1934-1936 Batter Up Size Question

[ChiSoxTony]

I’m aware that there are two sizes of Batter-Up cards. The first 80 cards in the set measure 2-3/8" by 3-1/4", while the remaining cards (#81-192) are slightly shorter at 2-3/8" by 3".

I have an Appling card (#124) and the card is clearly short of 3”, top to bottom. I don’t have the exact measurement, but can provide later. My question is: are there size variations, even within the two different sizes, or does being shy of 3” mean the card is probably trimmed.

Thank you for any help you can provide.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[conor912]

While I don’t collect that particular issue, I do collect a lot from the 30’s and being off 1/8” is not unheard of.

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by conor912

While I don’t collect that particular issue, I do collect it a lot from the 30’s and being off 1/8” is not unheard of.

Conor is correct. I will check some of the Batter-Up high numbers I have to (most likely) confirm there is a decent amount of variance in sizing from the established 3" top to bottom dimension.

Brian

[ChiSoxTony]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Conor is correct. I will check some of the Batter-Up high numbers I have to (most likely) confirm there is a decent amount of variance in sizing from the established 3" top to bottom dimension.

Brian

Thanks, Connor and Brian.

Brian, I’d be curious to know if the ones you have on hand do end up having short ones among them as well. Thanks in advance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brianp-beme]

Here are my results from 68 high number Batter-Up cards, in decreasing size order:

3-1/16" - 1

3-1/32" - 1

3" - 35

2-31/32" - 15

2-15/16" - 12

2-29/32" - 4


As you can see, over half measured at the 'gold-standard" 3 inch size, while just a couple measured over 3". On the shorter end of the spectrum, 31 of the cards measured below 3".

Below is a Batter-Up heighth visual. The Parmalee card on the left is 3" tall. The Crowder card pictured in the middle is at the low end of the spectrum at 2-29/32", while the Lee card on the right resides in gentle giant land, measuring 3-1/16". I have included a scan of the backs as well because I think it is a little easier to discern the differences in height.


Brian

[ChiSoxTony]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Here are my results from 68 high number Batter-Up cards, in decreasing size order:

3-1/16" - 1

3-1/32" - 1

3" - 35

2-31/32" - 15

2-15/16" - 12

2-29/32" - 4


As you can see, over half measured at the 'gold-standard" 3 inch size, while just a couple measured over 3". On the shorter end of the spectrum, 31 of the cards measured below 3".

Below is a Batter-Up heighth visual. The Parmalee card on the left is 3" tall. The Crowder card pictured in the middle is at the low end of the spectrum at 2-29/32", while the Lee card on the right resides in gentle giant land, measuring 3-1/16". I have included a scan of the backs as well because I think it is a little easier to discern the differences in height.


Brian

Brian, you really went above and beyond in answering my question. Thank you so much. Your response is very informative and was of great help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[doug34-36]

That's great information -- thanks, Brian!

Did you by any chance track which cards are which size? It might be interesting to cross-reference against the sheet layouts to see if there's any relationship between card heights and sheet positions.

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Here are my results from 68 high number Batter-Up cards, in decreasing size order:

3-1/16" - 1

3-1/32" - 1

3" - 35

2-31/32" - 15

2-15/16" - 12

2-29/32" - 4


As you can see, over half measured at the 'gold-standard" 3 inch size, while just a couple measured over 3". On the shorter end of the spectrum, 31 of the cards measured below 3".

Brian

.