E92 confirmed lists for difficult backs

[x2drich2000]

Looking to assemble a list of confirmed E92 cards with difficult backs, can anyone add any more to the lists I have?

Red Crofts Candy
- Barry x2 - SGC A, SGC 10
- Bender (stripped cap) - raw
- Bemis x2 - SGC A, CSG 1
- Bescher x3 - SGC 50, SGC A, raw
- Cobb - rumored but I have not seen an image
- Crawford x2 - SGC 20, SGC 10
- Devlin - CSG 2
- Donovan - SGC 10
- Davis x3 - SGC 60, SGC 50, SGC 30 (Lionel Carter)
- Evers - SGC 80
- Miller (fielding) x3 - raw, SGC 40, PSA A
- Shean - SGC 10 with red crofts overprint

Menagerie
- Bemis
- Kleinow - raw (poor)
- Lobert - SGC A
- McGraw - SGC 30
- Murphy - SGC 30
- Shean - BVG 1
- Wagner (batting) - SGC 40

Blank Back
- Chase x5 - SGC A, SGC 20, SGC 30, SGC 40, PSA 7
- Crawford - raw poor
- Davis - PSA A
- Dougherty - SGC 40
- Gibson - Unknown
- Kleinow - SGC 3.5
- Knight - raw
- Lajoie - SGC A
- Magee - SGC 1
- Mathewson - SGC 1.5
- McGraw x2 - was SGC 10 now raw (with cocoa overprint on front), SGC 40, SGC 60
- McLean - SGC 10
- Miller (fielding) x2 - SGC 30, raw
- Schlei - SGC 40
- Seigle - SGC 10
- Smith - SGC 40
- Tinker - SGC 40 (Goodwin - no scan)
- Wagner (throwing) - SGC40 (possibly 2, but they appear to be the same card with different cert numbers, cards have obvious diamond cut), PSA 3 (different than the SGC copies, normal cut)
- Zimmerman - BVG Authentic

Prizefighters
- Magee - SGC 40
- Young - SGC 30
- E8 U.S.S. Connecticut
- E8 U.S.S. Pennsylvania (Added 5/14/23)

Nadjas that still need to be confirmed
- Bescher
- Cobb (rumored, but has anyone actually seen the card?)
- Donovan - 1 is posted on the PSA pop report, but I don't trust PSA enough to cross it off the list without seeing it.
- Doyle (with bat)
- Zimmerman

Blue Crofts that still need to be confirmed
- Bender (white cap)
- Bergen
- Cobb
- Donovan
- Doyle (throwing)
- Gibson
- Lajoie
- Magee
- Matthewson
- Miller (batting)
- Murphy
- Schlei
- Seigle
- Smith
- Tinker
- Zimmerman


Thanks
DJ

[Leon]

Nice list DJ. I wish I could help . Here is something to throw out there though. I remember the E92 Miller Fielding discussion and believe there were some background and/or shading differences with that pose in other series, which is how they are differentiated. I assume it is the same shading differences (to their e92 counterparts) which has these labeled as E101 and E102 respectively?

I personally think we will find several more, different players of all of the backs mentioned above. It's only a matter of time. *The scans aren't to size and are at least caramel with wrong backs........

[ullmandds]

There is an E 90–1 background variation...but I do not know of any variations within the 92.

[x2drich2000]

Leon, i forgot about the prize fighter backs and haven't tried to put a list of those together yet. As Pete stated, i believe from the Miller thread it was believed that the no sunset variation was limited to only e90-1. I am not aware of any variation in either the Young or Magee within the e92/e101/e102/e105 family of sets. I believe SGC likely just labeled those based on whatever the submitter wrote down. Same with the blank backs, i don't think there is a way to differentiate which set those came from (except the freaky McGraw that showed up earlier this month). One other point i would make is that we know the e92 quality control was not very good based on the number of miscuts that have shown up, but i don't recall ever seeing a miscut or other issue that are definitely from any other series.

Dj

[Leon]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Leon, i forgot about the prize fighter backs and haven't tried to put a list of those together yet. As Pete stated, i believe from the Miller thread it was believed that the no sunset variation was limited to only e90-1. I am not aware of any variation in either the Young or Magee within the e92/e101/e102/e105 family of sets. I believe SGC likely just labeled those based on whatever the submitter wrote down. Same with the blank backs, i don't think there is a way to differentiate which set those came from (except the freaky McGraw that showed up earlier this month). One other point i would make is that we know the e92 quality control was not very good based on the number of miscuts that have shown up, but i don't recall ever seeing a miscut or other issue that are definitely from any other series.

