October pick ups

[Exhibitman]

Why is October after September when octo is 8? Edd was wondering...

[ALR-bishop]

Probably for the same reason 11 is called eleven instead of onety one.

Nice example of Edd

[glenv]

Because in the Roman calendar September was the 7th month and October was the 8th month.

[BruceinGa]

Originally Posted by glenv

Because in the Roman calendar September was the 7th month and October was the 8th month.

+1

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by glenv View Post
Because in the Roman calendar September was the 7th month and October was the 8th month.

+another. The same reasoning applies to November and December--months nine and ten.

[David W]

Originally Posted by glenv

Because in the Roman calendar September was the 7th month and October was the 8th month.

And to add to it, Julius Ceasar and Augustus Ceasar thought they were "Special" and added two months to the Roman calendar, because they could.

Hence July and August bumped everything back 2 months......

[doug.goodman]

Here's a vote for Dougtober...

[doug.goodman]

On second thought "Al-tober" might be better

[skooter]

The two months were added to the Roman calendar because with only ten months the seasons were eventually not occurring in the same months. (For instance autumn was staring in June.)
The astrologers added July and August. In order to be sure there would never be a need to add any months in the future, February was to include one extra day every four years.

[mintacular]

My new woody willie

[Volod]

Nice woody Willie. Love the 55 Bowmans. Hey, I keep clicking my remote on it, but the channel doesn't change.

[Brianruns10]

I'm really, really proud of this one, for my '52 set. Paid a fair bit over SMR for it, but totally worth it. I don't know WHAT PSA was thinking...perfect, original colors, sharp corners, dead centered, no gum stains, and not a hint of creasing. The picture doesn't show it, but the gloss is outstanding. It utterly mystifies me they graded it a 6...I've got 7.5s that aren't this good. I'll probably crack and resubmit, once I have a few more worth sending in. I think it'll get at least a 7. Just goes to show, buy the card, not the plastic!

[brob28]

Just got this one yesterday.

[brob28]

Originally Posted by mintacular

My new woody willie

Great looking 5!

[Big Six]

My first Red Man and one of my favorite baseball personalities...

[ALR-bishop]

Nice card Matt. But you should follow the directions and cut off that ugly bottom part. Be sure to stay on the dotted line

[Big Six]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Nice card Matt. But you should follow the directions and cut off that ugly bottom part. Be sure to stay on the dotted line

Now don't go startin' trouble, Al!!!

[Iwantmorecards77]

Two new rookies to the collection (actually, the Brock is an upgrade):

[almostdone]

Very nice Aparicio. Always loved the '56 set.
Drew

[Volod]

My brother and I did cut off those premium tabs in 1952 and mailed them in. We got - wow, gee whiz - Boston Braves and Philadelphia Phillies caps after waiting anxiously for a month. I think the caps lasted about one summer before falling apart.

[97manoftroy]

Great Cards all around. The art work on the Red Man cards always amazes me.

[novakjr]

Not exactly baseball..But close enough..

[ALR-bishop]

Dave---I have the 48 MP baseball subset, and the Bendix is the only non baseball card I added

[novakjr]

Al, I had seen you post that once before.. Honestly, I didn't even know about the card until you mentioned it. I decided that I wanted to include it in my own collection and have kept my eye out for one since then.. Thank you for that. Just another reason I love this board.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by novakjr

Not exactly baseball..But close enough..

Only one man's opinion, but that is absolutely a baseball card. I'm with Al.

Doug

[savedfrommyspokes]

I came across this 1973 53 Topps "reprint" recently....hopefully there are no known reprints of this reprint, as this appears to be similar stock compared to other early 70s Topps issues The lines are from my scanner and thankfully not on the card. According to the VBC bible, there may have only been 300 of this 1973 53 Reprint set produced...is there any truth to this? It is hard to believe only 300 sets exist.

[ALR-bishop]

An interesting Topps "set". What was it's purpose ? There were 8 cards and 3 are incorrectly identified. That seems ridiculous on such a small issue. Were they favors at a Topps Banquet or event ? A test for future Archive issues ? ( The 53 set was recreated in 1991) Were they released on a limited retail basis in Brooklyn ?





Furillo is really Bill Antonelli. Rosen is actually Jim Fridley. And McCullough is actually Vic Jancowicz

[Volod]

Interesting, indeed. I've not seen those. Do the cards have any identification marks on the reverse - such as company name, or trademark?

[ALR-bishop]

They are a Topps specialty issue, from 1973. I can post the backs

[ALR-bishop]

[savedfrommyspokes]

That is a great looking set Al...I would not have minded if Topps had indeed issued a set in this format(however, accurately depicting the players in the set).

[Chris Counts]

Here are a couple of type cards from the 1950s I recently picked up, a 1953 Stahl-Meyer Franks and a 1953 Glendale Meats. For what it's worth, before I busted them out of the slabs they came in, both cards received a "3" by the grading companies ...

[ALR-bishop]

Nice cards Chris

[CharleyBrown]

Upgrade!

Added this:



to replace this:

[Volod]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Thanks for that, Al. It's pretty odd that a Topps issue (that does read T.C.G. on the close-up, doesn't it? My eyes aren't what they used to be) would have three cards so grossly misidentified. The mixups seem to based on superficial similarities, such as, Janowicz and McCollough - both backup catchers on the Pirates; Antonello and Furillo - both Dodgers with similar names; Fridley and Rosen - both Indians and sharing a facial resemblance. So, did some Topps employee or friend of a friend with only a passing knowledge of players somehow get access to the press plates and run these off for some personal purpose? Were Topps higher-ups alerted and the set stopped at eight? The imagination runs riot.

[CW]

The '48 Williams is pretty recent. No wrinkles or creases, so it's surprising it only graded VG 3 by PSA. The card is an interesting color variation, too, with an almost fuschia color in the background instead of orange. The Koufax rookie arrived this week. Great pickups, everyone!

[bcbgcbrcb]

Chuck:

Very nice Koufax Rookie.

[ALR-bishop]

Very nice

[Paul S]

Tough grade on that beautiful Williams. I'd give it more. Could be surface wear and a couple of scratches and maybe browning on the borders. Nevertheless, I don't grade cards.
On the other hand that is a terrific Koufax. 55Ts tend to retain their gloss and "whiteness".
Congrats!

[CW]

Thanks very much, guys. Happy to post 'em.

[hammer]

Finally landed my favorite card.

[ALR-bishop]

Wow

[71buc]

Originally Posted by hammer

Finally landed my favorite card.

Congratulations, that's a beautiful card.

[Rickyy]

Wow Hammer congrats! I always love that Mantle card...yours is a blazer!

Ricky Y

[mintacular]

That '58 Mantle is remarkable. My latest '57:

[almostdone]

Like always, nice pick up Pat of the Snider.
Dre