Vintage Baseball Glove Forum

Had a chat with my glove bud, Joel Tobillo, the other day and we were discussing King patent gloves (lacing around the back of the hand) and buckle back full webs. A couple of questions arose that I was curious what others thought. We all understand the reason/function of the decker patent, but what exactly does the King patent do? Does it have a function or is it cosmetic (eye appeal)?

My thinking was 3 things: 1. Maybe a way to unloosen and add more padding throughout the glove. 2. Maybe the tight lacing around the back of the hand allow it to grip the ball tighter in a "catch" 3. Cosmetic, it just looks neat.

Any thoughts?

Also, I think I read in the catalog that there was a king patent basemitt. Has anyone seen one of those? I know Brett has a full web king patent, but how much earlier/later does this design go? I think Rob Mucha has a vertical tunnel loop glove that has this pattern.

Anyway, these whole thoughts came up when I was talking to Joel and I was looking at old photos that I have and other collectors have in their possession as well. In these older photos you see many King Patents and buckle back full webs, yet they don't come up as often on ebay or other places. Why is that?
Sorry so many questions, but I've always been drawn to these gloves and was curious what others thought. If this was a topic before or was already addressed in TheGloveCollector I am sorry, I was just curious.....RBD

Another note: I know Reach and Spalding made these types of gloves any others. JD?

Ricky....Interesting you brought this topic up. I just picked up my first King Patent & spent some time on JD's site trying to research it & found in the 1920 Spalding catalog where it has a pictoral of the how to repad the glove. Apparently, the lacing around the wrist & wrist opening were intended to allow for adjusting the padding or replacing it.
These catalogs are great. I was even able to identify the glove I picked up.....thanks JD!

Thanks for the response Deacon. I must have missed that one. That makes a lot of sense which also would/could explain why most King Patents have some flaws to them. The constant play and the relacing of the pad adjustments over the years. I've only seen a couple (5 at the most) that had great liners. I saw on JD's site that there's a Wilson version as well. Any others?
Also, has anyone seen or have a basemitt with this design?

One last thing, why do you think these gloves (King Patent and the buckle back full webs) are so scarce? I see them in a lot of cabinet photos. I don't think price back then had to do too much with things. Is it maybe that very few survived? Dunno, wish others would chime in. Love to hear what you all think or your thoughts?

Maybe there should be a quick glove census on these models. Haha!

I have:
1 spalding king Patent

2 buckle back full webs.

Ricky-

I think I mentioned this to you before but we have a turn of the century photo with a laced back full web in it.(No back strap just laces all the way up). Has everyone ever seen one of these, or have one? We haved looked very close at the photo many times and it looks like it was manufactured this way and not just something the player did him self. Anyone ever even seen another picture with one of these in them?

Josh

Great topic! The King Patent gloves are interesting and seem to be pretty rare. I'm not sure they are as desirable as the buckle back full web gloves.

Deacon, that is interesting about the repadding. Makes a lot of sense but I wonder how often players of that area worried about adding more padding.

The King Patent I have is a full web - it is laced a little bit differently and the shape of the glove seems to put it between the 1900 to 1910 era. I wish it was in better condition but beggers can't be choosers. It's one of my favorite gloves because I like the look of the front more than the back (go figure).

I have one King Patent and 1 buckle back full web so they have an even standing in my collection.

And I'm sure this a dumb question that everyone knows the answer to but me, however, who was the King that the patent is named after? Did he work for Spalding???

As for companies that had gloves like this - there was an import glove that had this design - I think it was from Japan - there might be a pic on JD's site. Also, the unassisted triple play guy, Wams..., his Worth glove had a King type patent.

Brett you have a good memory. Here is a Mimatsu brand Japanese 1" web with buckle back and King Patent lacing. This is a sweet glove I got on ebay, my only example.
Mark

Hi All. Allow me to shed a little light on the subjects. Charles M. King of Spalding invented the King Patent for basemitts on June 28, 1910 for the many purposes, one of which was to secure the padding in an external position and another was to be able to adjust the padding to the user's preference. He goes on and on for many paragraphs about his invention. He also had two more patents (King Patents) in 1913. One of them was a bunch of dimples in the pocket of a glove. So of the three King Patents, only one of them relates to the lacing on the back of the glove.

