1876 scorecard in REA

[GaryPassamonte]

This scorecard just sold for a crazy price of $5500. excluding BP in REA. What was unusual about this particular scorecard was the colors listed below the name of each Chicago player. It has always been thought that 1882 was the first and only year players wore jerseys color coded by position. It would seem that this idea was also tried in 1876. Has anyone ever seen another scorecard with similar "color" notations?

[bmarlowe1]

Amazing - I've never heard of this.

[Dto7]

The 1888 Pittsburgh Alleghenys wore different colored hats in August 1888.

[johnmh71]

It is news to me too. It must have been interesting to watch a game back then with everyone wearing a different color jersey or hat.

[oldjudge]

Gary--as someone who bid on this scorecard, I think your characterization of the price it went for being crazy is, to coin a term, crazy. On the contrary, I think it is one of the most important scorecards in existence. To put this in context, by 1875 William Hulbert was convinced that eastern baseball powers in the National Association were conspiring against western teams. After the 1875 season he spirited Al Spaulding, Cap Anson, Deacon White and Ross Barnes to Chicago and then orchestrated the formation of the National League. On May 30, 1876 Boston met Chicago for their first National League game. This was the first time that Al Spaulding played against his former team, and marked the first battle of the two baseball powers of the early years of the league. Today, 138 years after the National League was formed, only two franchises have had uninterrupted National League membership, making them the oldest National League franchises-the Cubs and the Braves--and this is the scorecard from the first time they met.
As for your question about the colors listed with the Chicago player's names, in 1876 the Chicago team had each player wear a different colored fez like hat (no tassel). The program shows the color each player wore.

[RUKen]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

As for your question about the colors listed with the Chicago player's names, in 1876 the Chicago team had each player wear a different colored fez like hat (no tassel). The program shows the color each player wore.

The Threads of Our Game website has further information about the Chicago uniforms in 1876: http://www.threadsofourgame.com/1876-chicago/

[barrysloate]

Jay- while I do think it is a really great scorecard, I'm not sure I see the significance of this game. Each of the teams had played roughly a dozen games before May 30, and while this was the first National League match between Boston and Chicago, do historians think of those teams as natural rivals? It seems like any league material from 1876 is important, and while this particular match is noteworthy, it doesn't strike me as historic. If it were played on opening day, making it the first league game in history, that would be extraordinary. This one is a tier or two below. Still a cool scorecard, though, no question about that.

[GaryPassamonte]

Jay- As someone who also bid on this scorecard, your points are well taken. However, as an underbidder on the scorecard, I believe if I or any other bidder was out of the equation,
the price would be significantly lower regardless of the historical significance of the scorecard. I think if it sold tomorrow, it would not come near the price realized on Saturday.

I had forgotten about the different coloration of the 1876 Chicago players' fezlike caps. Uniform history remains unchanged.

[oldjudge]

LOL---Gary, you state that as an underbidder, if you or other underbidders had not bid the price would have been lower. What lot was this not the case for? If you were an aggressive bidder on this lot, but believe that it went way too high, why were you bidding? If you want to see high prices let's talk about the PSA 8.5 Curley Three Stooges card or the $95,000 presidents card.
Barry--who knows. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I could see this on display in Wrigley or Atlanta when (if) the Cubs play the Braves next year. Think about it, the person who scored this scorecard sat in the South End Grounds 138 years ago and watched Al Spaulding pitch to George Wright while he was being caught by Deacon White. This is not a card that was produced after the fact, which by the way would cost many multiples of the scorecard price. This scorecard was part of the game. BTW, Anson talks about this very game in his autobiography.

[barrysloate]

Agreed Jay, that every scorecard and ticket stub was in attendance for a game, and that has tremendous appeal to the people who collect them. And I also agree that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. All I was saying was that while the game was noteworthy, I don't consider it historic.

Suppose you had the scorecard for the game that Babe Ruth hit his 200th home run. That is certainly a noteworthy game, and 200 HR's is a great milestone. But I would not consider that historic. His 1st and 714th would be historic, and maybe his 500th too, but not his 200th. I'm just distinguishing between what is really cool and what is legendary. Subjective, no doubt.

And assuming you won the scorecard, you have the Sloate seal of approval on it. It really is a nice one.

[oldjudge]

Barry--I guess I'd agree with your analogy if this was the scorecard from the second or third game of the Boston-Chicago three game series. However, it was the first. Other than the scorecard from the first game in NL history, I see no more important 1876 scorecard, and I assume the scorecard from the first game would sell for six figures, if one exists.

[GaryPassamonte]

Jay- I guess I got a little crazy when bidding on the scorecard. Thank God I caught myself and realized I had no business sensibly being in the fray.

[oldjudge]

Good thing these guys weren't bidding too!

[barrysloate]

It's a great scorecard Jay, and an important game from the first year of the league, but I still think it's just short of the historic level. As you said, it's subjective. I guess anything from 1876 deserves its own special status though.

[bobbvc]

When you consider what Jeter stuff is selling for, or many other modern items, not to mention many mass produced vintage items, 5,500 seems like a bargain for a soon to be 150 year old scorecard. Whether it's 1st or 2nd tier historic, if that's what you collect....... Personally, the 2 oldest teams in the National League, their first game against each other, way more historic than tonight's first pitched ball of the world series which is going to Cooperstown but if sold would top 5,500 I'd bet.

[patricka]

Here is my 1876 Chicago home scorecard vs. the Reds. Double sided single sheet scorecard. Chicago side shown with references to colors also.

[GaryPassamonte]

Nice scorecard, Patrick.
REA made reference to only three 1876 scorecards that have been seen by them in the past decade. Are there any others owned by members?

[bobbvc]

Originally Posted by patricka

Here is my 1876 Chicago home scorecard vs. the Reds. Double sided single sheet scorecard. Chicago side shown with references to colors also.

VERY NICE!

Again, I don't collect them, but based on what other items in our hobby sell for, 5k for a scorecard from the first year of The National League seems pretty inexpensive or at the very least, reasonable. Am I missing something here?

[GaryPassamonte]

An 1876 Boston- Hartford scorecard sold for just under $1300. in a REA in 2011. An 1876 Chicago-St Louis scorecard, which I believe is similar to Patrick's, sold for less than $1000. about a decade ago. The highest price for a professional post 1870 scorecard I can find is for a game between Boston and Hartford in 1875. This scorecard was significant in that it represented a record of the final National Association game ever played. This scorecard sold for almost $5000. and, until the recent sale of the Chicago-Boston scorecard, no other scorecard has come close to this selling price.
I can't definitively answer why these scorecards don't bring higher prices, other than the fact that they aren't particularly attractive, because they are quite rare. The exceptions, regarding scorecards, would be those issued by Mort Rogers. These cards are expensive and I believe this is due more to the photographic images included than to the historical significance of the game involved.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Agreed Jay, that every scorecard and ticket stub was in attendance for a game, and that has tremendous appeal to the people who collect them.

Except for full tickets, which were not there. That's why I don't understand why they sell for a considerable premium. Yes, they are rare, but so what? They have as much to do with the game in question as any ticket I could buy at any box office today.

[djson1]

Just my 2 cents: I think $5,500 for any scorecard is crazy...but then again, a LOT of things sell for crazy prices these days. I miss the prices of the old days....sigh. (I'm more of a buyer than a seller...so, that's why)