Ruth Card
 

This one went way low, if it's really unaltered and untrimmed. Did the recent negative feedback hurt the bidding? Also, the description says guaranteed to be authentic and untrimmed, but doesn't say anything about 'unaltered' - is that a loophole?

1933 Goudey Ruth

Taking a break from the game of the century
Tigers and Elephants

I won't buy a card that costs that much on ebay unless it's graded. Not that I would have been a bidder in this particular auction, but you get the idea.

I think
 

I think that seller has been discussed before and the consensus was that most/all of his stuff is legit. I think sometimes ungraded can bring more than graded, when there is hope for a higher grade than it will receive.....in other words, that card has the appearance of a 3, or so, but maybe (and I have no idea on the card in question, this is just for example) it only grades a 1.5 technically. Then someone might have overpaid for it.
That seller sells a lot of nice ungraded cards.

IMO, having "**AWESOME**" in the title didnt help...

but my internet is so slow I havent seen the card or description yet :(
....still loading......

Frank, I almost won the card, and I certainly would have if I hadn't stopped and read his negative feedback comment first. Leon says he's legit, but as your example shows, he had a lot of the classic 'fishy' signs.

In any case, I'm looking for the yellow portrait, so no biggy.

I agree with leon that his cards are all real, but I'm pretty sure I've read some other threads that showed some of his cards being obviously trimmed without him saying.

Could be...I would have him guarantee its not altered. Looks like buyer got a nice deal and this guy is pretty legit. He has a nice t206 cobb

I think the card's legit and the buyer got a good deal. I've purchased from that seller before without any issues.

He may have meant unaltered, but didn't have a lawyer check his wording. Literally, his wording doesn't cover alterations other than trimming, but he may have simply written the description quickly. If I was a bidder I'd ask for a clarification.

Just noticed that in the title the seller called it "100% Original." Maybe that covers it.

Crease
 

There appears to be a horizontal crease that is visible on both front and back, which would make it no better than a 2/30.

Good eye...yup...I see the crease...and tiny bit of paper loss on front associated with crease. I think the price was about right...all things considered.

Still a decent looking card, I've seen lesser Ruth's sell for more. And the neg wouldn't have bothered me one bit. Spending over 1300 for a raw Leaf Baugh rookie is absurd. The buyer had 7 days to return but didn't. Notice how he waited 3 weeks to leave a neg....he must have sent it out to be graded and was unhappy with the result. That's part of the grading game. Kinda like rolling the dice...sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. Can't always tell by the scans!

1933 Goudey Ruths are on the list of cards I tell people to be wary of buying online unless it's graded. Though that's due to the proliferation of fakes.

I bought a 34 Gehrig from him before with no problems.... But, the only reason I bought it from him is because the same card I was bidding on in another ebay auction ended early due to an offline offer by him.

I learned since then that he acquires many cards this way. I've been able to spot some of his stuff in other ended auctions, with less flowery descriptions of course.

Agreed. I always thought Goudeys were super-simple to i.d. as real or fake...until I picked up a yellow portrait WWG Ruth. It looked different from Goudeys in many respects, and even different from other WWG cards I had handled - gloss, ink, registration, paper quality. The only thing that looked totally 'right' was the card thickness and the typical 'bleed through' that can't be forged.

I sent it to SGC and they confirmed it was real.

After reading the opinions of Leon and others that this guy's cards are safe to buy raw, I considered bidding on the red Cobb that's about to end. Looking at the back very closely, it really looks like it's missing a little paper.

I don't think the slabbed value of this card is going to come close to what it sells for - just something to consider.

I wouldn't bring this up as the auction's still live, but this card isn't slipping by anyone and this might save someone some grief if they didn't spot the back problems.

let me clarify
 

Let me add a little to my statement. While I believe the seller is a legit seller I also believe he sells ungraded to get more money for his cards. He does this, imo, by getting people to think the cards are better conditioned than they are (usually). As we all know, what can look like a 6 from a small scan can easily be a 1-3 from almost unseen technical issues. It's a game and he is winning it.

I basically said the same thing in my first post :)

Yep, you did good. I sort of wish I had bid on that Ruth.

I've seen known Goudey reprints (including Ruth) with the "bleed through" on the back side. Thus, judging a Goudey authentic, because it has a wet sheet transfer is a dangerous game. The "bleed through" can and has been forged.

Lovely Day...

Ruth
 

I think they have an interesting strategy to buy graded cards with nice eye appeal, crack them out, and then resell as an authentic raw card. There was a raw T206 from the same seller in another post. Seems like a legit strategy.

Personally, I wouldn't pay that much for an ungraded card so not sure they can make a profit on expensive cards like this one. Nevertheless, some people would rather have a nice raw card with good eye appeal.

This is what the card looked like before it was cracked out and photographed by a passing weather satellite. Same card.

Not the same thing as a wet sheet transfer. But you have a point regarding true forgeries. I've never seen reprints where they attempted to add bleed through, but I wouldn't be surprised if that's being done.

If I remember correctly, there was a set of Goudey reprints created in the early '60s that when 'aged' looks pretty convincing. The great Goudey forger of the early 2000's, Feldman, offered to send me a free one, just to prove to me that he wasn't actually forging cards. I should have taken him up on it, but didn't want to encourage him.

