Uncut 1901 Ogden's Boxers Sheet

[PowerhouseBoxing85]

Hi all!

I'm a new member and have found a lot helpful information on this forum since I started collecting boxing cards and memorabilia recently. This group seems very passionate about advancing the collective knowledge of boxing cards and their history. I'm very appreciative to have been added as a member, and look forward to learning from this group.

I'm getting back into the card collecting hobby again for the first time in about 10-15 years after focusing on my other passion, US and Ancient Coins.

Boxing has been my favorite sport since I was about 12 or 13. It's a sport that is so rich with history, and I love re-watching classic fights or learning about the legends of the sport.

I especially love the tobacco card era (pre-1945).

I recently picked up an uncut full production sheet of 1901 Ogden's 'Heroes of the Ring'. The sheet is in excellent mint condition with the exception of some minor chipping at the top of the sheet that does not impact the cards, and a minor tear on J. Mace.

Question to this group:
I've given some thought to having the tear repaired, primarily, so it does not get worse. I know with cards and coins it's usually frowned upon to do any repairs or restorations because it can hurt the value.

Would I be better off leaving it alone? I don't want to risk damaging any of the other cards, but I don't want the tear to get worse either.

Thank you,
Joe

[G1911]

That is an awesome piece. I have a torn tobacco sheet too, and have chosen to keep it unaltered and as it was discovered. I'm scared to further damage the piece, though I'm more concerned with preservation than maximizing value, but still decided 100% original is best. This Ogdens sheet has been floating around at least ~20 years or so, glad to see it has not been cut up and ruined.

Truly fantastic sheet.

[Exhibitman]

A good paper restorer can repair and reinforce the tear in a way that is completely reversible and will not damage the sheet. IMO, well worthwhile when it comes to a unique item that is fragile and damaged.

Oh, and that sheet

[D. Bergin]

I've never seen an uncut sheet of Ogden's before. Remarkable!

I'd keep as is. The rigid holder you have it in should keep it from getting damaged any more.

[PowerhouseBoxing85]

Thank you all! Initially, after I purchased it, I was convinced I wanted to have the tear repaired and have it archival framed. However, I haven't found a good local paper restoration business that specializes in this type of repair, and I don't want to do any more damage to the rest of the sheet.

Also, the more I research old Tobacco Cards, CDV's and Cabinet Cards, the more I find they tend to come in 'as is' condition with tears and wear vs. being restored. I love it either way, but won't rule out repairing it in the future if I could find the right specialist.

[G1911]

I don't the British issues all that well, but a couple of thoughts I am hoping others may better inform on and I hope OP doesn't object to for going perhaps slightly astray. I have relied on David Luf.tig's (he used to post here before he stopped collecting) article (A copy is here: https://oldbaseball.com/refs/Ogdens_...ra_David_L.pdf) on the black border Ogden's for them, and he kindly sent me a couple cards that got me collecting these casually. They are a ton of fun.

There are 18 cards in the Heroes of the Ring set. The Leading Athletes also present on this sheet comprise 22 subjects, for a total of 40 in this 'set'.

I'm attaching the old image of this exact same sheet I had in my archive, which is not as good as OP's fresh picture. I think this is from an old public auction but I don't recall the source.



1) If this is a production sheet, 25 small size cards is a very small sheet.

2) With 40 subjects, 25 unique subjects on this sheet is an odd number that would suggest that A) another set of Ogden's was printed in the same run or B) there are probably double print's.

3) If this is a production sheet, we should see poorly centered cards with white borders. I have not found this myself, but again, I only collect these casually and don't monitor every one I can find like I do the N/T/E/C/V.

[PowerhouseBoxing85]

No objections at all! I've been researching too to see if this was possibly cut from a larger sheet. It doesn't appear to be cut from a larger sheet to the naked eye, but I was also thinking it would be small for a full production sheet based on more modern sheets I've seen.

I went through all the major sports card auction house sales going back 10 years or more, but couldn't find any other 1901 Ogden's sheets to compare it to.

Since 'Heroes of the Ring' and 'Leading Athletes' share the same sheet space, it could be a combination of these two series along with others from the set adding to 75 or 100, etc.?

