This new OM blue back "find" is collectors nightmare since most OM reprints are printed in red, green or BLUE.

Good luck hunting!

card
 

The card is a beauty !! I didn't loop it but have looked at it a few times and would love to own it.

I looked at it about 5 different times. In some lighting I couldn't discern the color difference, mostly due to a bit of color blindness I have, but when over at the Heritage Auction, where the owner and I chatted for quite a while....in that lighting, I could definitely see the blue. I could tell it more on the back, outer border than the letter printing on the back. Every single person that looked at it, some very, very experienced, think it's legit. I think the real question is "does this add to the list of backs or not?"

I can assure you the guy who buys is it will say it adds to the known master set of T206 backs.

I'm curious whether this was a deliberate attempt to use different color ink, say a test run using blue, or merely a chemical reaction over time causing the black to turn blue. Now I don't know if that is even possible, but I am by nature skeptical so when a new T206 color variation shows up for this first time at this late date, I have to wonder.

That's certainly possible. I was thinking just the opposite though. Maybe the sheet was ran through accidentally with blue ink. The printer realized his mistake and said, "Oh, crap!" and threw the sheet in the garbage and later sombeody pulled it out and hand cut the cards - thus the extra wide borders on that card. Is that possible?

I haven't seen anybody address the wide borders.

As a recovering type collector...and a former rare backed t206 addict...I can certainly relate to the desire for absolute completeness in a type collection...but I am still skeptical of this card.

I have not seen the card in person but I trust those who have and if their opinion is that it looks real...than it must be!

But in no way would I feel that a blue backed OM is now necessary to complete a complete t206 back run...this is some type of anomaly...whether factory produced by accident...or chemically, UV altered over time...or just outright altered by a card MD...in my opinion.

Leon- in order for that happen, a second one would need to surface to confirm its a legit color variation. I'm still skeptical, as others have mentioned, the front including the name looks rather dark. There were some really good fakes/reprints produced (in the 80's I believe), that were very convincing. As a T206 back collector, the possibility that this is legit is exciting, but I'm just not sure. The above blue AB that Chris posted (due to ink oxidation) makes this topic have a major grey area.

Getting on Amtrak in NYC now to head down to Baltimore. See u guys later today.

If this card is indeed the real deal, what are the opinions as to the potential price?

If the card is legit, it will make the # of collectors with a complete back run a very short list!

I will be seeing the card today the owner and I have been chating I look forward to seeing it.

Saw the card under a loop today with Wonka. I stand corrected...the ink is certainly blue, card is legit. I believe they were printing polar bear at the time and ran the back side thru (maybe). But it's real.

Can I have it?

does anyone know who owns it?

Now the question is. Is it for sale? (not that I could afford it..:()

It'd be nice to see a reg old mill next to a brown om...next to this new blue one to compare!

Can anyone facilitate this?

I believe its on Neptune, waiting for a buyer.

I wonder how many people checked their collections in the past few days and see what color their OM backs are. LOL

I scanned every old mill at the nationals in the last 2 days and there is no blues there:(. Card is getting some really high offers. Just a neat find for the hobby. You never know what you may have laying around.

http://photos.imageevent.com/jimblum...Old%20Mill.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/jimblum...back%20cut.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/jimblum...illBackcut.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/jimblum...0SL%20back.jpg
JimB

I saw the card raw. The owner has had it for years and I have known him for 35 years. The card is blue and unaltered. Dan Mckee.

Is there paper loss on the back? Because Old Mill backs do not have a break in the line under "Cigarettes"...if there is paper loss, I would understand...if not, then I am not sure what is going on with this card. Maybe a scrap and they fixed the line?

Joshua

In fact, this OM blue variation "find" is not surprising at all, there are brown Tolstoi backs out there also. I know one collector on this board has at least one specimen of it. I can guarantee if that card ever get graded it won't be in a PSA holder since he doesn't get along with them. :)

It is just a matter of time for him to speak up.

This is an interesting card, and I don't know what to think- you have very knowledgeable collectors who have been in the hobby for years and know their cards who've seen it in person and say the card is legit.

You have SGC slabbing it, and I know TPG's can make mistakes- but I've come to trust SGC's opinion the most (of TPG's)........

If it is legit, there's no other explanation other than PB blue.

If it is legit, wouldn't that make this rarer than Brown Old Mill, based on known examples?

