Hi John,
Sorry, I didn't mean to be redundant. Must have missed your earlier statement to the same effect.
Scot

But there could be one in a closet somewhere, or in a parallel universe, so it's still POSSIBLE this is a sliver of a Wagner back.

They weren't still using the Pony Express in 1909.

Count me among those who don't think this lot deserves any more scrutiny than many of the other pieces of nonsense over-hyped by the AH's. I am; however, curious what Brock would be willing to pay for it, in real U.S. currency.

Brock, I haven’t typed why its way off as I figured it would be a waste of time as you seem to be way into the fantasy world of belief with the Huggins Team on this. The only argument that Huggins is hanging their hat on is that this card must have been next to the Wagner because of the strip that once belonged to Wagner.

That proof strip is very cool but in no way is a final production sheet clearly that can be seen from the graphic elements missing from the strip.

Using this to assume this is how the sheets were laid out. Let alone make the claim that a factory cut production card has remnants of Wagner’s back is an absolute leap of blind faith at best if you’re a collector. If you’re an auction house with any shred of integrity its downright glorified unfounded bull.

Brock reputable auction companies don’t do stuff like this. You will never see an 18th dynasty Egyptian artifact that looks high-end and might have come from a royal court. Try and tie the item to most likely but not for sure belonging to King Tutankhamun. With some drawn out story about how they have pictures of Lord Carnarvon and Howard Carter in the tomb with a similar item so this one could be Tut’s.

There are countless other little nuances and bits of info taken over the years from collectors who share knowledge much is right here on the board to read. All of these also put further death nails in this cocked up story spun by Huggins & Scott.

Hope this helps….

What a surprise this has ties to Patrick Chan even more reason to run for the hills on this epic yarn. :)

Did I miss something? How does this tie to Chan?

Scot, you have forgotten more about these cards than I know...the day you need to say sorry to me on T206 stuff...that's the day I pony up my opening bid of 5k on a "partial" Wagner Piedmont back. :D

No worries brother.

Use the search feature you newbie. (Kidding) :D

Peter, you're right what about an attic? :D

i think brock and steve are looking for jobs as auction puffers...I'd send resume's directly to huggins and scott!

Better a puffer than a fluffer. At least with the former, you're only trying to get ahead.... :eek:

This is nothing short of another enterprising seller trying to exploit T206 collectors' desire to own a piece of the famed Wagner card without delivering an actual piece of an actual Wagner card.

"But it cannot be reasonably said that this is not possibly a partial Honus Wagner." Wrong. This is not possibly a partial Honus Wagner card because there is no evidence that Wagner's front ever appeared on it. A Wagner is made by the front, not the back.

I'm not saying the card is what they it might be. There's so much against it that it really shouldn't have been written up like that without a lot more than a maybe preproduction maybe uncut strip to back it up.

I am saying that someday having something far more solid might be possible.

But probably not for a Wagner/Piedmont.

Just the compiling pics of the plate scratches has shown some subjects that can't be from the same sheet. Eventually we'll know more.

Steve B

But you'll never know that the front of this card has a Wagner on it. Whether a card was cut from a sheet that had another card on it is fun to talk about, but doesn't make a Bowerman a Wagner, partial or otherwise.

"But it cannot be reasonably said that this is not possibly a partial Honus Wagner."

That is unequivocally the worst equivocal description I have ever read.

Maybe Panini or Topps will bid on it, chop it up into 100 pieces and make a special commemorative insert card out of it.

1/100 Gold Refractor Diamond Inlaid rare Bowerman/Wagner remnant card. Maybe they can even throw a half signature of Ted Williams on the same card for good measure.........or better yet, just one letter of his handwriting and include a JSA Basic Cert..................but you have to send it in along with $75 to get the Full Certificate.

Oh, the endless possibilities. :D

Totally agree. It uses double negatives to try to make a positive, without ever saying the positive, which would be:

"But it CAN be reasonably said that this IS possibly a partial Honus Wagner."

Again, just not true.

I agree for the most part with your points here John, however, as I was reading through the thread and forming my own opinion a thought came to mind.

Some of you may venture from time to time over to the memorabilia side, more specifically the game used memorabilia side of not only the board here but of the hobby as well, but some of you may not. My observations are that in general vintage equipment, uniforms and to a degree pre-model bats all (baring rock solid personal provenience) are determined to be "game used" by nothing more than conjecture based on a set of at times very lose criteria.