These 'no-number' British Labour Ogden's issues total to 331 cards known per the 'The Cigarette Card Issues of Ogden's Ltd. Cartophilic Reference Book No. 115'. However, they could have been printed at different times between 1900-1903 and this could have been a combination adding to 75, 100, etc. or smaller sample run?

Just guesses though based on what I could find so far. Interested to hear what others think though.

[PowerhouseBoxing85]

Here are the different back types by series. It could have been 'Heroes of the Ring' with 17, 'Leading Athletes' with 22, and 'Notable Coursing Dogs' at 11 =50 or 2 of these sheets making up this batch, since they all share the same back type and it would evenly fill 2 sheets, or possibly some other combination? It would be hard to prove without other examples.

[G1911]

I may stand corrected; are there 17 or 18 subjects? Luf.tig's article adds a Jem Smith card missing from some other checklists and not on this sheet. PSA has it in their list, too, so it's not just David's. Jones does not list him. Smith is a logical subject, he appears in some of the other black border Ogden's cards.

I could not find any other uncut material or miscuts that connect Leading Athletes series cards to another of the individually named series.

Points in favor of a production sheet:
A) No alignment marks or other marks indicating a testing purpose.

B) Fully printed backs.

C) The Craig card is not the Each Packet version.


Points in favor of a pre-production test of some kind:
A) Impractically small sheet for mass production.

B) Surviving cards do not show white border remnants that should be common if this was the sheet.

[PowerhouseBoxing85]

This is great information Greg. I found a listing for this sheet from Heritage in 2020 where they thought it could possibly be promotional material printed later (see below), but I found further evidence that leans pre-production test sheet.

I don't know that Ogden's would have printed this sheet later than the 1900-1902 time period. The mix of subjects, orientation on some of the cards, the lack of Jem Smith and alternate back for Craig, would seem to suggest pre-production test sheet from the time period.

Here is a Toomey's Auction for another non-sports 1901 Ogden's that was referred to as a pre-production test sheet. It has the same layout, but there is evidence it was split (see below).

[D. Bergin]

Here's my Jeffries "Jefferies", Heroes Of The Ring card.

For what it's worth (and it may not be much), the printing anomalies on the front, and especially on the back (ink smudges on certain letters, symbols) seem remarkably similar to the one on the sheet.

Like they came from the same print run...or at least the same plates from a similar time frame.

[PowerhouseBoxing85]

That's a great point Dave. Here is another example from a Robert Edwards auction. Granted, this doesn't seem to be as strong of a print, but it is missing some of those same print anomalies like the extra 'comma-like' mark after the period following '1899' . It's very possible your example came from the same plate as this sheet.

One other consideration is that there are 3 known back variations of the Frank Craig card in the Ogden's reference guide. This sheet has the 'Packets Ogden's' instead of 'Packets of Ogden's'. That seems like an error that would have been corrected in later runs.

[G1911]

I can't imagine this sheet was produced at any great remove from the time the production cards were printed. Maybe it's some sort of sheet for something else like a related advertising effort, but I would think that there would be some indication of that on the item and it wouldn't just line the cards up like an uncut sheet with normal backs, but would have a different layout like we normally see on posters. It doesn't fully fit into a likelihood of a pre-production test or a production sheet either though; none of the three options really line up to what I would expect or find likely.

One of the best things about uncut sheets of this vintage is that they are so rare (and usually destroyed after discovery) and we have so little evidence about them from the surviving cut cards that when one does appear and we see one there is some surprise that people wouldn't expect.



Incidentally, I am suspicious the checklists with 18 cards are in error, probably taking a PSA label or something as a confirmation. These cards are not super easy but they also aren't that rare and I still can't find any copy of the Jem Smith from the Heroes of the Ring. PSA has only 1 in the POP report, 7+ of all the other cards (Dick Burge being the lowest, not because he's any rarer but because nobody knows who Dick Burge is). This is probably PSA just not knowing the difference between all the Ogden's sets and then people using PSA as a confirmation (hence my love for gathering scans to prove a card ). Thus my earlier questions about the missing boxer from this sheet are null and void, because one is not missing and I can downsize my checklist. It's nice to trim a card off my wantlist without spending a penny .