Does this Gehrig look good or fake?

[dabigyankeeman]

Anytime I see an un-graded card like this I always wonder, what do you guys think about this one?

[bcbgcbrcb]

Not a Goudey expert but my guess is not good.

[iggyman]

Looks authentic, I would bid if it was on eBay. But at the end of the day, to be 110% certain you need the card in-hand.

Lovely Day...

[bbcard1]

Based on a quick glance at the scan, I don't see anything wrong with it. I don't love the feel of the lower right corner rounding...seems a little contrived, but didn't see anything at a glance on the scan that would cause me undue problems. That said, the touch test is usually the failsafe for me. The printing registration seems very tight.

[Leon]

I too am not really a Goudey expert but I can add a decent picture to a post as I did in the first post. If I had to guess I would say it's ok but would need it in hand to be more sure. Others might know definitively by the scan on the board. I should add that the printing looks a little bright/dark compared to the creasing and other wear.

[dabigyankeeman]

Thanks a lot for all the opinions guys, and the added scans Leon. Anybody else got a feeling on this?

[Runscott]

It looks good to me, but I see what Leon's saying. I've noticed that some ebayers are enhancing their Goudey scans, which almost makes them look fake - even the holdered ones. A '33 Gehrig I recently fished from the bay was definitely color-enhanced and definition improved, close to being past what I would consider acceptable.

[CW]

I would also definitely want to see a scan of the back before placing a bid/making any offers.

[bcbgcbrcb]

As mentioned previously, my main reason for questioning the authenticity is the bright blue color as compared to the SGC graded example and most others that I have seen. The assessment that the seller has enhanced the color in the scan could account for that but may not be the wisest move for that reason.

[dabigyankeeman]

Originally Posted by CW

I would also definitely want to see a scan of the back before placing a bid/making any offers.

Sorry, I blew that by not posting it, here is the back:

[autograf]

My vote's good......enhanced but it doesn't have the tell-tale back issues most reprints do......

[JeremyW]

Judging by the seller, this Gehrig is good, no doubt. Not sure what it would grade though.

[zljones]

I own one of those BVG graded 1, and from my opinion the card is genuine.

[dabigyankeeman]

Thanks again guys for all the opinions, I greatly appreciate it.

[Kalineman]

I agree with the above posts. No question in my mind it's legit.

[fkw]

Card looks good, I think the seller tweeked the color saturation on the scan a bit.

the first spots I look at is the edge of the image, on this R320 Gehrig, most reprints will have the image cropped slightly.. the edges of image will be straight, and also the bottom blue line below the small portrait will be thinner or missing along with the bottom of the "y" in "Says".

your card has the colors slightly misaligned along the edges (good), see the blue lines on left side go into the border, same with the end of bat, and also the green on the right side. the only thing thats funny is the top of the hat is ever so slightly closer to the border compared to the slabbed card, but this may just be because the blue is off registered a bit.

on the harder fakes to ID, the home made ones made using a scan of an authentic card, they could never get the card stock to look this thick, and the wear so good, especially the broken paper crease damage on front or corner wear too.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by fkw

on the harder fakes to ID, the home made ones made using a scan of an authentic card, they could never get the card stock to look this thick, and the wear so good, especially the broken paper crease damage on front or corner wear too.

Haha. Yep, they always want to add the creases before the glue is dry