And, to top it off, I keep hearing Peter's words saying "What if it were done to prove a point" :eek:.....(I don't know if I have that word for word)

And no one is talking about re-backing on this one,,,,

I am surely confused. :o , it sure looks legit but for some reason I can't help being skeptical?

Sincerely, Clayton

Clayton.....
 

my sentiments exactly! i like brown om better cause it is printer scrap,(im too biased;) i dont own brown om tho) and the "brown" jumps out......this is factory cut card.....

altho very cool, the polar bear blue tint is not driving me wild!!!

if it were piedy 42 lite blue and handcut, i think id have heart palps, but the factory cut is not turning me on.....


not to take anything away from this card, just not as excited as i should be....i do trust sgc, they are very sharp and VERY VERY hesitant to put special items on the flip....


If this card is purchased at a very high price, im in fear some will surface....theoretically there should be more out there....



whoever owns/buys this card i am happy for, its just not doing it for me for some reason....:o


anything discovered in this set after 104 is very exciting, and im happy about it...but just a little hesitant right now and agree with clayton 100%


just my opinion.....not trying to offend anyone or take anything away from this very interesting card.....


BTW- Chris B. always finds THE TREASURES!!;) you are the man Chris , and are a true treasure hunter in my opinion, and have put 2 centerpiece cards in my collection that i am forever appreciative and can never re-pay the happiness you brought me with those cards, really great guy you are....


and to those who have put such great cards in my collection without "raping" my wallet, (you know who you are), you make me want to collect more and really realize there are truly some great people here....YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE;) thanks again:)


peace

johnny

Thanks Johnny, I always appreciate your kind words-thanks :)

I'm not trying to bash the card, or the opinions of the veteran collectors who have seen it in person- usually, these opinions would be my deciding factor being that it's the closest thing to seeing it in hand myself that I can get.

And, I'm not saying it's not legit. If it is, it is pretty groundbreaking. It would also be interesting to see the Brown Tolstoi that was mentioned. I haven't been collecting as long as many of you, but I guess the thing that keeps me on the fence is that with the signifigance of the Brown Old Mill I'd think it would've been announced as a new discovery awhile back? That's all.

If I knew I had this card in my collection I couldn't contain myself from announcing it to the hobby- but I am a T206 freak and it's only because I would love to own any only known example of a card :o

So I'll just say I'm confused. ;)

Sincerely, Clayton

and to those who have put such great cards in my collection without "raping" my wallet, (you know who you are), you make me want to collect more and really realize there are truly some great people here....YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE;) thanks again:)


plus one big one:D

Update anyone?
 

Any word on the fate of the Old Mill Blue back? Is it going to one of the major auctions, or is it already in a private collection? Haven't heard anything about it since the National. Thx

But wait, there's less

Here's the rare 'Blue Sweet Caporal' Titus that just ended on ebay.

Somehow it slipped through the cracks: T206 Titus Blue Sweet Cap

http://i.ebayimg.com/t/1909-1911-T20...ELQ~~60_57.JPGhttp://i.ebayimg.com/t/1909-1911-T20...Suw~~60_57.JPG

"Plastic sleeve included."

No wonder it sold for $13.

I think David Mc.Donald is hoarding those Titus cards, even the reprints, as they look so much like him!!

As for the rare, Old Mill blue backed card from the National, I don't know if the owner is going to chance it at auction (if he still has it). I spoke with him at great length at the National and he was a bit unsure on how best to sell it. Private sale for "all the money" would be great for him. It's just a matter of what that $$ number is. Also, as I said way up in this thread....I think a lot of the value will be determined by this card either being included, or not included, in the complete back set for T206.

I saw the card at National and spoke to a friend of the owner (both gentlemen were behind the table). The friend said that the card was headed to the auction block shortly, but he didn't give a timetable or house.

I also examined the card (already in holder) with a loupe, as well as two different UV/black lights to help look for chemical alterations. The card looked legit and did not show any signs of bleaching. (For what it's worth, it's harder to see bleach with UV without being in a dark room, but it still possible to see signs.)

I did take pictures, but they were just with a point-and-shoot, so I'll look into posting them when I'm home (although I don't think they turned out great).

