S74 Collectors - Need help with theory regarding white version checklist

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob Casmer

Been working on collecting the S74-1 (white version) and S74-2 (colored version) sets of silks for quite a while. I recently found the last S74-2 colored silk I needed (thanks to Dan Paradis) a little over a month ago. There are still five of the S74-1 white version silks eluding me. In talking with other collectors over the years, these same five silks seem to be on everyone else's want list also. I'm beginning to wonder if these actually exist and I have a possible theory about it.

To help, I'm trying get confirmation from anyone that collects the S74-1 white version silks of having owned or ever seen an S74-1 silk WITH THE PAPER ADVERTISING BACK STILL ATTACHED of the following five players:

Peaches Graham (w/Cubs)
Tommy Leach
Bugs Raymond
Doc Scanlon (Scanlan)
Harry Steinfeldt (w/Rustlers)

Bear with me as I explain my theory. Each of these five listed S74-1 white version silks is also listed as being part of the S74-2 colored silk checklist. As I noted above, I have a complete S74-2 set so I can confirm that each one of these actually exists as a colored version silk. Of the five, Graham and Steinfeldt are actually listed as existing on two different teams in the S74-1 white version. Oddly enough, Graham is shown with the Rustlers and Steinfeldt with the Cubs on the versions that I do have examples of and know exist.

In going back and doing some research on the players' careers, I found that Graham played with the Rustlers in 1910 and then played for the Cubs in 1911. Same thing for Steinfeldt. He's shown as playing for the Cubs in 1910 and then for the Rustlers in 1911. There's no overlap of either of them playing for both teams in one year and the 1910 and 1911 dates correspond to the supposed release dates for the S74-1 (1910) and S74-2 (1911) silks. I didn't go so far as to find the exact dates they were traded to their new teams but, it looks pretty clear that the trades occurred after the end of the 1910 season and before the start of the 1911 season for both of them. If that is the case, then why would these two be listed on the 1910 released S74-1 silks with teams that they didn't play with till 1911? They are properly shown as being with their new teams in 1911 on the 1911 released S74-2 silks. No S74-2 colored silks are shown with two different teams for any player, which made me wonder, "Why would they have listed them on two teams for the 1910 S74-1 silks then?" Made no sense.

For anyone that has ever collected the silks, you've probably noticed that there is a difference in the material used between the two years. The S74-1 white version silks seem to have used a thicker, more coarse material, while S74-2 colored version silks used a finer, more satiny (not sure that is a word) kind of material. The material choice may have had something to do with the fact that the white version silks had the paper advertisements attached to the backs while the colored version silks had no backing.

In my collection, I've got a couple S74-2 colored version silks that are made from the same material that was used for the S74-1 white version silks. You can tell they're S74-2 silks because they show the printing for the tobacco brand and/or factory they came from on the front of the silk at either the very top or bottom. You don't see them very often, if at all though. Here's where my theory comes.

I'm wondering if after the 1910 S74-1 series they decided to change the silks for any of a variety of reasons. Since they were intended to be used in making pillows and quilts, the use of mutiple colors made a lot of sense as the ladies would be the ones mostly using the silks. Also, the paper backing used with the S74-1 silks already explained what they were to be used for. Maybe the tobacco company figured by now everyone knew what to do with the silks and they looked to save some money by not having to produce and attach a separate advertising back to each one. Also, the white version material (really more of a manila than white color) being thicker, may have been more expensive. Whatever the reason, they decided to change what they were printing the silks on. I'm wondering if they made the change in materials from the white to the multi-colored fabrics right after starting to print the S74-2 version silks in 1911? They may have only used the white version material for a short period of time, accounting for the relative rarity I think in seeing white colored S74-2 silks. Then, over time the silks often start fraying. I can easily see how a white version of the S74-2 silks could have the tobacco brand and factory number be removed by fraying and look like they were actually an S74-1 silk. That is why I'm asking if anyone has or can confirm seeing any of the five listed silks with advertising backs still attached. If not, frayed versions of the S74-2 silks may explain why these were ever included on the S74-1 checklist.

Sorry for being long-winded. if my theory proves out though, it may show that the checklist is incorrect. Thanks for any help.

Bob

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Very nice investigating you have going on here. Recently I acquired a small group of silks and the only thing I can do is confirm that I have a Steifeldt Cubs with a Red Sun back. None of the other players listed were in the grouping. BTW, since you seem to study and collect these somewhat.....are you in agreement with what I am to understand; that there are only 3 known Helmar (paper) backed S74-1's, or might you know of more?

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob Casmer

Leon,







I've heard the same rumor you have. I haven't seen one in person but, don't I remember seeing you have a Cobb silk with a Helmar back in the recent group you picked up. Or was it of another player? In any event, very nice. Also, I believe you recently picked up a Red Sun backed Cobb, of which I've heard rumored there are only two known? Again, very nice. Those are great. I think they are definitely underappreciated/undervalued.



I wish you had some of these ones I'm looking for. I've been looking for examples of those five silks for about a decade now and everyone I've talked with doesn't have them, hasn't seen them. Some people I've talked with have rumored that they believe they don't exist at all. I'd be happy to find any of them without the advertising backs even. I could see if there were one, maybe two of these silks that were almost impossible to find. But five of them.....doesn't make any sense. When I noted that two of these impossible to find ailks were players supposedly listed on two different teams and saw the info about when they played on those teams and when the different versions of the silks were supoosedly issued, I started to come up with my theory about how that could happen.