Anthony, that is downright scary. Looks a heckuva lot different up close :(

From his original description: "beautiful original sheen, "flawless" factory finish, and has a light horizontal crease."

Thank you - I won't be bidding on anything this guy sells.

Great catch Anthony (both on the Ruth and the Cobb)! Thought it was a home run, but you snagged it at the wall! Score one for the good guys. I don't think I've ever won anything from Great Lakes Shell Game Auction House, but I sure would be leary of bidding on anything in the future (disclaimer: unless, I really really needed it).

On another tangent........Scott, perhaps I need to be enlighten, but Goudeys don't have "bleed through" they have "wet sheet transfers". Have I been drinking kool-aid all these years??? Looks like we need a poll.

Lovely Day...

Iggy, I might be wrong on this one. I will readily admit that my memory sucks even more as I age. But I know what wet sheet transfer is (I even wrote an article that talks about it: http://runscott.homestead.com/Articles.html)

I had a pretty nice '34 Goudey collection, but I haven't handled these cards in five years or so, and own none currently, so I'll rely on the opinions of others - you sound like you collect them, so I'll take your word for it.

...Still, I'm going to buy a common off ebay that appears to have the bleed through, just to enlighten myself again. I have a '33 Gehrig that should arrive any day now, but the back looked pretty clean.

Here's a very good example from the current SCP auction. If you look at the image of the front, the ink lines up exactly, as it does in all Goudeys (at least that's the way I remember it). If it were wet sheet, the back would not always be lined up exactly with the front.

Also, SCP agrees with you. From their lot description: Back super clean also but there is a ghost of the front of the card, the result of sheets being stacked at the plant before the colors had completely dried.

Show me I'm wrong - I have no issue with learning something new.

https://www.scpauctions.com/LotImages/17/16095b_lg.jpeg

https://www.scpauctions.com/LotImages/17/R0080_lg.jpeg

Besides the point that the card in the topic is obviously authentic...

common sense would tell you that its 100% impossible for a card as thick as a R319 or R320 to have so called "Bleed Through"

Even if the card was made out of a single layer of tissue or typing paper it would be heavily distorted if the ink bleed through, plus it would have to be "Magic Ink" to make it through the many thin layers of paper that make up the thick stock of these Goudey cards and still be sharp and easily readable.

All of these are "Wet Ink Transfers" made when the printers stacked these sheets while printing them and with some weight from the stack the slightly tacky ink from the front transfers to the back (or front sometimes too).

yes, common sense would tell us a lot of things about cards that aren't necessarily true (such as whether a postcard was printed in the 1930's or the 1970's, based on obvious differences in printing techniques for the two periods).

I have never understood the Goudeys and the bleed through thing, but as you say, it does not make sense that it is actually bleed through. The problem with it being wet ink is, as I mentioned before, and no one has explained other than to simply say I'm wrong, is (and I'm repeating myself here) that the ink on the back is always lined up perfectly with the ink on the front. This is not true of any other issue that I've seen.

Frank, please explain this. Seriously, I agree with you - I just don't get it from a printing perspective. If they can always line up the sheets so perfectly after printing, how come registration is commonly off, as is centering? Have we ever seen a 'bleed through' (or wet sheet) example where the ink on the back is NOT lined up?

Also, I'm sure that whoever has the above card in hand (the example I posted), would simply have to loupe it to tell immediately whether or not the 'bleed through' is over or under the green lettering.

Wet sheet transfers can happen at a few points during the production. Some of those can have the ink lined up exactly, but not all of them. I'll explain those after I get a couple of the other questions out of the way.

The offset transfers being lined up has nothing to do with the registration or the cutting. The registration is a function of the platemaking and the press adjustment. The cutting is a completely different operation. (Although offset transfers can happen during cutting)

Wether the offset is over or under the green back printing doesn't matter. All that would indicate is wether the back was printed before the front or after. Printing it after the front makes sense as it's only one color -less work would be ruined if there was a problem.

On most "modern" presses the sheets are fed from a stack of sheets and run through the press in excatly the same position. The press then deposits them on a removable platform. During this phase, there's a bit of air between the sheets. This air makes the sheets move easily in relation to the stack. But when it's time to do the next step, you need a very neat stack of sheets. so the press has a set of guides to direct the sheets to be exactly on top of each other.

Now if that stack is allowed to get too tall, the air will be forced out, and the weight of the stack will make offset transfers. The very bottom of the stack will be the clearest, and the offsets will get weaker farther up the stack.
Offsets that happen there will all be aligned exactly with the fronts.
A good press operator switches the removable platforms before this happens.

The rest of the places offsets can happen are during handling. And in that handling the sheets aren't usually aligned as precisely because a number of sheets are being moved from one place to another.

----------

Since the offset on the Ruth is a complete offset either Goudeys were printed on a multi color press(Like 2-4 or more presses attached together each doing one color) OR they were printed in a big hurry. Since the print shop was probably trying to do them as cheaply as possible they likely were rushing and overstacking.


Steve B

Steve, it's great to have an expert in this area on the board. There were many years when we were clueless as to how this worked (or no one was talking).

Thanks,
Scott

that was funny
 

That was funny Frank....nice one.

Steve- Thanks again for sharing your expertise. You help the hobby quite a bit and it's appreciated.

Here is the same card again:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1933-GOUDEY-...item2569f0f3d8