1889 N526 Diamond James A. Hart How scarce

[Donscards]

I just got this back from PSA---1889 N526 Diamond Cigars James A. Hart--Highest grade for Hart---Only 1 card in the whole set has been give a psa 6 due to the thin paper---Curious what the experts think on here---Is this a tough card---I am pleased with the grade--the card is very solid--I have enclosed 2 scans I would love some feedback---thanks, Don

[ullmandds]

Definitely a tough card was probably worth more back when type cards were hot six years ago. Not universally desirable but definitely to some.probably worth a grand or two at auction on a good day...imo.

[uffda51]

A very tough card, but not in high demand. Underrated IMHO.




I own the complete set which can be viewed here:

http://imageevent.com/uffda51/1889di...18&w=4&x=0&p=5

[ullmandds]

Wow bruce!

[shernan30]

I've only recently been looking at the N526 set. They are great looking pieces. In no way I'm an expert so I have little of value to offer.

Nice crisp example Don!!

Great set Bruce!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Leon]

Nice card. Their rarity far surpasses their value, unfortunately. Still quite a bit of value but again, not relative to how difficult they are to find. I always have said, the demand side of the equation is far more important than the supply side, in our hobby. And this coming from someone who has focused on the supply side.

ps...and I wonder why PSA put C.S.White & Co on the label on when it doesn't have that stamp on it? (unless that is a faint stamp on the front?)

[uffda51]

Low demand, to be sure, but a relatively inexpensive way to pick up a 19th century HOFer, with four out of 15 in the Hall.

[drcy]

It's a rare issue, no question about that. You see them for sale, but not frequently.

[Donscards]

Originally Posted by Leon

Nice card. Their rarity far surpasses their value, unfortunately. Still quite a bit of value but again, not relative to how difficult they are to find. I always have said, the demand side of the equation is far more important than the supply side, in our hobby. And this coming from someone who has focused on the supply side.

ps...and I wonder why PSA put C.S.White & Co on the label on when it doesn't have that stamp on it? (unless that is a faint stamp on the front?)

Leon no there is no stamp noting C.S. White on the card---and experts, thanks for all the info on the card and set---What I like about the card is the condition which is very strong considering the thin paper---I think it is a interesting set with some nice Hall of Famers---I will take it to the National and see what happens--Hopefully somebody out there is looking for this card.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Donscards

Leon no there is no stamp noting C.S. White on the card---and experts, thanks for all the info on the card and set---What I like about the card is the condition which is very strong considering the thin paper---I think it is a interesting set with some nice Hall of Famers---I will take it to the National and see what happens--Hopefully somebody out there is looking for this card.

H.W.S. & Co., Number 7, is the one you have. The flip, which says C.S.White & Co., should probably be changed to be correct. Not a huge deal but..... When I was doing type cards for 19th Century, those were 2 different cards. Great looking card. Good luck!!

ps..actually it seems the flip has both of the incorrect companies and not the correct one. What are the odds?

[RCMcKenzie]

I was talking with BobC about this set in the REA thread, and was going to start a new thread until I found this old one as a jumping off point.

Here's one I got in September with the Diamond S back. I'm at 10/15 and will post scans tomorrow with some more discussion about back checklists. Neat to see Bruce completed the set by fronts.

[Vintagedeputy]

I’ve been collecting for 40+ years, and I can say that it’s true; you really do learn something new every day. Great stuff! Never seen these before.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by Vintagedeputy

I’ve been collecting for 40+ years, and I can say that it’s true; you really do learn something new every day. Great stuff! Never seen these before.

+1 on that! Number 1 reason I love this forum.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

I was talking with BobC about this set in the REA thread, and was going to start a new thread until I found this old one as a jumping off point.

Here's one I got in September with the Diamond S back. I'm at 10/15 and will post scans tomorrow with some more discussion about back checklists. Neat to see Bruce completed the set by fronts.

Hey Rob,

Didn't remember this old thread either, thanks for resurrecting it to discuss these without taking away from the REA thread.

Interesting that the card the OP originally posted was very clearly mislabeled. Not sure how somehow could so easily have messed that up. Given the overall rarity and uniqueness of these cards, you would think someone more knowledgeable would have been involved in its grading, and/or that some research was required. The old SCD catalogs showed and described these as three distinct sets/variations, so you'd think coming to the correct answer wouldn't have been that difficult. The most common two variations being the "Number 7 Cigars" or "Diamond S Cigars" backs. The third variation/version had "C. S. White & Co." printed at the top on the front of the card, not on the back. I'm still waiting to see one of those come up for sale.