As additional evidence, there's actually a third player, Hap Smith, who is also shown as being on two different teams in the S74-1 white version silks. The suppposedly rarer version of him with the Boston Rustlers is actually listed in the Standard Catalog as the third most valuable silk in the S74-1 white version set (behind the Cobb and Mathewson). This rarer Boston Rustlers silk is listed in the Standard Catalog as having a NM value of $500, while his supposedly more common version with the Superbas is valued at $150. Unlike Graham and Steinfeldt though, Hap Smith's S74-2 colored version silk is NOT of him with Rustlers, the rarer of his S74-1 version silks. On that one he's only shown with the Brooklyn Superbas. So there is no possibility that this rare S74-1 version silk of him could really just be an S74-2 version with a lot of fraying. What is also odd is how/why did someone listing values in the Standard Catalog determine that his Rustlers version silk was so rare and assign it such a premium value? There is no premium or extra value noted for what I've found to be the rarer versions of Graham or Steinfeldt S74-1 silks. They are shown at the same value as all the other common silks. I've got a white silk version of Smith with the Rustlers, so I do know it exists for real. These others, I'm not so sure.



Also, if my guess about changing over from just white silk material to the varied, multi-colored materials you primarily see used for the S74-2 colored version silks is correct, that would indicate that there is a possible short print effect for white S74-2 colored version silks that no one has really thought about before. There's so many different colors in the S74-2 version though that is probably doesn't matter and wouldn't lead to any kind of premium, or should it?



And there's still my theory that whoever created the original checklist for the S74-1 white version silks had some very frayed versions of white colored S74-2 silks that they thought were S74-1s, and mistakenly added them onto the checklist. Unfortunately, the S74 silks don't seem to get a lot of love, and therefore, virtually no input from others yet about this thread. Hopefully some others will see this thread and chime in with what they know/think. I'd love to find out if I can actually quit looking for these other missing silks and either prove or disprove once and for all if they do or don't exist. Thanks. Bob

[Archive]

Posted By: andy becker

i have never seen the 5 silks in question. i doubt they exist.

regarding sp's within the s74-1 and s74-2 sets; there were clearly double and triple printed silks which would make the single print silks, in effect, short printed .

lew's book gives a detailed breakdown of the known uncut sheet which shows the double and triple printing.

[Archive]

Posted By: bob casmer

Thanks Andrew. Very good point. I've never read the Lipset books, and probably should. I'll have to get a hold of a copy and check out the article. I'd be extremely interested to see how the double and triple printed silks match up to numbers I've seen of the silks over the years. There are definitely some players that you find with no difficulty while others....well, maybe you'll see an example come up for sale or auction somewhere once in a blue moon, if even that often.

In any event, do you think my theory can actually hold water and might explain why the checklist may be incorrect? Unfortunately, my theory can't be 100% proven. It can only be affirmatively disproven by finding ad backed versions of those silks.

Bob

[Archive]

Posted By: andy becker

i think the checklist is incorrect. every collector i know of is looking for the same silks.

the checklist was developed way before the information age and the fact that many white silks had the backs removed and that many colored silks frayed to the point of not having the identifying tobacco brands AND the fact that within the colored series there is an ivory silk (that can look like a s74-1, after fraying).....make me believe that the checklist is wrong.

hope that makes sense.....

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

Thanks for chiming in. I know you have collected and tracked S74 as much as almost anyone. From everything being discussed it does look like the checklist is incorrect. Maybe we can get Bob Lemke's idea on the checklist? best regards

[Archive]

Posted By: bob casmer

Good point Leon. Or would Don Fluckinger be the better person to contact as he's the current SCD Catalog Editor? I know he posts on here every once in a while. I was hoping he might see the thread and chime in.

Bob Lemke would probably be the best source to see how the checklist actually originated and maybe explain the pricing premium placed on the Hap Smith silk but, none on any others. Do have a way to get a hold of them? Thanks.

Bob

[Archive]

Posted By: Keith O\'Leary

I got my old checklist out where I had 77 of them and had none of the 5.

[Archive]

Posted By: Keith O\\\'Leary

duplicate message

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob Casmer

Thanks Keith,

I'm curious as to where you got your checklist from and who is on it. I've been working off the checklist from the SCD Catalogs, which list 92 different S74-1 white version silks. Minus the 5 I can't account for gets us to 87 silks. Did you just mistype 87 as 77? If not, I'd like to compare you list to the one in the catalog and see what the other differences are. Thanks. Bob

[Archive]

Posted By: Keith O'Leary

I used to collect these Bob. I used Lew Lipset's book as my checklist master and would cross them off as I got them. This is what I got out and looked at. My memory was bad, I thought I had gotten up to 77 when I gave up...it was 67.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob Casmer

My mistake Keith. Misunderstood what you meant by having 77. I thought you meant that was what you had on your checklist, not the actual number of silks you had. By the way, were all of those silks with advertising backs attached?

I'm beginning to think that those five missing silks don't actually exist in the S74-1 white version.