Steve

====

As a side note, here are a couple of the keychain UV lights and UV loupe I carry around at shows:

http://www.batteryjunction.com/phimiulviled.html
http://www.batteryjunction.com/titan...ylight-uv.html
http://www.precisionproducts.us/Blac...-p/l3001uv.htm

Ah, it is great not to be a back collector :D
More power to you guys who are. Other than collecting the red Cycles backs from the T207 set I could care less if a card is a factory 25 or 99 or an Old Mill or Uzit and what color the backs are.
Complete sets! Not types, not backs, just sets. We all have our obsessions :)

I'm curious as to how this decision will be made. If the card is factory cut, and determined to be legitimately blue, how could it not be included?

Wouldn't there have to be at least 1 more example that comes to light in order to include it?

It could be considered an anomaly and not part of the regularly manufactured cards. An error card in essence. I won't be making the decision. That is up to the die hard T206 guys. Doesn't make a lot of difference to me though I do have most of the backs of T206 I haven't really tried for them very much.

Thanks for the reply, Leon. I understand. It could be viewed like brown old mill or blank backs. Something not issued, or a possible mistake.

Let's say if I said the card is sold for a 4 figure amount. Would that upset a lot of people?

It still seems odd to me that this back is the same color back as the reprints even though this one has been judged to be authentic. Coincidence I guess.

+1

i think a lot of people would be disappointed..and upset...if said card sold for 4 figures. def a 5 figure card.

Have you seen the card in person??

No and I'm not offering an opinion as to its authenticity. It just seems weird that of all colors this new variation happens to be the same color as the reprinted versions of the card. I would think the printer of the reprints used the blue color as a way to distinguish their reproductions from the originals. I guess its a coincidence that this card carries the same color.

The card has the same color as PB. I guess I am not familiar with the reprint color. Any chance you have a pic of one to show

Here's a link. Check out the back. It looks very similar in color to the authentic card even though this copy is a reprint. I would just like to point out that it could be a re-fronted card. But I am not an expert and am not offering an opinion either way.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-Nap-Laj...item43b088df5a


Back of the Reprint

http://s107.photobucket.com/albums/m...ms/OldMill.jpg

Are you happy with that loupe? I need to grab a new one

Authentic example and reprint side by side. I notice the reprint doesn't have the factory number.



http://s107.photobucket.com/albums/m...s/oldMill2.jpg http://s107.photobucket.com/albums/m...ms/OldMill.jpg

Here are some pictures that I took of the blue back. It was really tough taking any worthwhile pictures, but hopefully you guys find them interesting anyways.

Side note -- yes, Mike, I like the loupe. I also carry this regular loupe on a keychain with UV lights:
http://www.nikon.com/products/sporto...elry/index.htm
(But the UV+loupe combo for < $10 is a great deal.)

Steve

Thanks for the response Steve...I will be ordering a set here shortly. Mike

One more thing that I wanted to point out -- see the crease on the front of the card that runs horizontally through Walsh's chest? It's noticeable on the front because of the dark jersey, but you can't see it in the photos of the back...but the crease DOES go through to the back.

This isn't proof that the card wasn't rebacked or otherwise altered, I would doubt that someone would meticulously construct a card and then put the "authentic finishing touch" of creasing it in the middle. If anything, this would potentially expose any rebacking.

Again, it's not proof, but I do think that the crease lends credence to the other wear and tear (ie rounded corners) on the card.

Steve

Good point Steve!

Well... buying "1 of 1" variation like this is risky. I agree that we have to find another specimen to prove their existence.

This is another thing that has me on the fence about this card.

A friend and fellow board member who also attended the National and looked at the card and said it looks real. It's hard for me to have so many knowledgeable collectors say it's real and for me to still feel so skeptical :confused:

Just wondering- anyone own a PB backed Ed Walsh?

Sincerely, Clayton

If you showed me the front, without the back...I would have said...probably not real...but a good fake. A blue old mill back doesn't help the cause. I'm still in the skeptic corner.

Mac

I have to admit I have a bit of skepticism after seeing the photos of cards beside each other, taking into account what Val said (and I agree about the massive corner rounding and lack of wear otherwise).......I thought it real this whole time but now am not in the 100% camp. I have to think SGC really put it through the ringer but still.....

Curious how, if fake, they added the factory designation. I would like to see an actual hi-res scan of that area, to compare to a known real example.

I'll remain a skeptic...
 

There are t206s with slight color variations that occurred after printing. For example, color changes from glue and paste or from exposure to sunlight. Who's to say this card didn't receive exposure to sunlight that faded the black ink? No real way of knowing for sure.