Dj

So we can add prizefighter to the E92 backs and include at least these two. And I am almost certain I have seen at least another baseball player / prizefighter back or two also....Here is a Menagerie as an example..

[x2drich2000]

Thanks Leon,

I added your two prize fighters and the blank backs I was able to find quickly to the original list. Also digging through the archives I came up with another Menagerie (Bemis) from old threads confirmed by a reliable board member.

DJ

[cdn_collector]

There is a blank back Gibson "back view" as well, but I have no idea whether it's considered an e90-1, e92, e101 or one of the other sets that contains that image.

But I do know that that image exists with a blank back.

Hope that helps,

Richard.

[Bliggity]

Please enlighten the E-card novice - I assume the Menagerie and Prizefighter backs are from the E26 and E78 sets, and were mistakenly printed on the back of E92 sheets?

Has anyone seen non-baseball E-cards from that era with "wrong" baseball backs? Now that would be a tough type collection!

[x2drich2000]

Dan, you got it exactly right. The Menagerie and Prize fighter were misprinted on the back of the baseball cards. I don't recall ever seeing either of those with the baseball back, however, I have also never looked.

Richard, thanks, I've added Gibson to the list of blank backs. Do you happen to know the grade or if it is raw?

DJ

[Bliggity]

Thanks DJ, very interesting stuff!

It seems to me that of the Young and Magee Prizefighters, the Magee designated as E102 must be incorrect. The matching upside-down/miscut backs on those two cards suggest that they were cut from the same sheet. Magee and Young were both in the E101 set, but only Magee was in E102. So, if these cards were on the same sheet, it could not have been an E102 sheet. That's not to say it was definitely an E101 sheet, but we know it wasn't an E102.

Here's something else. (Again, warning - a novice outside of his comfort zone.) The E26 Animals and E78 Prizefighters were 1910 issues, yes? My understanding is that the E101 and E102 printings would have predated that - at least they're slabbed as 1908/09. So it seems to me that those "wrong backs" could not be E101s or E102s. Looking at the seven confirmed Menagerie backs (and also the Prizefighters, actually), the only sets that contain all those front poses are E92 (all four), E101, and E105. We know E101 was a 1909 issue, as was E92. The only 1910 issue was E105. So is it possible that the wrong backs are actually E105s? Doesn't that make the most sense based on the dates?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Bliggity

Thanks DJ, very interesting stuff!

It seems to me that of the Young and Magee Prizefighters, the Magee designated as E102 must be incorrect. The matching upside-down/miscut backs on those two cards suggest that they were cut from the same sheet. Magee and Young were both in the E101 set, but only Magee was in E102. So, if these cards were on the same sheet, it could not have been an E102 sheet. That's not to say it was definitely an E101 sheet, but we know it wasn't an E102.

Here's something else. (Again, warning - a novice outside of his comfort zone.) The E26 Animals and E78 Prizefighters were 1910 issues, yes? My understanding is that the E101 and E102 printings would have predated that - at least they're slabbed as 1908/09. So it seems to me that those "wrong backs" could not be E101s or E102s. Looking at the seven confirmed Menagerie backs (and also the Prizefighters, actually), the only sets that contain all those front poses are E92 (all four), E101, and E105. We know E101 was a 1909 issue, as was E92. The only 1910 issue was E105. So is it possible that the wrong backs are actually E105s? Doesn't that make the most sense based on the dates?

E105s are on almost paper thin stock.....I don't think all of the "years" of those early caramel sets are so set in stone either. I think there were series issued multiple years.

[ephus]

Originally Posted by Leon

E105s are on almost paper thin stock.....I don't think all of the "years" of those early caramel sets are so set in stone either. I think there were series issued multiple years.

I agree with Leon, e105 is thinner stock. Even in a slab you can tell the differences in stock. As an example 1914 and 1915 crackerjack cards (most) look the same on the front. If you hold them up to a light 1915's you can see the back printing because they are so thin , 1914's you can read every word it is that much more thin. With that being said, and the fact that I have collected e92's for more than 15 years, when I hold my menagerie to the light and look at it in hand it has same quality/thickness of a e92. Oh yeah, here is my already verified Menagerie Animal back...

[x2drich2000]

Ephus, Is that the same one that was on Ebay earlier this year? In either case, very nice card!

DJ

[ephus]

No, I have had it for maybe 6+ years. It was for sale earlier this year on Memory Lane's Own IT Now sale, but did not sell. Maybe you saw it there.


