1933 Delong Fake?

[nwobhm]

Seller refuses to supply picture of the back. I’m starting to think the borders are to wide and the corners are overly sharp.

[Jay Wolt]

Even if its legit, if seller refuses a back scan, I'd walk away

[brianp-beme]

The wide borders and different coloration in main section, at least what is seen on this poor scan, would make me believe this is not legit.

Brian

[Snapolit1]

Is the rule now that you can call this kind of stuff out on ebay sales and other locations but not on BST when a fellow board member is perpetraing it? Just trying to keep up with the unwritten rules.

[brianp-beme]

I would think questioning the authenticity of a card would be acceptable...safeguarding the community against a probable non-legitimate card would be something I would expect to happen in this place. The whole pricing dilemma...I could go either way.

Brian

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Is the rule now that you can call this kind of stuff out on ebay sales and other locations but not on BST when a fellow board member is perpetraing it? Just trying to keep up with the unwritten rules.

There are written rules on this, Steve. Check out Leon's post in the BST thread.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[LEHR]

Run.
I'd bet the house that's just an aged reprint. I've never seen top and bottom boarders that big on a Delong, plus it looks like it's got tons of age/patina and yet still has sharp corner. Nope, I'm not buying it.

[JimmyC]

Originally Posted by Jay Wolt

Even if its legit, if seller refuses a back scan, I'd walk away

Concur…..run, don’t walk…..

[Chris Counts]

That's a lousy fake — the colors aren't right and the borders are too wide.

[BabyRuth]

Here's a real one

[Pat R]

Besides the reasons already mentioned another dead giveaway is the stands jut in and out of the white border on legit examples like this one but the reprints have a straight white border in that area.

10.jpg

[nwobhm]

Thankyou very much for all the replies

[JimmyC]

As an aside, if someone can’t take the time to send me a photo of the back of the card they are selling - whether it’s a $3 card or a $10,000 card, I call BS on (1) the Seller; (2) there may be an unknown flaw on the back - or the centering may be awful and (3) True card collectors evaluate all aspects of a card, which includes the back of a card…..

If someone ignores that request and or says no to the request, they are not a true collector and I do not want to do business with them…,,

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Is the rule now that you can call this kind of stuff out on ebay sales and other locations but not on BST when a fellow board member is perpetraing it? Just trying to keep up with the unwritten rules.

Always has been the written rule. LMK if you can't see the Icon, right above, that says Net54 Baseball Forum Rules?

"One exception is to expose fraudulent activity. It may always be posted in any thread, anywhere on the board, but you better have your ducks in a row and your name by your post when you report these misdeeds."

.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Jay Wolt

Even if its legit, if seller refuses a back scan, I'd walk away

My rule in all cases. I don't complain to the seller (not picking on you), I just ghost them and move on. Some times people just don't want to bother.

[BioCRN]

Too many people get stung buying raw from Probstein (auction is over, EBay) assuming the massive feedback means they're trustworthy to check the card for legitimacy.

This has been a problem for them for a very long time with no end in sight.

Love this card, btw. I was considering this card or a Riggs Stephenson for my Cubs collection and went with the Warneke. Fun fact, he's also got a 1955 Bowman card as an umpire...easily one of the best player-turned-umps.

[Yoda]

Perhaps the back states reprint; hence, the sellers reluctance to reveal it.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by Yoda

Perhaps the back states reprint; hence, the sellers reluctance to reveal it.

Bingo! ^^^ This! ^^^

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by BioCRN

Too many people get stung buying raw from Probstein (auction is over, EBay) assuming the massive feedback means they're trustworthy to check the card for legitimacy.

This has been a problem for them for a very long time with no end in sight.

Love this card, btw. I was considering this card or a Riggs Stephenson for my Cubs collection and went with the Warneke. Fun fact, he's also got a 1955 Bowman card as an umpire...easily one of the best player-turned-umps.

2 very 🆒 cards, sir!

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Yoda

Perhaps the back states reprint; hence, the sellers reluctance to reveal it.

Probably!!
And then there are those sellers whom don't put up back scans and ARE bigger, legitimate sellers. I always like to see the backs. Sellers should always show them unless they are blank, with no damage, and the ad states as such.
.