You mentioned possibly going for a master set one day with the two different brands/backs. So how many of your 10 different fronts do you have in each different back/brand? Of my 6 cards I've got 4 with Diamond S Cigar backs, and 2 with the Number 7 Cigar brand back.

Also, for a 15-card set (14 players and manager James A. Hart) of just a single team from 1889 (the Boston Beaneaters), it surprisingly includes four HOF players; Chas. (Old Hoss) Radbourn, John Clarkson, Dennis (Dan) Brouthers, and Mike (King) Kelly. That is pretty darn good HOF representation for a single team from a single year. So how many, if any, of the HOFers do you have? I've got Clarkson and Kelly myself, along with two cards of manager James Hart, one each with the different Number 7 and Diamond S backs. Forgive me for misspeaking in that other REA thread as I only have 5 different fronts, and not 6 after all.

And an interesting factoid regarding James (Jim) Hart. Along with being a manager of various ballclubs besides the Beaneaters, he was also an executive and owner of various teams, including at one time the Chicago Cubs. And I believe these N526 "cards" may be the only card issue that Hart appears on.

Likewise, the N526 "card" of J.B. Ray you just won from REA may also be the only known card issue that exists for him as well. That might also help to explain the rather strong price I thought it got. And as you had pointed out in the REA thread, the card should say I.B. Ray, and not J.B. Ray. Irving Burton Ray only played in 9 games for the Beaneaters in 1889 before being sold to the Baltimore Orioles of the American Association on August 16, 1889, for $1,500.00. He went by Irv, and is listed/referenced as such in Baseball Reference. Everyone else in this N526 set, besides Ray and Hart, appears in the N172 Old Judge set, along with other then contemporary card issues/sets for many of them. Once again, think you had a super pick-up on that Ray card, and didn't realize the possible added rarity until after doing a little bit of additional research.

Most definitely an extremely underappreciated, and an awfully obscure and unknown set, given some of the players included in it.

[RCMcKenzie]

Bob, and anyone else that wants to chime in on this set, here is Lew Lipset's confirmed list from the 1987 2nd printing edtiion of his guide. I haven't found any other public lists of the confirmed backs. As you point out, and others pointed out earlier in this thread in 2015, the tpg's don't get the backs correct often enough on the labels to use for a confirmed list.

I'm going to put my checklist of my cards on here with scans. I should have some time for that later tomorrow.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

Bob, and anyone else that wants to chime in on this set, here is Lew Lipset's confirmed list from the 1987 2nd printing edtiion of his guide. I haven't found any other public lists of the confirmed backs. As you point out, and others pointed out earlier in this thread in 2015, the tpg's don't get the backs correct often enough on the labels to use for a confirmed list.

I'm going to put my checklist of my cards on here with scans. I should have some time for that later tomorrow.

Thanks Rob,

I forgot all about that listing in Lew Lipset's Encyclopedia. Hadn't looked at it in years. I don't believe any more than the 14 players, plus Hart as the manager for a total of 15 different cards, have ever been found. But I'm sure that some of those missing backs for several players have been. I know that for a fact as my John Clarkson has a Number 7 Cigars back on it, which was unknown at the time Lipset's Encyclopedia came out.

And if you go to the PSA and SGC Pop Reports, and compare those to Lipset's lists, it looks like Number 7 Cigar backs do exist for all 15 different fronts. But for the Diamond S Cigar backs, between Lipset and the Pop Reports I can only confirm it exists for 14 of the 15 different fronts. Can't be confirmed for J.B. Ray yet. Although, the SGC Pop Reports do list one J.B. Ray card, but don't say which back it has. Also, based on the mislabeled back on the N526 card the OP posted and started this thread about, I guess we can't be 100% certain the Pop Reports are completely accurate anyway. Still a rare issue though, with only 95 total graded so far between PSA and SGC.

[RCMcKenzie]

Originally Posted by BobC

Thanks Rob,

...my John Clarkson has a Number 7 Cigars back on it, which was unknown at the time Lipset's Encyclopedia came out.

That's great. Hoping more collectors chime in with what they have.

Here are scans of my 10 cards. All are on Lipset's checklist and SGC has labeled them all correctly.