Or who's to say the level of black ink was running low on that particular day of printing? Since we haven't seen other legitimate blue Old Mill backs, this probably wasn't the case. Unless of course the print run was scrapped due to poor quality and a printer took one home for his kid. No real way of knowing for sure.

Perhaps we're all being taken on a ride by a really good scammer who's testing the waters with a new counterfeiting method? Think about it. Out of the blue at the most popular card show of the year, there's a discovery of a new T206 back - one of the most popular types of baseball cards. Discoveries of new T206 errors/variations in the past have brought mega price tags (e.g. Doyle 'error'). The blue Old Mill made headlines on Net54, was passed around to well known collectors and to a respected TPG company to be legitamized. Now folks are saying it would bring not a 4 figure price tag, but a 5 figure price tag. To me, everything seems too convenient and I'll remain a skeptic.

Or perhaps it's a once in a lifetime find and I don't know left from right.

Jason- i hear you, i was skeptical too, but i (like many other collectors here) saw it in person, and looked at it under a 10x loupe. looked 100% legit to me. it was certainly a card never seen before, but had all of the correct attributes of an authentic T206 card- paper color, paper quality, toning, proper wear, etc...as per one of my earlier posts, i think they probably ran out of black ink, and ran some "polar bear" blue. that's one quick thought, but liek you sad...who really knows for sure.

Don't have an opinion one way or another and have little interest but I do know a real front can be joined with a vintage paper manufactured back and get past a TPG. It's a long tough process with a high failure rate but has been done.

Kevin

I agree with the first statement above. Regarding the new counterfeiting method theory, my understanding is that this card has been in an old-time collector's collection for many years - 20 or so? It could still be a fake, but the factory designation line looks good.

Still, my gut says 'not real'.

I would just like to add that those blue backed Old Mill reprints were made over 20 years ago. The guy who has this Cobb says he's had the reprint for 25 years.

There's no factory number on the Cobb either.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-1911-T-...item337b105e20


HOWEVER, there IS a factory number on this Cy Young Blue Old Mill reprint. Reprint on the left, authentic on the right. The cards also seem to have the same darker than usual font on the front.

http://s107.photobucket.com/albums/m...lueOldMill.jpg http://s107.photobucket.com/albums/m...s/oldMill2.jpg

Whoa, the back of that Young looks awfully similar.......

I've seen the reprints in person before and I couldn't help but see the similarities. It's either the coincidence of all coincidences or perhaps the experts were fooled on this one.

I should also mention that there are red Old Mill reprints as well which also carry the factory number.

Yeah..:confused:

Anyone have a PB Walsh?

Sincerely, Clayton

I posted this image on the first page, it shows that most of the coloured reprints have the factory # shown. Looks like the Young has the "Reprint" line cut off...still suspicious.

http://i.imgur.com/VHQRo.jpg

On a side note.....
 

A little O/T but following this thread http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=142480
about one T206,two names, (which is an awesome thread BTW) I'm having a hard time with the logic of not labeling (on the flip) the two different names T206's when there are plenty (although they are scarce) of examples, yet they are labeling this card (blue back) with nothing else to compare it too?

I don't know folks.

Please, if someone has a PB Walsh I'd love to see a scan if possible. Thanks.

Sincerely, Clayton

Hi Clayton,
Walsh is in print group 1, so he does not come with a Polar Bear back...
Be well Brian

Thanks Brian, that's where I was going with this ;)

Glad to see you posting, hope you are feeling better.

Sincerely, Clayton

Very interesting thought Clayton. If polar bears were not even being printed, how could polar bear ink show up on the back of an old mill card.

if you're looking for dark blue ink, you need to look no further then Walsh's jersey.

I'm a believer in occam's razor thinking. We do know there are reprints that carry this color and that TPG have graded reprints as authentic examples in the past.

+1 on the above. To add to it, another recent post discussed how SGC wouldn't indicate obvious missing colors on the flip for some T206s. It appeared, based on comments in that thread, that the graders were split on that decision.

Why SGC slabbed this Old Mill and gave it the 'blue' designation is beyond me given there are no other non-reprint examples known. Yet, when it came to missing ink variations, of which there are numerous examples, they'd only indicate certain colors but not others. Now they're starting to cherry pick which colors to list on the flip and choosing only known examples over well documented ones. They also fail to recognize other errors such as the Marquard 'comma' on shirt, despite multiple examples, but recognize a one and only blue Old Mill? It seems SGC needs to get everyone on the same page so we don't start seeing the discrepances we see from other TPGers, but it might be too late. I think SGC, given their positive reputation in the TPG world, would've taken their time to really think this one through.