Outside of personal provenience, its an educated guess at best based on a set of limited available information if a pre war jersey or piece of equipment is in fact game used. Yet, that doesn't prevent auction houses and other companies from authenticating the pieces and labeling them as being genuine game used equipment when they're consigned. They are in fact making a very similar leap of faith with a lot of the vintage pre war "game used" equipment that gets consigned and auctioned. The information available to authenticate these pieces is sparse and pretty limited if not non existent in some cases. Just because a glove matches the type/style used by Ty Cobb, or a pre-model bat matches the kind of bat used by Lou Gehrig does not grantee that Cobb or Gehrig every touched that piece of equipment let alone use it in a game. Yet they can be authenticated as such because they meet a set of limited and sparse qualities and attributes.

I'm not saying this is right or wrong, I'm just stating that the same type of assumptions and leaps of faith are made all the time by auction houses when they auction vintage game used equipment.

I would say that owning this card would be about as exciting as standing next to someone who might have had sex with the most attractive woman on the planet (the assumption being made because he at one time lived next door to her sister).

Boy, the stories I could then tell my friends.

Partial Wagner/Bowerman Back
 

I rarely post and just read the nonsense that goes on with posts like this and get a good laugh. Can't believe I've actually read this entire thread but, having done so, I noticed there are some facts no one has pointed out yet.

As already noted in the thread, supposedly all the sheets with Wagner cards on them were to have been destroyed. If so, that means the Bowerman (and Brown) cards that were next to Wagner would have likewise been destroyed at the same time. The known Wagner cards are all supposed to be hand-cut which, since the Bowerman card in the auction is supposedly machine cut, would rule out the possibility it was actually printed next to a Wagner card on the sheet it originally came from. Still, assume the possibility that somehow the Bowerman card just looks to be machine cut and could have been next to a Wagner.

Are there any known Sweet Caporal backed Wagners that have a misaligned/miscut back on them anything like this Bowerman card? I personally do not know the answer to that but, if there aren't any, then how could there possibly be a Bowerman card with such a miscut/misaligned back that was next to a real Wagner card? You can't have one without the other.

BobC

Nice, Bob. You just rendered the 'Pony Express' communication theory irrelevant.

The silence from Huggins and Scott here is deafening.
JimB

I think that they just accepted the consignor's description of the card (and possibly printed it verbatim) and are now too embarrassed to try to defend it. :rolleyes:

I'm guessing they were thinking, "This is funny, and no one will bid on it. But, if someone does, then hey, we just got a little richer and some (albeit awful) publicity."

John,

The top institutions, and auction houses, regularly present items that they do not have all the firm answers to.

The market determines a value based on the uncertainties.


Here is your King Tut questionable item -


http://www.herkimercommunitymuseum.c...ed-Catalog.pdf

54. Ankh Mirror Case. Found in the Treasury where it had been stripped by the grave robbers
of the silver mirror it once contained, this regal mirror case was fashioned of wood covered in
sheet gold and embossed with both the royal and personal names of the pharaoh. Since the
hieroglyphic ankh symbol for life (represented in the form of sandal straps) was also the symbol
for mirror, the witty artisan who crafted this unique case was indulging in a playful pun. Within
the loop (as in a cartouche), a hieroglyph of Tutankhamun’s throne name, Nebkheprure, is
incorporated into a sacred motif inlaid with carnelian, quartz, and colored glass. The design
ritually depicts the creation of the universe with the birth of the sun god (Re), rendered as a
scarab (kheper) rising forth from the primordial lotus (its corolla crowned by the neb basket).
Although it might have been intended exclusively for funerary purposes, this delightful amulet
may well have been one of the pharaoh’s treasured personal belongings.

(one of his most treasured personal items? or used at his funeral?)