Kelly

[x2drich2000]

Kelly, that's the same one. Thanks

Earlier today I was also asked if I had a list of confirmed crofts blue backs. I put a quick list together, but am still missing the following. So can anyone confirm any of the ones below?

Bender (white cap)
Bergen
Casey
Cobb
Donovan
Doyle (throwing)
Gibson
Lajoie
Magee
Matthewson
Miller (batting)
Miller (fielding)
Murphy
Schlei
Seigle
Smith
Tinker
Zimmerman

I also found evidence of a 2nd red crofts Crawford, so that list has been updated.

DJ

[Leon]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Kelly, that's the same one. Thanks

Earlier today I was also asked if I had a list of confirmed crofts blue backs. I put a quick list together, but am still missing the following. So can anyone confirm any of the ones below?

Bender (white cap)
Bergen
Casey
Cobb
Donovan
Doyle (throwing)
Gibson
Lajoie
Magee
Matthewson
Miller (batting)
Miller (fielding)
Murphy
Schlei
Seigle
Smith
Tinker
Zimmerman

I also found evidence of a 2nd red crofts Crawford, so that list has been updated.

DJ

I don't have a scan but there is a Red back Crofts Evers.....it is from a very reliable source. Thanks for the efforts.

[x2drich2000]

Added a 3rd Miller fielding red back...Any one else able to add to these lists?

DJ

[cdn_collector]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Richard, thanks, I've added Gibson to the list of blank backs. Do you happen to know the grade or if it is raw?

DJ

Hey DJ -- sorry for being so slow in responding to this.
The truth is that I don't remember for sure. I will see if I can track down some information and return to post whatever I find (if anything).

Richard.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Added a 3rd Miller fielding red back...Any one else able to add to these lists?

DJ

wow! a third? what condition?

[x2drich2000]

Thanks everyone, added a few more to the blank backs and knocked off a few more blue backs. Please keep the lists going.

Originally Posted by ullmandds

wow! a third? what condition?

Pete, appears to be vg/ex-ex, but trimmed. Will send you a PM shortly.

DJ

[Leon]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

wow! a third? what condition?

I think I have owned 2 Red backed Miller fielding cards before. I am sure at least one is counted and I am not counting the other as it was too long ago (and might have been counted).

[x2drich2000]

Thanks to a board member, I've got confirmation of an e92 red croft's Shean added to the list. Any more to add?

DJ

[tiger8mush]

in case you're a stickler for documentation purposes, the "blank back McGraw SGC 10 (with cocoa overprint on front)" is now raw

[gabrinus]

Don't blame you for popping that one out.......that 10 designation was crazy....Jerry

[tiger8mush]

Originally Posted by gabrinus

Don't blame you for popping that one out.......that 10 designation was crazy....Jerry

Thanks Jerry, was happy to win it from you I guess the advertisement printing on the front is like a stamp, makes it technically "poor"? Anyhow its in a binder page now.

Wonder how it happened. Face down on a wet Crofts Cocoa sheet?

(sorry to derail thread)

[x2drich2000]

Rob, I updated the description. That's a great card, kind of wishing I had kept bidding higher myself.

DJ

[x2drich2000]

I know this is an old thread, but figured I would bump this to the top to see if we can add/cross anything off these lists.

I found a post from over a decade ago referencing a red crofts Barry (SGC 10), but would still like to confirm the player was correct and it isn't a case of mistaken identity. Also found an old post selling a blue crofts Bergen and I picked up a blue Gibson. If anyone can confirm any others, please post or let me know.

DJ

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Kelly, that's the same one. Thanks

Earlier today I was also asked if I had a list of confirmed crofts blue backs. I put a quick list together, but am still missing the following. So can anyone confirm any of the ones below?

Bender (white cap)
Bergen
Casey
Cobb
Donovan
Doyle (throwing)
Gibson
Lajoie
Magee
Matthewson
Miller (batting)
Miller (fielding)
Murphy
Schlei
Seigle
Smith
Tinker
Zimmerman

I also found evidence of a 2nd red crofts Crawford, so that list has been updated.

DJ

Yes, I can confirm the existence of a Crofts Blue Cobb. I had one about 20 years ago, but sold it when I left the hobby and folded Full Count's tent. As I recall it was graded a PSA 4. Nice card.

[x2drich2000]

Thanks John, blue Cobb has been taken off the list. I suspect most of the blue backs will end up being confirmed, so can anyone else confirm any?

DJ

[Baseball Rarities]

Here is a scan of the Evers. Unfortunately, it is no longer in my possession.

