1915 Federal League Cracker Jacks

[FrankWakefield]

3 things...

First, the 1914 cards aren't found rougher because they were available only one at a time in boxes while the 1915 cards were available through the mail... was the 1914 container really a box? True the 1915 cards could be obtained as mentioned on the backs of the 1915 cards, the set for a quarter. But two serious factors about the condition difference, 1914 cards are on what is closer to thick paper than cardstock, the 1915 cards are much thicker / stiffer. And secondly, kids who jumbled them together towards making a set shuffled the cards about, with the 1914 cards going through one extra year of wear and tear. That's why the 1914s are more subject to damage, and are worn more.

Second, Bruce, if you've just acquired Suggs, do you feel that his card was less available because it took you longer to acquire one? I know you seek pristine cards, was it that you saw lots of Suggs' cards, but only recently one up to your standards? Or do you think you've seen fewer Suggs cards than some of the others that you previously acquired??

I have a scan of my 6 Cracker Jack cards depicting Federal League players. I know they fall way short of your standards, Bruce. I would pick them up when the opportunity presented, the Cracker Jack cards show the Federal League uniforms, that's not the case with the T213 Federal Leaguers. One card, the Falkenburg that is in the top left corner, is a 1914 card. The other 5 are 1915 cards.


Third, thank you Bruce for responding, notwithstanding the chatter from the others. Bruce, any of the cards seem more difficult to you than the others, or super easy? Anyone else have a feel for that?

[Jim VB]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

3 things...

First, the 1914 cards aren't found rougher because they were available only one at a time in boxes while the 1915 cards were available through the mail... was the 1914 container really a box? True the 1915 cards could be obtained as mentioned on the backs of the 1915 cards, the set for a quarter. But two serious factors about the condition difference, 1914 cards are on what is closer to thick paper than cardstock, the 1915 cards are much thicker / stiffer. And secondly, kids who jumbled them together towards making a set shuffled the cards about, with the 1914 cards going through one extra year of wear and tear. That's why the 1914s are more subject to damage, and are worn more.

1. Lipset's Encyclopedia says "box."

2. Certainly, the difference in paper stock made a big difference.

3. I'm having a hard time buying that much of the difference is due to the fact that one set (1915) is 95 years old but the 1914's are worse because they are 96 years old. I understand what you're saying Frank, but can't believe it's much of a difference.

[FrankWakefield]

Look at a stack of T206s, I'm talking about a hundred of them, or so. Looking only at their fronts, sort them by condition, best to the right, most worn to the left. Then turn them all over. The 150 series will be ever so slightly likely to have more wear, especially well rounded corners. You can see that with T206s... which generally started with adults, or very old kids. The candy cards usually started with kids, and kids put cards in pockets and everywhere. How many of us did the clothes pins and spokes thing? I did, with Mantle on one side and Maris on the other.

The E90-1s and E102s are usually found quite worn. Kids had them. Not all, but many. Some kids pasted them into scrapbooks, some of those were soaked out long ago, and are now found in high numbered slabs. Still, lots of those candy cards show quite a bit of wear, kid wear. A kid didn't carry ball cards in pockets for 50 years, just a few, while he was a kid. I'd think the 1914 Cracker Jack cards could have been stacked and carried in a pocket for 2 or 3 years, and the 1915 Cracker Jacks for 1 or 2. I think that because the kids were growing up, and they'd reach an age where they left their cards behind; and, the 1914 cards could mix in well enough with the 1915s, but when 1916 rolled around and there were no longer 'major league' teams in Indianapolis and Kansas City, then those cards were no longer actively collected. As kids, we always focused on the new year, the current year. Cards a year or two old had lost their charm.

You don't have to buy into that, but I still think it's about right.

I am no expert on Cracker Jack packaging. We had boxes when I was a kid, brown cardboard covered with colored paper. The candy was in wax paper inside. Today it's in a plastic/foil bag? I think back in 1914 it was very thick paper / thin card stock, printing on the outside surface and candy against the inside. I had tops and bottoms that were folded then sealed someway, took a bit of determination to tear into it. I don't think the 1914 package was that difficult to tear open. I hold Mr. Lipset in high regard, more so than it seems many here do. I'm not sure it was that much of a box back then. The slogan "A prize in every box" dates to 1912, so maybe it was some sort of box; but not the stout thing I wrestled with as a kid.

And as for Bruce answering any of my questions, it seems to me he dodged them all. He responded that he'd acquired a Suggs card. He hasn't responded about what I asked about it and about other FL Cracker Jacks. He started a thread that was of interest to me, I wish someone else would offer what they think about the FLers. Thank you, Jim, for noticing that Bruce danced around answering.

And I don't know about where those nice 1914 cards came from, but it wasn't the 25 cent mail in offer mentioned on the back of each 1915 card. The 1914 cards came in the, wait for it, boxes. There.

Frank

Sorry for the delay in responding. We were out to dinner with a client

This is only the third Suggs card we have seen for auction in past three years
Accordingly, we would consider it a tough card (population 9) but not among the top 6 non HOFS.

We are very pleased with the card and the beautiful Baltimore uniform

By the way ,over the last 10 years, we have only held 2 PSA 8 1914 Cracker Jacks- neither was for sale.

See you in Baltimore

Bruce Dorskind
America's Toughest Want List

[Northviewcats]

It's not quite an 8, but it's still pretty sweet and the nicest prewar card I own.

Best,

Joe

[Thrill-of-the-Hunt]

maybe i am off base , but randy's set were cards that never made it into original packaging. the set was complete and all together. there were actually 5 sgc 98 gem mints and alot of 96 & 92's. of course being 1914 even an sgc 60 is a very tough find. i didnt mean to say it was a 25 cent mail in, i was referring that this set came from the factory direct. it is the only known set in this grade to surface and with such a minute amount of ex/mt - mint singles out there it shows how rare of a find it really is.

the card stock on the 1915 is so flimsy and thin that its hard to imagine those cards (circulated out of the candy box) remaining in high condition just for the corner wear alone. must have been alot of sets sent out for 25 cents in that year.

with the success of gum cards in the 30s, i am surprised cracker jack did not offer another set, how cool would a cracker jack card be with babe ruth, lou gehrig, and joe dimaggio.

[Thrill-of-the-Hunt]

By the way ,over the last 10 years, we have only held 2 PSA 8 1914 Cracker Jacks- neither was for sale.

did all 4 hands hold the cards at the same time?

[FrankWakefield]

Thank you, Bruce. Seems you and I think Suggs is slightly tougher than the others. Anyone else have thoughts on Suggs or any of the others?

I know not of Randy or his set. But getting the cards before they were jammed into candy boxes, that would have been the way to get them. The 1915 cards feel pretty flimsy, until you pick up a 1914 card...

And I agree about subsequent CJ issues. Would it not have been grand if CJ issued about 96 or 120 cards each year, on up to WW II ? Sisler on a Cracker Jack, Hornsby, Dean???

[Kawika]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

Would it not have been grand if CJ issued about 96 or 120 cards each year, on up to WW II ?

Indeed.

[calvindog]