuts to fashion models, and the page showing the Boston Garter's is the most commonly linked to/commented on from outside websites. The page was once featured by a non-sport website in Israel. So, even to non collectors, there's something about the Boston Garters.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

When the guy with the above cards originally contacted me, he said he had a bunch of 1912 Boston Garter that belonged to his grandfather. Of course this is one of those typical 'Yeah, right' eBay stories, but he sent me humongous and detailed scans of the cards. I was aware of the checklist for the set, but this was the first time I had ever seen many of the cards. They weren't Goudey Ruth or T206 Wagner images you could download from eBay, or even from a MastroNet auction. I knew the only way this stranger could give me the detailed scans was if he or someone he knew physically had the originals.

This is as opposed to the mentally challenged scammer who emailed me a picture of a rare Frederick Foto Babe Ruth card he was hoping to get big bucks for. I replied, "Uh, you do realize that the scan you emailed me is from my own website, don't you?"

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I am not the owner of the Boston Garter cards.