[x2drich2000]

Kevin, that's all i have to say. Thanks for the scan.

Leon, I am assuming this is the same Evers you were referring to, would that be accurate?

DJ

[gabrinus]

Incredible Evers Kevin!!.........Jerry

[Leon]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Leon, I am assuming this is the same Evers you were referring to, would that be accurate?

DJ

yes

[petecld]

I can confirm these three players can be found with Croft's Candy backs in blue:

Casey, Lajoie, Murphy

And yes, there is an SGC 10 Barry with a red back.

Have images of them all.

Peter

[x2drich2000]

Thanks Peter, I've updated the lists.

When you say you have images of them all, does that include a Cobb? I've only heard rumors of the Cobb (as in I heard from a friend of a friend that someone used to own one), but have never found a reliable source to actually say they have seen the card.

If you wouldn't mind, I would love to see the SGC 10 Barry, that and the Cobb are the only ones I have not seen a scan of yet.

Thanks
DJ
x2drich2000@yahoo.com

[x2drich2000]

Been a few months since I bumped this to the top. Is anyone able to add anything to the confirmed lists? Also, I've been able to confirm all croft's candy with black backs except for Davis. Can anyone confirm this card?

DJ

[Leon]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Been a few months since I bumped this to the top. Is anyone able to add anything to the confirmed lists? Also, I've been able to confirm all croft's candy with black backs except for Davis. Can anyone confirm this card?

DJ

I can confirm red and blue from my first collection....

[x2drich2000]

Now that I have it hand, I've added the 3rd confirmed red croft Bescher to the list.

What is interesting to me is you can see the SGC 50 copy and the raw copy have the exact areas on the back that are missing ink and that the missing spots got more pronounced from the raw to SGC 50 copies. Here are the 3 Bescher's side by side (raw, SGC 50, and SGC A).

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Now that I have it hand, I've added the 3rd confirmed red croft Bescher to the list.

What is interesting to me is you can see the SGC 50 copy and the raw copy have the exact areas on the back that are missing ink and that the missing spots got more pronounced from the raw to SGC 50 copies. Here are the 3 Bescher's side by side (raw, SGC 50, and SGC A).

Aaaaaand next on extreme hoarders!! I love it... I cannot wait to see this completed Someday!!!

[x2drich2000]

Now that REA is over, I thought I'd bump this for a couple updates. The Blue Crofts Candy Mathewson has been confirmed as well as a completely different blank back Wagner (throwing). While it is not baseball, I've also added a U.S.S. Constitution (E8) to the Prizefighter backs as the miscuts on the back are very similar.

Any one have any other cards they can add/cross off these checklists?

[CobbSpikedMe]

Hi DJ. I know you already have a confirmed Seigle blank back SGC 10 but I used to own one that was raw and don't know if it's the same one as the SGC 10 you already confirmed. If graded after I sold it, it would've been a 10 for sure. I can provide scans if you need them.

Thanks,

AndyH

[x2drich2000]

Hi Andy, by all means post a scan. I will check my records to see where I found the SGC 10, but I suspect I had the source noted on an old computer.

DJ

[CobbSpikedMe]

Here is the front of the blank back Seigle I used to own. I think the back scan is on another computer and I can't find it right now. The new owner might chime in but I can't speak for him.

Thanks,

AndyH

[x2drich2000]

Thanks to a board member who has confirmed Andy's Siegle is the same as the SGC 10 example. Attached are scans of the Crawford and Zimmerman blank backs.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by x2drich2000

Thanks to a board member who has confirmed Andy's Siegle is the same as the SGC 10 example. Attached are scans of the Crawford and Zimmerman blank backs.

Blank backs are very cool. Way to keep it going x2d (DJ)

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by Leon

Blank backs are very cool. Way to keep it going x2d (DJ)

Just picked up my first E92 blank back. Personally, I don't really like blank backs (including T206) because I like the Americana of the advertisements on the back. But this is rare, and I am trying a back run in this pose, so blank back it is (clearly this have been confirmed already!)

[x2drich2000]

At the request of a board member, here is an older scan of the Davis blank back. I have no idea why PSA labeled it an E104, of all the possible sets it could be, that is not one.

[brass_rat]

Just wanted to post the blue back Matty -- thank you to DJ for giving me the heads up on it!

[gabrinus]

Good thread guys.....Jerry

[x2drich2000]

Bumping this back to the top to see if anyone has anything new to cross off. A recent find brought confirmation of both the Nadja Cobb and Bescher.