In my opinion, they aren't rare at all. Look how many pictures we have. I have personally owned more than 10 and kept my favorite five. They are very desirable though as they are a variant on the sew web. In my experience, I have seen them in Spalding, Reach, Thomas E. Wilson, Mark's Miramatsu and a couple of generic ones. I have seen them in full webs, 1" webs and tunnel loops. They definitely do not date prior to 1910. I have seen them on gloves up through the 1930's.

As far as buckle back full webs go. They too aren't rare at all. They are just a nice feature to have on a sewn web as most people prefer buckle backs to button backs. They aren't that much scarcer. Again, just more desirable. Many gloves of the 90's and crescents of the early century had buckle backs. A lot of early catalogs have tons of pictures of buckle back full webs. I chalk them up to personal preference and don't go too crazy over them personally.

JD

I totally forgot Art's cool Worth Billy Wambsganss. Here it is. His might have been issued to Billy himself. That's what I would consider rare, not King Patents in general. After researching the patents, I don't think there were basemitts with that type of lacing on it. I think the original King Patent for a basemitt had to do with the interior padding, not the exterior lacing around the hand opening.

JD

JD, it might be a good idea to discuss the evolution of glove back fasteners. I believe we would start with what I call the "hook and loop" fastners of cords or lacing that wrapped around a hook and could be tightened. Maybe next the crude shank buttons, then the buckles, maybe in that order.

Hi Joe,. Don't get me started. I don't think anyone wants to hear me ramble on about glove back fasteners, although I would love to. Every time I start talking or emparting my useless glove knowledge, everyone clams up and no one ever posts after me. I feel like Nuff Ced McGreevy. I think I'll just sit back and shut up.

JD

Not JD any more but NS. Well think about it and try to give us a readers digest version if you can. Be brief please.
Clarence Watkins just sent me via email an 1895 Spalding catalog with
all the hook and loops. I think my 1895 D&M is also of the same type.
Just wonder when the buttons and buckles creeped in about that time?
I know the earlier ones had little button-type fasteners.

JD, it's hard to top your post so why even try?


Would love to hear about the fasteners (we should probably start a new thread) but back to the King Patent again - you mentioned that the original patent was for a basemitt. Has anyone come across a basemitt or catchers mitt with the King Patent? That would be an interesting item.

I would disagree in terms of rarity - I think they are somewhat elusive, especially over the past couple years. Looking back at the glove of the week/ month threads, and going by memory there haven't been too many listed on eBay in the last couple years - one last month and before that, well, I can't remember more than one.

King Patent #12 is a trader if anyone is interested. Kinda rough though.
Sorry for the big pics. Took them directly from the site without resizing.

JD

[img]http://www.baseballglovecollector.com/gallery/albums/king-patents/Spalding%20World%20Series%20King%20Patent%20Front.JPG[img]

[/img]http://www.baseballglovecollector.com/gallery/albums/king-patents/Spalding%20World%20Series%20King%20Patent%20Back.JPG

Just got back from JD's where among other things we disussed king patent rarity. My take is that I'd consider both king patents and buckleback full webs relatively rare. I admit that they certainly are no where near as rare as a Cobb or duck web to be sure, but among their eras both have been much more difficult for me to obtain, and both have commanded premiums mainly because they are more scarce.

Quickly off the top of my head I'd estimate that I've probably seen 350 (or more) standard 1" webs on ebay for every king patent I come across, and that ratio seems about right for buckleback full webs. All I know is I've owned at most two king patents and a handful of buckleback full webs, and I've been pretty active in going after them.

Anyway, I think they are great variations. The only downside for me is that I usuallly prefer to display glove fronts, and you really need to flip them to show their full glory.