Circa 1846 Daguerreotype – Alexander Joy Cartwright debate

[barrysloate]

Scott- I'm not so sure the Knickerbockers actually had uniforms. I think they took off their jackets, rolled up their sleeves, and played baseball. I never saw a reference that said the team had uniforms.

Corey and Mark: there is something here about this whole project that I do not understand. Why did the two of you have ground rules? Why did you both have to agree not to keep going back to your experts? Why did you both have to set the rules regarding who was allowed to amend his findings, and who would have the last word? I never understood that. If the point of this exercise is to determine the truth, what relevance do these ground rules have? I'm lost.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Scott- I'm not so sure the Knickerbockers actually had uniforms. I think they took off their jackets, rolled up their sleeves, and played baseball. I never saw a reference that said the team had uniforms.

The only team 'picture' I've seen is this one, and it seems to show a 'team' belt and shirt design:

[oldjudge]

Barry-You are exactly right. This dag has been widely used and accepted by the hobby and the sports community alike. Now doubt has been cast upon it and all that matters is whether it is Cartwright or not. A very strong arguement has been made that it is not and now I believe that, if it is to believed that it is, then Mark's arguement must be proved incorrect. Otherwise, as I said before, a cloud of doubt will always hang over this piece.

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Why did the two of you have ground rules? Why did you both have to agree not to keep going back to your experts? Why did you both have to set the rules regarding who was allowed to amend his findings, and who would have the last word? I never understood that. If the point of this exercise is to determine the truth, what relevance do these ground rules have? I'm lost.

Without ground rules we would have been going back and forth forever and the newsletter would never have issued. As it is, you know how long this took. Also, this discussion need not and will not end with the current newsletter. I plan to address the Curry/Adams/Wheaton ID's in the next newsletter (you've already seen Adams in this thread) and to briefly respond to points Corey made in his final response. Corey can of course seek any additonal expert help that he deems necessary and publish whatever he desires wherever he wants on this subject. If he wants Jerry Richards to go through thousands of 19thC baseball faces, he can certainly do that.

As SABR's pictorial history committee chairman told me, "this will percolate for a long time."