How reliable are the rarities listed in Lipset?
+3
bowlingshoeguy
sabrjay
Bosox Blair
7 posters
Page 1 of 1
How reliable are the rarities listed in Lipset?
Hi folks,
I have the original 3 volumes of Lipset's "Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards" and I'm just wondering what you all think of the reliability of the "rarities" noted back then? I'm sure most of them have stood the test of time, but I wonder about some. For instance, in T-206, Kleinow (Boston) was noted as a rarity, commanding quite a high price. Today, I see many copies of this card offered, and it seems to sell at only a modest premium over commons.
In T-207, many dealers and collectors are today noting cards that are tough/rare, but which Lipset never mentioned in the early days.
Is Lipset's listing of rarities of value today, or is there a better indicator of what is rare? Your opinions are welcomed.
Cheers,
Blair
I have the original 3 volumes of Lipset's "Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards" and I'm just wondering what you all think of the reliability of the "rarities" noted back then? I'm sure most of them have stood the test of time, but I wonder about some. For instance, in T-206, Kleinow (Boston) was noted as a rarity, commanding quite a high price. Today, I see many copies of this card offered, and it seems to sell at only a modest premium over commons.
In T-207, many dealers and collectors are today noting cards that are tough/rare, but which Lipset never mentioned in the early days.
Is Lipset's listing of rarities of value today, or is there a better indicator of what is rare? Your opinions are welcomed.
Cheers,
Blair
Bosox Blair- Custom
- Posts : 1068
Trader Points :
Re: How reliable are the rarities listed in Lipset?
The t206 rarities is pretty accurate. Some of the lower tier ones are touch off. As for t207s, I believe it was Tim Newcome and Bill Cornell who did a great article on the set and the rarities. They showed that the supposed big 3 really are the 3 toughest cards in the set.
Jay
Jay
Last edited by sabrjay on Fri Jan 08, 2010 11:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
Re: How reliable are the rarities listed in Lipset?
The Kleinow, Boston I believe is considered 9th or 10th if memory serves me right. they do not seem to be a problem to find but do have to pay a premium for them. I believe the Boston, NY catching may be as tough but does not seem to get much recognition. Otherwise the T206s seem to be in line.
Another card you are going to have to pay a big premium for is the Joe Doyle card with no team, for some reason people are paying stupid money to get even lowgrade versions of this card.
Lee
Another card you are going to have to pay a big premium for is the Joe Doyle card with no team, for some reason people are paying stupid money to get even lowgrade versions of this card.
Lee
bowlingshoeguy- Sultan of the Cycle Back
- Posts : 3106
Trader Points :
Re: How reliable are the rarities listed in Lipset?
I think Lipset's info on the rarities in established sets is very reliable. For example, all the usual suspects in the E90-1 American Caramel set are pointed out and explained at length. I think several small adjustments could be made in that case, but all the important info is there. On the other hand, some info on sets like T215 and Orange Border still had some fleshing out left to do because there have been a number of significant finds since he wrote the encyclopedia in the 80's. So while not a perfect document, it's certainly a very valuable resource for collectors that is (imo) still unmatched in terms of quality and content.
How about T207? Lipset cites a wide variety of T207's that he considers to be "rarities":
Well known: Lowedermilk, Irving Lewis, Ward Miller, Saier, Ragan, Tyler, Works.
Other difficult cards:
(* - indicates difficult cards found only with common [Recruit and Napoleon] backs.)
Looking at Lipset's list, there's a fair number of cards that aren't familiar to me as rarities in the set, but I'm a t207 novice. Have things changed? How were they documented in Tim Newcomb's Old Cardboard article? I should do myself a favor and just buy the darn back issue, huh?
How about T207? Lipset cites a wide variety of T207's that he considers to be "rarities":
Well known: Lowedermilk, Irving Lewis, Ward Miller, Saier, Ragan, Tyler, Works.
Other difficult cards:
Adams | Almeida | Bauman | Benz | Birmingham | Blackburne | Blanding | Bushleman | Butcher | *Collins |
Cunningham | Donlin | Donnelly | Downey | Fournier | *Graham | Gregg | Hartley | *Henry | Herzog |
Hoff | *Hooper | Hauser | Hyatt | Kelly | Kirke | Kuhn | Kutina | Lange | *Livingston |
Mogridge | Moore | Moriarty | Nelson | Pelty | Peters | Phelan | *McKechnie | Miller | *Mitchell |
Rath | Ryan | *Speaker | Sweeney | Weaver | White | Willie | Wilson | Woodburn | Zeider |
(* - indicates difficult cards found only with common [Recruit and Napoleon] backs.)
Looking at Lipset's list, there's a fair number of cards that aren't familiar to me as rarities in the set, but I'm a t207 novice. Have things changed? How were they documented in Tim Newcomb's Old Cardboard article? I should do myself a favor and just buy the darn back issue, huh?
Re: How reliable are the rarities listed in Lipset?
I'm surprised to see Livingston on that list. If you would have asked me, I would have listed it as one of the more commonly seen cards like Marquard and Bresnahan.
Jay
Jay
Re: How reliable are the rarities listed in Lipset?
Just bumping this old thread because there's a copy of Lipset's Encyclopedia (all 3 volumes) for sale on ebay for $18.95, cheapest I've seen it. I don't have any affiliation with the seller or item, but it's really a must have for any prewar collector, so I thought someone on the board might want to buy it now for cheap.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Encyclopedia-of-Baseball-Cards-T206-Ty-Cobb-T205_W0QQitemZ230421919004QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_Baseball?hash=item35a637751c
http://cgi.ebay.com/Encyclopedia-of-Baseball-Cards-T206-Ty-Cobb-T205_W0QQitemZ230421919004QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_Baseball?hash=item35a637751c
Re: How reliable are the rarities listed in Lipset?
Are T210s covered?
JohnV- Major Leaguer
- Posts : 59
Trader Points :
Re: How reliable are the rarities listed in Lipset?
hey i have this somewhere, probably bought it in '02 or '03...if the "new" issue is $18.95, how much can i ask for my "vintage" copy? prolly fun to dig it up and read it again (the caramel stuff is prolly somewhat outdated tho).
cccc- Hall of Famer
- Posts : 2550
Trader Points :
Re: How reliable are the rarities listed in Lipset?
TheBig6 wrote:Just Bought it, Thanks for the heads up..Ben
That's great, I think you'll really enjoy reading through it Jerry.
JohnV wrote:Are T210s covered?
Absolutely. There's a page long set description that goes into pretty good detail, as well as checklists of all 8 T210 series.
Similar topics
» Hey guys, some good BINs on poorly listed T210's.
» Rare Tharp's Ice Cream card listed on Ebay today
» FS: Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards (Lipset)
» Why variations get listed
» Cards listed in Vintage Sets that might not exist.....
» Rare Tharp's Ice Cream card listed on Ebay today
» FS: Encyclopedia of Baseball Cards (Lipset)
» Why variations get listed
» Cards listed in Vintage Sets that might not exist.....
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum