I'm almost POSITIVE this card features Shoeless Joe...

[Peter_Spaeth]

Wishful thinking is not the same as fact. The photo is too grainy, and too little of his face is visible, to make a positive identification.

[Ladder7]

Im gonna agree it's JJJ... As soon as I get one in my hands.

[barrysloate]

Mark- I would like to see Brett a little more open-minded to other opinions. Let's see where this thread is at by post # 300.

[Abravefan11]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Mark- I would like to see Brett a little more open-minded to other opinions. Let's see where this thread is at by post # 300.

Short of finding information on the original photo I think the debate will be just as contested at post #300 as it is now. There just isn't anything definitive to say it's Jackson and everything that has been put forward to this point, no matter how compelling, has just been speculation.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

Dan & Barry - it should be clear why I don't like this thread. If I'm arrogant, at least I have a track record of being right about some things sometimes. This guy doesn't have a clue and nothing anyone says is going to help. He still doesn't know what he doesn't know, and kindly reasoning will not change anything. If he wants to comprehend reality, he should try to get a copy of this card placed in JJ's file at HoF.

Mark, I don't think you're arrogant about it...I do think you come off as angry though when these threads pop up and I can understand that you don't like to see collectors be taken by misidentified photos, but IMO threads like these are educational. Even if some people can't be convinced it doesn't mean the thread isn't useful. A part of this hobby has always been speculation. It's fascinating to me what this thread did for a card that's been floating around the hobby for 100 years now as a "common." I certainly wouldn't be surprised if Brett has already stocked up on more than a few of these cards before posting this thread.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by Abravefan11

Short of finding information on the original photo I think the debate will be just as contested at post #300 as it is now. There just isn't anything definitive to say it's Jackson and everything that has been put forward to this point, no matter how compelling, has just been speculation.

At this point it's circumstantial evidence with no smoking gun, but it is fun.

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Mark,......I certainly wouldn't be surprised if Brett has already stocked up on more than a few of these cards before posting this thread.

Now that is a rational explanation. In fact - it may be the best post on this thread.

[Abravefan11]

Dan I agree completely. Even a road that leads to a dead end can be a fun ride.

[sago]

Here's a photo of Joe sliding into third base in 1913.

I'm not familiar enough with him to know if his sliding style was unique, but it looks similar to the one in the T202 photo.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Maybe someone should ask the Joe Jackson Museum what they think, or whoever maintains the Black Betsy website?

[brett]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

It's fascinating to me what this thread did for a card that's been floating around the hobby for 100 years now as a "common." I certainly wouldn't be surprised if Brett has already stocked up on more than a few of these cards before posting this thread.

Hahaha, I swear on my mother that I didn't start this thread for self-serving reasons. In the spirit of full disclosure I do have 2 of these. One of them is in my complete set and the other I have no plans to do anything with (I have a lot of doubles in this set).

[brett]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Mark- I would like to see Brett a little more open-minded to other opinions. Let's see where this thread is at by post # 300.

Barry I have nothing but respect for you and everybody else on here. I respect everybody's right to an opinion (sort of like religion). If somebody believes the player on that card is Oscar Gamble I'm cool with it if it makes them happy. I just firmly believe that I'm right on this one and that we've discovered something special together. Not wishful thinking on my part, just combining my knowledge with other people's observations and it all seems to add up beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Ladder7]

PM Sent to brett!

[barrysloate]

Thanks Brett. I do understand that you feel virtually certain you are right, but not everyone is on board yet. Let's see how this goes.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by brett

and it all seems to add up beyond a reasonable doubt.

I assume you're not a prosecuting attorney by trade?

[brett]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

I assume you're not a prosecuting attorney by trade?

Actually I'm a sports agent, but good guess on your part based off that last post.

[slidekellyslide]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

I assume you're not a prosecuting attorney by trade?

Hey! I already made that joke.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Hey! I already made that joke.

Great minds think alike!

[brett]

Here's ANOTHER thing to consider... an earlier poster showed closeup face pics of the 4 guys on the 1911 Naps team who wore ankle wraps on their right foot. Aside from the "C" on two of the guys' hats being faded (and I'm sure these guys didn't have access to numerous hats in a season like today's ballplayers), look at how Joe's sideburns are cut sharply at the top of his ears just like the guy in the sliding picture. GODDAMNIT IT'S GOTTA BE HIM!!!

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by brett

Here's ANOTHER thing to consider... an earlier poster showed closeup face pics of the 4 guys on the 1911 Naps team who wore ankle wraps on their right foot. Aside from the "C" on two of the guys' hats being faded (and I'm sure these guys didn't have access to numerous hats in a season like today's ballplayers), look at how Joe's sideburns are cut sharply at the top of his ears just like the guy in the sliding picture. GODDAMNIT IT'S GOTTA BE HIM!!!