Christies auction lots -

http://www.christies.com/lotfinder/b...d-848efd22183f

... cowled saint behind St Margaret is probably Gerard, the patron saint of their eldest son. One of the daughters, probably the eldest, is Margareta, wife of Georges Sersanders, whose fourth child was born in about 1502. The use of the feminine form for one prayer may mean that the book was intended for Margareta ...


http://www..christies.com/lotfinder/...d-848efd22183f

Examination of a limited number of metal objects, which have survived from the Western Zhou dynasty (1046-771 BC), suggests that the use of small amounts of enamel inlaid into metal may have been current in China from this early date. An iron axe blade in the collection of the Freer Gallery in Washington, D.C., and a bronze ladle in the collection of the British Museum, London, appear to have reddish brown glass-paste inlay, while the axe also has green glass-paste inlay. Technical analysis revealed that these were siliceous enamels coloured with cuprous oxide [1]. Both the axe and the ladle have been dated to the 11th century BC, and it has been confirmed that the siliceous enamels are original to the pieces. The use of what would have been applied as molten glass to provide decoration on metal also appears on items of the Warring States period, the Han and the Tang dynasties, albeit that objects thus decorated have not survived in great numbers...However it appears to have been in the Yuan dynasty that Chinese craftsmen began to produce fully developed cloisonne enamelled wares and their wares reached a high standard [4]...

So with these analogies to other totally unrelated antiquities...are baseball cards entering this realm...where restorations and other preservation techniques will be deemed not only acceptable...but in a lot of cases the norm?

I don't think so!

This is apples to oranges...even comparing memorabilia to cards...is apples to oranges.

I don't think never is necessarily correct.

Once the sheet size and layout is known then individual positions on each plate will probably be identifiable. At the moment it looks like common players were on more than one sheet, and that more than one back plate was used. the 150's were probably done in at least three press runs with changes made between each one.

For instance Magie comes with backs that only match with certain details on the front. And at least some Magees share an identifiable back with Magie. There are at least six different Magies.

So each instance of a Wagner on a sheet will probably have a particular and identifiable back that may or may not be shared with another card. If it's not shared then identifying one from the back should be possible.
Whether the differences will be near enough to the edge to tell from a slight miscut isn't likely, but possible.

Of course, as of right now it's not possible. And I don't expect it to be for a long time.

Steve B

If they really want "the market" to determine this card's value, start the bidding at $10 and see where it ends up. I'll bet it never reaches $75, unless someone else wants to bid against Brock.

My point is that since no part of a Wagner front shows up on the Bowerman, any proof or theories regarding sheet placement will always be speculative. Moreover, even if you proved with 100% certainty that this card once shared a sheet with Wagner, and the Wagner would have been on the front of the card next door, you still do not have a piece of a Wagner because none of its front shows up.

It is purely a ruse. Engaging in rationale discourse about sheet theory lends more truth to it than it deserves.

EXACTLY!!!

My point is that since no part of a Wagner front shows up on the Bowerman, any proof or theories regarding sheet placement will always be speculative. Moreover, even if you proved with 100% certainty that this card once shared a sheet with Wagner, and the Wagner would have been on the front of the card next door, you still do not have a piece of a Wagner because none of its front shows up.
It is purely a ruse.

Engaging in rationale discourse about sheet theory lends more truth to it than it deserves.[/QUOTE]

Brock, you're just looking to argue no thanks. You asked why earlier I didn't outline more to you its clear it would be a waste of time.

Also nice quick google searches, hope you didn't spend too much time on them. :D

What you have shown above isn't even apples to apples. it just further highlights that you can't seem to grasp what many of us are saying about Huggins & Scott's auction listing.

At least the items you dug up from the internet have provenance and historical ties that may allow them to be part of or possibly tied to historical figures or times. In other words they have presented real research that shows the possibility and that research is also accepted by a community of peers.

It isn't some made up fish story made out to be fact with its only argument being well you can't say for 100% it didn't happen that way. That's not how the academic and antiquities worlds work.

But again I'm wasting time....

If you really feel this partial Wagner thing isn't a stretch or a complete false statement with little to no evidence to support such a bold claim. Then no wonder so many of the Bill Mastros of the world have practiced their trade with little to no resistance must be like shooting fish in a barrel.

Cheers,

John

For sale: single signed Babe Ruth baseball. Could be the ball he hit for his 714th and final home run. No provenance, but it cannot be conclusively proved that it is NOT that ball. And it goes without saying that it cannot be conclusively proved that it is not his signature.

H&S actually put this card on their front page as one of their auction highlights. So even if they just accepted the description of the card from the consignor, IMHO, they're equally at fault for hyping it.

I wonder if Mastro kept the scrap shavings from the trimmed Wagner PSA 8. If he knew just a slice of it could get 5K with this much doubt whether it's even from a Wagner, what would a slice of a genuine Wagner fetch?

good point Gary...but I'm guessing they disposed of the "evidence!"

