1916 collins mccarthy cards [Archive] - Net54baseball.com Forums

View Full Version : 1916 collins mccarthy cards

Archive

11-12-2007, 01:05 PM

Posted By: Vanessa PhippsHey got a call the other day from a friend who has an elder family member who has some vintage baseball cards. My friend has told me that there is a babe ruth card, joe jackson, and a ty cobb card that when he came over to my house we looked up on the computer and he picked out the 1916 collins mccarthy as the cards that these looked like. So of course I am excited if they are real. My question is: are there reprints of this set. Is there a sure fire way of detecting a reprint of these cards? Is this set reprinted like say the Fro Jo cards? Any help would be great! I will be going to look at these cards soon. They are in a neighboring state so It may be a couple of weeks before I can see them. Thanks for any help

Archive

11-12-2007, 01:47 PM

Posted By: Mark MacraeFirst off the cards are from 1917, not 1916. There are several different types of this card which exist (Different backs). Collins-McCarthy, Weil, Boston Stores, Standard, Blank backs, etc. Reprints of this series began circulating in 1972, and many other reprinted versions have been created over the last 35 years. Familiarize yourself with the paper stock and printing characteristics of an original one before attempting to buy or evaluate any of the stars.

Archive

11-12-2007, 02:24 PM

Posted By: Vanessa Phipps .<img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1194819706.JPG"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1194819753.JPG"> This is exact example of what cards I am talking about. And they are 1916.

Archive

11-12-2007, 02:28 PM

Posted By: Rhett YeakleyVanessa, with all due respect, the cards are from 1917 (NOT 1916) and listen to what Mark said. -Rhett

Archive

11-12-2007, 02:32 PM

Posted By: MattThe SGC flip says 1916 which is why she thinks they are 1916.

Archive

11-12-2007, 02:49 PM

Posted By: barrysloateVanessa- Mark knows more about vintage baseball cards than just about anyone in this hobby. And graded card labels often do have errors. They were issued in 1917. But what's more important is if they are real.

Archive

11-12-2007, 02:59 PM

Posted By: Frank WakefieldI agree with the 1917 date, but that doesn't really matter, if the cards are genuine. Vanessa, any chance you have a black light? If you illuminate reprint cards with ultraviolet light, then the brighteners in the paper will fluoresce, they will shine bright. On old card stock from when these cards were issued there were not brighteners in the paper... Using a black light would be a good way to tell the difference if you aren't experienced about discerning the differences. You might scan one or two of the cards and post them here. Posting an image isn't terribly complicated, we oldsters can do it. Email one of us and we'll talk you through it. If the cards are authentic thew would have value. If not authentic, not much resale value. And Barry is right, Mark knows his stuff. Seems to me that teenage kids sometimes label these grading holders, and they sometimes get stuff wrong. With kind regards, Frank.

Archive

11-12-2007, 03:04 PM

Posted By: Vanessa PhippsBelieve me I am not questioning anybody's expertise here. I was just going by the SGC slabs that i have seen of these cards. There is a Ty Cobb card of this set that is on REA auction 2007 archive <a href="http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/auction/2007/356.html" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.robertedwardauctions.com/auction/2007/356.html</a> Either way I am going to see if I can send the cards off to be authinticated before buying. Thank you all who help me in my card buying.

Archive

11-12-2007, 03:12 PM

Posted By: Cat (ret.)Slabbed at the 2007 National... <img src="http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/3531/bo3fhornsbyyp1.jpg"> Slabbed long ago... <img src="http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/320/bo5fhornsbyvy9.jpg">

Archive

11-12-2007, 03:17 PM

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman<img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1194481574.JPG">

Archive

11-12-2007, 03:20 PM

Posted By: MattHmmm Cat - it seems like you have an extra....

Archive

11-12-2007, 04:15 PM

Posted By: Frank WakefieldVanessa, You might consider sending just one or two... no need to send and pay for several if they aren't genuine. And scanning and posting here for some opinions is free and quick. But sometimes having thick skin helps. Frank.

Archive

11-12-2007, 05:14 PM

Posted By: PaulThe Collins McCarthy cards were catalogued for decades as being 1916 cards. It was only in the last 3 years or so that the revised date of 1917 became generally accepted. So I think both Vanessa and SGC can be forgiven for refering to them as 1916s. I'm assuming, based on Cat's post, that SGC slabbed the "1916" Alexander a few years ago.

Archive

11-12-2007, 06:13 PM

Posted By: Todd Schultzand yes, they have been reprinted. The reprints are obvious in hand--they are whiter and the images are far less sharp.

Archive

11-12-2007, 06:32 PM

Posted By: quancat, ur just mean! please stay retired!!! and vanessa, congrats if they're real...nice to see there are new cards coming into the hobby all the time. would love to see some scans.

Archive

11-12-2007, 07:33 PM

Posted By: Cat (ret.)Q... So did you get cold feet on the PSA 4 Fatima? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> It's there and then it's gone. It must be nice to have so many Dups that you can just exchange the pics. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

11-12-2007, 08:19 PM

Posted By: Vanessa PhippsWho was that post for? Please explain.

Archive

01-19-2008, 05:21 PM

Posted By: Vanessa PhippsHere is the Ruth. All opinions and comments are welcome. <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1200705575.JPG"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1200705596.JPG">

Archive

01-19-2008, 05:35 PM

Posted By: StevePhoto is blurred. Text and border looks too heavy -especially the number. Same with the back. Hope I'm wrong.

Archive

01-19-2008, 06:46 PM

Posted By: fkwHope Im wrong, but like Steve said, its too bold. Looks like a reprint IMO Here is a back of one of my cards (scaned about the same size). <img src=http://centuryoldcards.com/images/e135b.jpeg>

Archive

01-19-2008, 08:41 PM

Posted By: Frank WakefieldI agree, caption on front is too dark and blurred, not sharp and crisp. Bars on back aren't clean, they look a bit heavy and blurred, too. I think it is a reprint that has been 'aged' a bit. But it could be better determined by someone in person. Maybe you could take it to a big show near you, where you can find a few folks who know the OLD cards... or you could send one in to SGC and see what they say. Wish you well with them...