Its as Plain as the Nose on your Face-the Ear Thing isn't Gospel

[Directly]

Econteachert----Two words Coaches corner


Two words; Charlie Sheen. ( This type ultra-high level collector )

Comiskey did reside in Dubuque for around four years between the age a 19-22. The photographer was in business while Comiskey played baseball there, then left to play baseball in St Louis. One hundred years later this Dubuque baseball team photograph was found in St Louis.

I have been advised to focus and concentrate with the Comiskey image. Because he is the real bread and butter, value and importance of my Dubuque photo. No one cares about Alveretta or Reis. Radbourn would be a bonus. Also SABR will be a good forum for my photo.

I have heard the mustache theory before, sorry I can't locate any photograph of Comiskey with mustache.

The age theory: I presented two photographs comparing my Comiskey with another person-. Could the person on the left be forty years old?--So although a good thought the age theory just doesn't hold water with my Comiskey image.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Directly

Econteachert----Two words Coaches corner


Two words; Charlie Sheen. ( This type ultra-high level collector )

Great - you are finally admitting that you can only sell this through a disreputable auction house, or to an idiot with a lot of money.

It's good that you have finally come around.

[Dave Grob]

Not sure it is even worth mentioning at this point, but dismissing the other players in the photograph and focusing on the one thought to be Charles Comiskey does not address the contextual aspects of analysis. If the thought is that these other players don’t matter and may not be the members of the Dubuque Rabbits as first thought, then who are they and why would the proffered Comiskey have been photographed with them? From a logic and analytical standpoint, if you espouse merit in the concept of contextual analysis as part of this process (which I believe you have), then you can’t forego it as part of your assessment and return myopically to a reliance on facial references only, and then for only one person in a group photograph. To do so is tantamount to rejecting the value of contextual analysis.

Please know this and my other posts are about my interests in process/protocols and not product (this particular photograph). Unless someone has any questions about process and protocols, I think I have reached my saturation point with this thread.

Dave Grob
DaveGrob1@aol.com

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Dave Grob

Not sure it is even worth mentioning at this point, but dismissing the other players in the photograph and focusing on the one thought to be Charles Comiskey does not address the contextual aspects of analysis. If the thought is that these other players don’t matter and may not be the members of the Dubuque Rabbits as first thought, then who are they and why would the proffered Comiskey have been photographed with them? From a logic and analytical standpoint, if you espouse merit in the concept of contextual analysis as part of this process (which I believe you have), then you can’t forego it as part of your assessment and return myopically to a reliance on facial references only, and then for only one person in a group photograph. To do so is tantamount to rejecting the value of contextual analysis.

Please know this and my other posts are about my interests in process/protocols and not product (this particular photograph). Unless someone has any questions about process and protocols, I think I have reached my saturation point with this thread.

Dave Grob
DaveGrob1@aol.com

Dave from someone that's hopes they learned something from you wonderful posts in this thread Thank you for the info Sir.

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by Directly

I have been advised to focus and concentrate with the Comiskey image....I have heard the mustache theory before, sorry I can't locate any photograph of Comiskey with mustache....

If you can't support your other IDs, and for example apply your "point system" to "Radbourn", why would anyone think you're right about Comiskey? And as Dave said, why would Comiskey be there if the others were not?

You don't understand the mustache theory (nor anything else), no one expects to see Comiskey with a mustache

[Directly]

Dave, thank you so much for your valuable insight. - In my opinion by just two short paragraphs you solved the mystery about my Dubuque photograph more than all of us put together X 100---everything you said is completely relevant and true to my photograph-- it hit me after reading your articles and thinking about what you are saying it suddenly became very clear to me, everything you wrote should be in a future SABR article-thanks, Tom

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Directly

Dave, thank you so much for your valuable insight. - In my opinion by just two short paragraphs you solved the mystery about my Dubuque photograph more than all of us put together X 100---everything you said is completely relevant and true to my photograph-- it hit me like a hammer after reading your articles and thinking about what you are saying it suddenly became very clear to me, everything you wrote should be in a future SABR article-thanks, Tom

Trolling behavior.

[Directly]

Dave's input didn't imply to me my player can't possibly be Comiskey. He did point out Comiskey played baseball in Dubuque for four years, (the Comiskey age factor of 19-22). Comiskey did in truth play baseball with several different Dubuque baseball teams and ball players during those four years. So in truth the photograph could have been produced within any of those four years 1878, 1879, 1880 up to 1881. In fact the Rabbits team toward the end of 1881 was made up of anyone who wanted to play baseball.

So in retrospect Comiskey might had my photo taken with several different teammates within those four years!


I may someday take my Dubuque photo either to the Chicago Sun-times show or the National. thanks so far to the forum, members and readers for their patience.

[Lordstan]

Holy crap.
How dense are you?
You will say anything you can to prove it is what you think it is.

For the last time...
1) The team doesn't match therefore the context of a Dubuque team is gone. There is nothing in the photo to suggest it is from Dubuque.

2) The face doesn't match Comiskey.

It isn't Comiskey.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Directly

-- it hit me like a hammer

Two more hammer hits and I think you'll have it.

(I realize you edited out the word "hammer", but I think you got it right the first time)

[MW1]

Question: Why does one item after another from this particular seller/source have recent notations that were added, presumably to enhance value? It seems like there is a distinct pattern here to deceive.

[Scott Garner]

Originally Posted by MW1

Question: Why does one item after another from this particular seller/source have recent notations that were added, presumably to enhance value? It seems like there is a distinct pattern here to deceive.

Yup

[bigtrain]

Haven't looked at this thread for a few
days. Amazing that this discussion continues.