OMFG! You are joking right?????? What is our hobby coming to?

For what it is worth, I spoke to the owner at the Net54 diner (great guy) regarding this card and they had most of the details ready to send to H&S.....it was an interesting discussion but I did not think it would actually come to fruition.

I think its ridiculous the AH went ahead with it. :eek:

If you really feel this partial Wagner thing isn't a stretch or a complete false statement with little to no evidence to support such a bold claim. Then no wonder so many of the Bill Mastros of the world have practiced their trade with little to no resistance must be like shooting fish in a barrel.

They practice(d) their trade selling to many an educated collector as well.

This auction simultaneously mocks the T206 collector, and the many genuine approaches and intricacies of collecting the Monster, while at the same time attempting to drive traffic to its website by the very same collectors. Perhaps they think we'd be in on the joke. Ironically, it is anathema to all of the truly excellent research and discourse about the T206 set - an obvious attempt to take a growing body of knowledge and profit by distorting it.

Could you imagine a brand new auction house leading with this listing? Of course not. You have to build up some amount of credibility in the industry before going with this one. It has to be dismissible as an aberration, otherwise it would forever taint your business. By the looks of this thread, the stain may still last.

Take it down, H&S. Do yourself a favor. Show a little more respect to your customers.

Agreed Paul...honestly...the shilling debacle...now this...not a good trend for H & S in my opinion...from someone who used to go to the brick and mortar house of cards...I will not deal with this auction house.

Why haven't any of you answered my question yet? If this was your card I'd be willing to bet over 75% of you would try to get some sort of premium instead of just selling it for the $30 as a common.

brock...your question is ridiculous as this card is a t206 common that has nothing in common with a t206 wagner. it's worth what a t206 bowerman with a miscut back is worth(and not even miscut enough to warrant a premium)...which aint much!

I will say I had a nice call from Bill this evening. He called because he wanted to hear my thoughts on this topic/lot. He was very open in the fact that he didn't know tons on T206's and took the consignors lead and that the consignor presented what looked like a ton of well thought out research.

I happily explained the reasons I felt the card and the claims being made by the consignor were unfounded. I also asked Bill to read this whole thread and not to just take my view on it. Bill's stance was that he needed to read through this thread a bit more to wrap his head around the details shared by all and armed with those details contact his consignor with those findings.

That’s where it left off……thought I would share.

Cheers,

John

Yet he knows enough about t206's that he's been collecting miller huggins cards with all the backs for decades...and supposedly was/is hoarding shag shawnessy cards?!?!

+1. I thought this was a joke when I first start reading this thread.

Brock, this is just a really bad argument. It's like saying that if you owned the Cincinnati Wagner, you'd be trying to get every last buck for it like the current owners are doing. John and others have explained why it is very doubtful that the edge belongs to a Wagner (no Piedmont Wagners were factory cut). Therefore, that's most likely not a Wagner sliver right there, so if you owned this card, and you knew this information, it means that you're basically willing to scam someone for money.

Tony, you might check your safe again. Something seems amiss. :eek:

http://imageshack.us/a/img5/7373/cemg.png

You were right the first time. It is a joke.

+1
Isn't it ironic that this consignor got this card from the T206 Museum. It appears Patrick Chan was selling this card as a simple Bowerman, not a "partial Wagner." Even Chan had more integrity than to try that.
And yes, using Patrick Chan and integrity in the same sentence is a first for me.

How in the world are you so certain that the Piedmont Wagners were hand cut?

How in the world are you so certain that more, perhaps many more, Piedmont Wagners were not printed and destroyed? We know Piedmont Wagners were printed.

Do you Really think they would have thrown out Entire sheets to destroy/discard just one card?! Intuitively, does this make any sense to anybody? Financially, does this make any sense to anybody? particularly with the expense of the different color inks.

This is your opinion - which is being stated as fact.

There are to date only 2 Wagners with Piedmont backs that we know of. One appears to have been a scrap, and was hand cut. Check the Wagner Gallery on T206Resource.com.
The other is the Gretzky Wagner, which was cut from a sheet and later trimmed by Bill Mastro.
We can't prove that no other Wagner Piedmonts were ever produced, but since none have ever turned up it seems likely that production was halted after the Sweet Caporals were produced, but before the Piedmont print run.

