I'm almost POSITIVE this card features Shoeless Joe...

[drdduet]

Can't we use that software from Avatar to clean up the image, zoom in, and positively id who this "unidentified Cleveland player" is?

[rdixon1208]

While I think it is a strong possibility that it is him, I've found myself asking this question:

Would I pay a premium for this card as a Joe Jackson card based on what I know now?

The answer is no. Not yet anyway.

[orator1]

I'm not an attorney, but I've read that "beyond a reasonable doubt" is typically quantified as being 95% certain. Given the weight of ALL the evidence combined, I am comfortable that it is JJ beyond a reasonable doubt.

[slidekellyslide]

Just a few random thoughts so far.....

-The sliding player's left leg is obviously underneath his other leg...I'm not sure what Andrew is seeing, but that is a cloud of dust, not a leg.

-Brett is being very arrogant about this, but the fact remains that absent the original photo it's still not 100%.

-Some guy (dabbuu??) used his first ever post after having been registered for over a year now to add absolutely nothing to this thread. Somebody's sock-puppet?

-the wrap on Jackson's ankle that is not in the Newspaper photo could have been painted out of the photo....I've seen many cases of inane "painting" by early photographers to change the photo.

-I actually think this IS Joe Jackson.

[ChiefBenderForever]

I think it's him as well, but also need to respect the purist opinions as well, who may never be convinced without iron clad proof, although it is getting very close.

[brett]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Just a few random thoughts so far.....

-the wrap on Jackson's ankle that is not in the Newspaper photo could have been painted out of the photo....I've seen many cases of inane "painting" by early photographers to change the photo.

-I actually think this IS Joe Jackson.

I think you hit the nail on the head. It's possible the photographer touched up the photo so the reader could more easily see his leg over the lighter background. Everything about these pictures are WAAAAAY too similar for it not to be. It looks like the newspaper photo was snapped a tenth of a second after the picture on the T202 card.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by brett

I think you hit the nail on the head. I believe the photographer touched up the photo so the reader could more easily see his leg over the lighter background. Everything about these pictures are WAAAAAY too similar for it not to be. It looks like the newspaper photo was snapped a tenth of a second after the picture on the T202 card.

Complete, wild speculation, in my opinion. Sure.

[HercDriver]

Brett --

While I'm not taking sides in the "it is" or "it isn't" Joe, I will say I don't believe the pictures come from the same slide. Not only the leg wrap, but my explanation of the SS positioning from my last post along with the newspaper caption saying it was a throw from SS. I think if it's Jackson, it's a different play at third...

Cheers,
Geno

[Peter_Spaeth]

Cmon Geno, the photographer not only blacked out the ankle wrap, he repositioned the shortstop. It is clear as day.

[tbob]

Originally Posted by orator1

I'm not an attorney, but I've read that "beyond a reasonable doubt" is typically quantified as being 95% certain. Given the weight of ALL the evidence combined, I am comfortable that it is JJ beyond a reasonable doubt.

Well, actually there are no percentages and although the judge always instructs the criminal jury what "reasonable doubt" is, juries often struggle with the concept. It is extremely subjective despite the definitions. The standard is much higher in a criminal case than in a civil case in which the standard is "by a preponderance of the evidence," for example, but the area is very gray.

[mark evans]

I'm convinced. Congrats to Brett and thanks to all for the outstanding research, especially Greg for the newspaper story.

Mark