It looks to me like it can only be the middle-right guy or SJJ. They are the only ones with "sunken" cheek-bones and Joe's go higher, like in the card. Plus as someone mentioned, Joe's C is more prominent on his cap.

[Matt]

Brett - you're overboard on the foot wrap thing. To assume just because months later only 4 people are wearing foot wraps, why does that have any bearing on the game in question? Was it worn for style? To heal an ankle injury? Either way, knowing how superstituous baseball players are, maybe a guy in slump decided to wear one for a few games or whatever.
That is why for photo ID you look at unique facial features like the ears and the spacing of features on the face, as Mark has explained many times - those won't change 4 months later.

[brett]

Originally Posted by Matt

Brett - you're overboard on the foot wrap thing. To assume just because months later only 4 people are wearing foot wraps, why does that have any bearing on the game in question? Was it worn for style? To heal an ankle injury? Either way, knowing how superstituous baseball players are, maybe a guy in slump decided to wear one for a few games or whatever.
That is why for photo ID you look at unique facial features like the ears and the spacing of features on the face, as Mark has explained many times - those won't change 4 months later.

That's why first and foremost I always said that the facial resemblance is the main reason I believe it's him. All these other factors are just the icing on the cake. Look at the cheekbones, ears, lips, chin, etc... The picture is not that small and not that grainy where you can't get a good enough look and see that it's him. The ankle wrap is just all the more reason. If I had to bet all the money I have on whether it's him or not I'd bet that it is and I'd like my chances of winning.

[bmarlowe1]

originally posted by Brett:
The picture is not that small and not that grainy where you can't get a good enough look and see that it's him.

-------------------

Yes, it is too small and too grainy. I'm being way too nice here, but all you can accurately say is that it can be JJ. That is all that anyone who does this seriously would accept.

Since you say you have 2 of them, I am wondering why you don't post a 600 dpi scan - and just crop out the face. If you don't know how, there are people that can help you. That may or may not help.

[orator1]

Mark, based on the 4 close-ups of 1911 Naps players in post #219, can any of their facial features exclude them from being the player in question?

[JasonL]

I am ready to say that it is reasonable to think that the sliding player on the T202 card is in fact a Cleveland player. But I think that is all we can know at this time.

I guess everyone overlooked the white wrap on the other foot. Its as clear as can be in seeing the distinct outline of the shoe, white wrap, and then black sock.

It's not JJ.

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by Pup6913

I guess everyone overlooked the white wrap on the other foot. Its as clear as can be in seeing the distinct outline of the shoe, white wrap, and then black sock.

It's not JJ.

Kind of hard to say that when his left leg is underneath his body completely out of sight.

[bmarlowe1]

Originally Posted by orator1

Mark, based on the 4 close-ups of 1911 Naps players in post #219, can any of their facial features exclude them from being the player in question?

Paul - they way I would like to put it is that I can't be sure who it is or isn't based on what has been posted and also the reproduction in Slocum's book.

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

Paul - they way I would like to put it is that I can't be sure who it is or isn't based on what has been posted and also the reproduction in Slocum's book.

I know it's not your job to do so, but who is the player then, if it's not Joe Jackson? Who was it before it "became" Jackson?

Originally Posted by sportscardtheory

Kind of hard to say that when his left leg is underneath his body completely out of sight.

You must be blind or in denial with the others that are hyping the card. You can clearly see the shoe, white wrap and then the black top of the sock. The arrow points to where the wrap and sock meet.

[tbob]

Did anyone else notice that in the Addy Joss panorama picture Jack Graney is pictured twice?

[Matt]

Originally Posted by tbob

Did anyone else notice that in the Addy Joss panorama picture Jack Graney is pictured twice?

From that to the collection of talent, to Cobb in a Cleveland uni, to the history surrounding it, it's a special photo. I created a wall display surrounding it.

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by Pup6913

You must be blind or in denial with the others that are hyping the card. You can clearly see the shoe, white wrap and then the black top of the sock. The arrow points to where the wrap and sock meet.

I think you are seeing what you want to see. Look at post #209 in this thread. It's a clear as day example of a Jackson slide and his left leg is so far under his backside that it's not visibly there, just like the T202 card. You are seeing dusty air under his right leg. Who the heck slides with both feet extended. Answer, no one. I don't have a horse in this race. I don't have the card and don't plan on getting any.

[brett]

Originally Posted by Pup6913

I guess everyone overlooked the white wrap on the other foot. Its as clear as can be in seeing the distinct outline of the shoe, white wrap, and then black sock.

It's not JJ.

The other foot is behind a huge cloud of dust and you're not seeing anything clear whatsoever. Pay more attention to the features on the player's face and tell me who you think it is.

[Cat]

While you guys have been arguing about the foot wrap, I just made three more deals over on the BST.