It appears that a printing of Sweet Caporal, with Wagner, was not only completed, but that cards had already made their way out into the world, and that at a minimum, Piedmont was on the presses - with Wagner. And some Piedmont Wagners had been printed.

We don't know how much of a run with Wagner there was in Piedmont. Wagner may have been there the whole run, and they destroyed them.

Perhaps they could not destroy all the Sweet Caporal as they had already left the factory by the time word came. So it was not that factory workers did not listen, a number of Sweet Caporal had already gone out. But perhaps the Piedmont Wagners were all still there to destroy.

When examining what is before us, for now, and 20 years from now, I think you first need 'a world of the possible' to examine. This card, this idea, of possible partial Wagners from the sheet, must include Piedmont, as we know Piedmont Wagners were printed.

I honestly think it is the money aspect here that is clouding objective perspective. This is an interesting topic, card, etc. That should not be dismissed on momentary fancy.

I believe Steve is correct, in that there is more that can be discovered.

In my opinion, there is nothing unholy or improper about any of this. It is possible and interesting.


As a side, the inauthentic Wagner, and the inauthentic card variations, created to defraud, are not proper, possible, or interesting. They are fraud.


Also as a side, how do we know the Mastro Wagner was originally hand cut, and not a large (or about regular size) factory cut, that was trimmed?

a partial front Wagner would be interesting...THIS partial "back" of a Wagner is not interesting at all...it's just plain stupid...and ridiculous!

:):):):)

Lol

– others find possible missing periods, apostrophes, and color - not interesting, just plain stupid, and ridiculous

The problem is that there's so much that isn't known about the production and distribution of any T206. Stuff like the sheet size and makeup can probably be figured out, although maybe not with absolute certainty. Other things, especially anything about how they were sent from ALC to the various factories will probably never be known.

Without that, there's no way of knowing when or how the Wagner was removed from production. There are a number of possibilities, but none provable.

My current thinking is that there were a few sheets common to all brands in a group, and others that were specific to a brand and factory and sales area.

So it's not certain that Wagner would have been on a regular production Piedmont sheet. The two that we know of argue against it.

As for destruction of completed work, that depends. While nobody likes doing it, it happens. We did a huge batch of course catalogs for MIT. And delivered maybe half of them. There was no space left in the office we delivered them to after we left. We were even putting a case under each desk and under chairs. A couple months later we threw away the rest, around 25,000 of them. Printed, bound into books, packed. And I had to open the boxes and dump them all- No point in wasting the boxes. But the company was paid for them.
So yes, if Wagner got ATC to stop distribution and ATC paid ALC for the sheets or even finished cards, then ALC may have decided to toss them all rather than spend the effort to remove just the Wagners. (Even with fairly low labor costs)

As things stand now, I would simply consider the card to be a P150 with a miscut back. It's one I'd maybe pay a small premium for, but more like 40-50 instead of 30.
Making the Wagner claim is so far outside what's currently known that there needs to be more proof. And there simply isn't.

I'm familiar with this, in one of my other hobbies I wrote an article about an item that was known from records to have been produced, written about in 1932, then the 1932 article was essentially proven wrong - Until I found one that was provable. And oddly, it's only provable because of what's essentially a miscut showing a fraction of a plate number. And it's provable because the location of the plate number is different from the ones that are commonly mistaken for the one I found. (keep in mind, this is something where the sheet size, layout, method of production, exact number produced etc are all known.

Steve B

Brock, is that you? :D

Brock, how long have you and the consignor been buddies? :D

:) Isn't it bromantic?:D

+1 and very funny.

Pulled
 

After being made aware of some additional information regarding Piedmont backed Wagner's, we, along with the consignor, have opted to pull the card from the auction.

Thanks,
Huggins and Scott Auctions

let the love fest begin!

i get jokes
 

H&S pulled their card, but check out what Joe's Vintage has to offer:
http://jvscauctions.com/LotDetail.aspx?inventoryid=5904

Classic. Title alone makes it deserving of a bid.

:):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):):)

Well I hope you guys are happy. I was prepared to go as high as necessary to get that card and now it's gone.

Thanks, jerks.

Laugh, but some of the white cardboard on the back of that Bowerman could actually be part of a Wagner.

+1

Thank you H&S - faith restored.

+1 Hilarious!