Has this Ruth improved with age like a fine wine?
 

First photo from SCP/Sotheby's 2006, where it sold as SGC 40/3 for $15K with description that said "corners showing moderate, honest wear." Second and third photos from Mastro 2007, where it sold as SGC 70/5.5 for $26K. Note same print lines and other distinguishing features. Corners appear much improved. Subsequently sold Memory Lane 2013 for $98K.

To paraphrase a line from "Field of Dreams":

"It's shrinking! It's shrinking!"

Clean thoughts guys.

People should be more concerned with things like this than the flips.

[QUOTE=Bicem;1280308]People should be more concerned with things like this than the flips.[/QUOTE

Indeed. This, after all, is a six figure card!

Two comments:

The 40 looks better than a 40, unless there is some small crease or something we can't see. Based on your auction description though, it doesn't sound like there is.

On the 40, it looks like there is a faint print line by Ruth's right foot, which is not present on the 70. Is that the case? If so, different card?

Also appear that card on left has a bit better centering? I'm thinking different card.

I noticed the print line near the foot on the first one as well. That dark spot underneath his glove looks to be a slightly different shape as well.

I feel like I'm reading a Highlights magazine.

I agree!! That's one hell of a card but it looks like Ruth's stuff in general has been going up and up. I only wish I had one of his big cards. Soon enough

Also the upper print line 1/4 inch from the top boarder looks more broken up in the middle on the 40 more than the 70. Im also thinking might be a different card.

funny!

Different card. the line in the upper right is in two different positions on each card. even the line in the middle of the card hits his bum in a ever so slightly different place. i have an eagle eye...might be from the same sheet (hence similar printing lines) but a different card.

I'm going back to the SGC flip threads. ;)

Good eye but more likely from a different sheet (during the same run) where the sheets are slightly offset from each other.

Certainly NOT the same card.

Guys, thanks for your comments. I think that perhaps you are correct that is a different card. I am relieved to think this and sorry for false alarm.

its a different card. the one on the left has the lines more pronounced. so the line present on the card on the left would be more visible.

kevin