[teetwoohsix]

I guess there is a rule that it has to be proven that it is JJ, and not the other way around. I didn't know about that, I thought more people would be able to explain why they didn't feel it was him. I think Andrew is the only one who gave a reason why he felt it wasn't JJ.

To me, I can see why Brett thinks this is Jackson, and from looking at all of the photos, comparing the slide, the uniform, the hat, the leg wrap, the facial features (what we can see from them)........I am becoming convinced (almost ).

I understand whats coming next--it's all speculation without proof--I know guys. But can you all agree that you see what Brett is seeing? I can.

Clayton

[Tcards-Please]

Clayton,

It may be difficult to PROVE, but based on the information that has been posted before (facial features, sliding style, hat, etc) I think it may be him as well. We have other people come on here and give their professional opinions on other cards from over 100 years old based deductive reasoning and common sense. No absolute proof at all and we take their word based on area of expertise and opinion.

r/
Frank

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by teetwoohsix

I guess there is a rule that it has to be proven that it is JJ, and not the other way around. I didn't know about that, I thought more people would be able to explain why they didn't feel it was him. I think Andrew is the only one who gave a reason why he felt it wasn't JJ.

To me, I can see why Brett thinks this is Jackson, and from looking at all of the photos, comparing the slide, the uniform, the hat, the leg wrap, the facial features (what we can see from them)........I am becoming convinced (almost ).

I understand whats coming next--it's all speculation without proof--I know guys. But can you all agree that you see what Brett is seeing? I can.

Clayton

I think we all have said we see what Brett is seeing. If we didn't we wouldn't be saying it could be JJ; we would be saying we don't think there is any chance it is him.

As to why it might not be him, the answer is simple. There is simply not enough detail to rule out other players who bear similar enough resemblance. In regard to ankle wraps, method of sliding, etc., again how can we know there aren't other players that wear ankle wraps or have similar sliding methods? Since all these players are on the same team, how do we know they don't have a trainer who encourages use of ankle wraps, or a coach who instructs his players to use a certain method of sliding? As Mark said, and I agree, no one who does photo ID in a serious way could at this point conclude beyond a reasonable doubt it must be Joe Jackson.

[T206DK]

there is a slim chance that the player sliding in the picture has the same cheekbones structure and chin as Jackson does when relaxed. Look at the lines that run from his nose down the sides of his face to his chin. Jackson also had a sunken area under one of his eyes that to me makes it impossible for that face on the card to be him. Even if he was gritting his teeth while bearing down on the bag his face would not look as aged and old as it does in the T202 pic. The ears do not match up either, at least not the way I see them, so I don't know why that is still being argued. The player that is sliding is not Jackson, but is someone who could have looked similar in uniform and was older than he was ( my opinion). The white "sock" or wrap may have been a support for an injury, but I was also told last night that it could have been worn by the team captains or used in that manner. Can you see his left leg through the dirt....I can't tell, but it doen't really look like all dirt there. I think you can see some of his left leg and shin perhaps. Every player slides almost the same if they are going in feet first anyway, so for Brett to say that it is a "Jackson" slide is not right either. I slide that way playing softball , and I'm sure a lot of other guys know what I'm talking about. you put your target leg out, tuck your other leg under and trail one hand behind you. It's the way sliding is taught to 6 year olds. I think the fact that some on this board now want it to be Jackson so bad that they are not willing to "see" anything different.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Jax hit .408 in 1911. If this is a 1912 issue, and the pic was Jax, wouldn't he likely have been identified as other middle photos of stars were identified?

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Jax hit .408 in 1911. If this is a 1912 issue, and the pic was Jax, wouldn't he likely have been identified as other middle photos of stars were identified?

The card wasn't about him though, it was about Lord getting his man.

[botn]

Here is link to a an enormous high resolution scan of the Cleveland player.

www.botn.com/images/LordCatches.jpg

[botn]

The Cleveland Public Library's Microfilm Department has been kind enough to save me a trip. They have provided me with coverage from all 11 games in which the White Sox played in Cleveland. I am reading the articles in chronological order. The headlines for the 2nd game they played (printed in the July 6, 1911 paper) reads "Yes, Joe Jackson Was Surely Out At 3rd Base", the image in the newspaper is at a later point in the slide but it made headlines. Here is a link to a larger version of the scan. www.botn.com/images/CPD050611.jpg

[calvindog]

Jeepers, Greg, that's good detective work.

[Jacklitsch]

WOW!!

Vindication.

[Matt]

well done Greg!

[whitehse]

I am actually amazed that this information was available!! Great detective work!

[HercDriver]

Too bad his foot isn't wrapped...or is it?

Take Care,
Geno

[yanks12025]

I don't think it is wrapped in the photo, just looks black. Also is it me or is it funny that the article talks about how Lajoie hit the ball to Tannehill who threw it to Lord to get Jackson, and both Tannehill and Lord are on the card.

[botn]

Geno has a valid point.