To be clear, I'm a fan of SGC and I prefer them for my pre-1970 slabbed cards over others. I'll continue to use them.

But one has to question, did SGC get caught up in the hype over this card and make a bad decision?

My [limited] understanding is that any card made 20-30 years ago uses paper that has titanium dioxide in it, which will fluoresce very white under UV light. That's one way of outing counterfeit Fro-Joy cards. Perhaps the focus of inquiry should be the paper [front and back] and not the ink.

Assuming the card is legit, however, my view is that it would be best classified as a printing freak or variation, not as a legitimate new back type. I'd treat the other accidental back color variations as such too. Doesn't mean it isn't desirable...

Having seen the card in person, I would not be as quick as some who haven't seen it to classify that blue as "Polar Bear" blue. It might very well be, but it's not a slam dunk -- especially when one draws that conclusion based on a scan or photo. One of my first thoughts upon seeing the card was that the printing on the back is not "Polar Bear" blue.

SGC concluded the OM was legit then the designation makes sense to me. I do not think a slight miscut (double name) deserves a variation designation however.

Interesting point Rob D.,,,

I was discussing this thread with my wife, and looking at my Polar Bear backed cards, and she said "these are blue?"....I told her they(PB's) always have seemed more "black" to me,but they've always been described as "blue". My eyes aren't the best anyways.... Thanks for your input on this card, by the way.

Sincerely, Clayton

That's a brightening agent used to make the paper more white. Un-brightened papers have been available all along, and a few modern cards won't flouresce. Most brown papers and cardboards won't either.

So while flourescing is a sign of a modern paper lack of it isn't.

Steve B

Based on all of the respected members on here who saw this card in person...and say it's real...I believe them!

Most fake t206's are very obviously fake...in fact...other than photocopied fakes...I don't think I've ever seen a fake that was good enough to pass by so many experienced collectors.

I don't think this "find" will change the backs collecting dynamic very much as only 1 example is known...so only 1 wealthy collector will own it someday.

Those things being said...it's still odd to me that such a discovery this late in the game has just occurred...and if someone told me 2 months ago that a new t206 back color would be exposed at the national...I wouldn't have believed it.

+1 It didn't strike me as "Polar Bear" blue either. Count me in the camp of believers.

I'm not surprised. I also collect stamps and specialize in stamps made for the various cabinet level departments from 1873-1878. One of these was made in huge quantities, from 6 different plates. Two plates were used on an experimental press and are actually quite uncommon. To the point that no stamp that could be proven to be from plate 40 was known. That's 139 years in a hobby that thrives on tiny details. two weeks ago I found a stamp with a clear bit of the plate number showing. Plate 40:D

So I'm really not surprised that in a hobby that typically rejects any difference that isn't horribly obvious and only a handful of sets have been explored in much detail until recently.( Burdick had some lists, like the existing backs. And decent lists were around in the 70's - So only around 40 years of somewhat basic study and maybe 20 of advanced study. ) There are new discoveries.

Steve B

This Old Mill really looks blue to me. Like you, I never thought of Polar Bear backs as blue, until someone on the board said so.

I would love to get a first-hand look at this, with a loupe; however, I respect the opinion of those who have seen it, even though it makes little sense.

As far as back-collecting, given this example, I'm just glad I'm not one.

I agree Peter, the amount of experienced/veteran collectors who have seen this in person and said it looks legit seems to carry more weight about it's legitimacy (in my eyes at least) than the fact that it's graded- and out of the major TPG's I tend to trust SGC the most.It's hard to go against the grain when you look at the wisdom of the respected people of this hobby who have had the chance to view it in person, even with a loupe.

I, unfortunately, am skeptical in nature about most things. Sometimes I hate that about myself. I'm always trying to complete a puzzle that can't be completed :o

Thank goodness we are all entitled to our own opinions, and allowed to express those opinions here. I guess I'll be skeptical until another surfaces. With that being said- the T210 Old Mill set, with 640 cards(?) and 8 different series- every card having an Old Mill back- I wonder why we don't have a Blue Back showing up in that set?

Sincerely, Clayton