Opinions please on 6 Ungraded cards
 

These 6 cards are from my early days of collecting
just rediscovered them and wanted the forums opinions
Most or all of these I will probably sell/trade since not in my collection focus

Like each player and the cards have nice memories in the early days of collecting
But should I get them graded? or leave raw?
what grade might they get or not get?
Should they be contenders for me to put on Leon's Front page auction?

Raw except Gehrig... he could be worth grading and I think the ROI might be ok...the others probably not.

and yes, take the Gehrig out and you would have a good front page auction, I think...but I am biased.. :) We will see what others say.
(and actually leaving that Gehrig in might be ok)...who knows
.

Cap and Fred Clarke might get Fair or Good. Rest are all poor IMO, except for Gehrig which might only get AUTH for having paper/glue applied.

In terms of which would do best at auction, those would be the superstars. To me, players on the collectability level of Clarke would be better as BIN/BO.

From the vantage point of a buyer (Hello Mr Anson!), I would only buy a 19th century card if graded/authenticated.

I realize there are shenanigans with TPGs but I would like the assurance that the 100+ year old card I am adding to my collection is authentic

I’m sure others are quite fine with raw but for me, I’d grade the Anson (at least)

Good luck!

Grade
 

Grade Anson, Gehrig, and probably Matty. There are many reprints/fakes of these cards out there - especially Anson and Gehrig. Buyers value some type of third party validation. Even poor, these two command over $1000.

I would agree to grade those three. The Gehrig and the Anson in particular both look washed out, so if you get them graded then buyers can have more assurance they are authentic.

I would grade the Anson and the Gehrig. You might be able to get a 2 on that Anson. The other cards are probably all 1s and not really worth grading, although as expressed above, the Matty might make a buyer more confident to know that it's authentic, but I don't think it adds any value, just a wider pool of buyers (which you probably don't need).

Also, I would try to find out if the glue on the back of the Gehrig is water soluble or not. If it is, that might just come right off without damaging the card simply by soaking it in water. However, I suspect it might not be as the card itself looks a bit washed out and faded like someone already tried to soak it in some sort of chemical bath or something. I don't know. But if the fading is just from the sun /light exposure and it hasn't ever been soaked in water, then it's worth a try on my opinion, because if that glue dissolves, then you'd have a really nice Gehrig. Either way though, the Gehrig is worth grading.

I agree with Leon and remember your Lou is #160, which is more desirable and valuable than his #92.

Paying $35ish per to get those graded by SGC will more than pay for itself on all except Clarke. Just sell that raw for $90 or whatever it's worth.

My thoughts exactly!

appreciated for the input.

I will regroup and get back to the group on what I decided

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but a couple of those look to be fake/reprints to me. I hope for your sake I am wrong.

The Anson and Gehrig don't look real at all. Obviously PSA would love a chance to grade them, but if they determine they are fake (like I suspect they are), then you lose your grading fee. And it is NOT cheap those grade those two based on their respective values if they were real.

.

Compare your Anson dot pattern
 

Loop the Anson and compare the dot pattern on the hands against a authentic card--notice the overall dot patterns on the authentic example--at least may help for a indication to submit to TPG--good luck!

Look at the total absence of color on the Anson. How it appears monotone.

I will check but these were all bought from a sports card/ Memorabilla shop by me and they have been in business for over 20 plus years.
I bought them there myself when I first got the collection bug.

Do you think they will give you your money back if it is determined that those cards are fake?

Not at this point. I bought them about 5 plus years ago. But they have been in business on Long Island for 27 plus years.

Is that paper loss or extra paper on the back of Lou. Hopefully it’s extra paper and the glue can be soaked off.

I think all 6 are real.

I'd bid on Gehrig ungraded, so long as I could have 3 days to inspect and initiate return if needed.

If you send it off to grade you'd be waiting to get it back to sell for quite some time, you'd get more, or if the naysayers are right then you'll pay grading fees up front to find out that it's not real months and months from now. I think the Gehrig is real, but want to actually have it in hand to be satisfied with that.

And I'd like to get that Keeler, too, unless it gets slabbed.

The Gehrig is fake. Look at a low grade PSA graded one. Notice how rich the colors are. Then look at how the Gehrig looks 'xeroxed".

Also compare the colors of the Anson to a real one. No way. That card shop should be ashamed of itself.

It looks like a scan/pic issue with the Gehrig. I don't like the Anson...but I'm ok on Gehrig.

The Gehrig looks real to me. It just looks like it's faded, either from the sun or from chemicals. Who is going to glue a fake Gehrig to a scrapbook?

A guy named Larry.
.

That was my first thought as well - the Anson especially doesn't look good to me

When I was in the Navy, I was on two different ships (Midway and Independence) home ported out of Yokosuka and shore duty at Atsugi. Learned to speak Japanese fairly well, and even read/write some kanji and katakana. They can't pronounce our r. So Larry got pronounced "Laddy" or "Lawdy".

Who is Larry?

Being a raw cards only guy, and knowing what Mr. Reality seems to be about from his many net54 posts, I think they're real. Just faded for whatever reason(s).

Quite the interesting thread. It's a rabbit hole so have a few spare minutes...

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...t=larry+harris

.

Quite interesting indeed

I am confident in all the cards. But of course their is always the possibility.

I will let everyone know shortly what I will do

Cards
 

Could just give them a price and sell them "as is"...let the buyer take a little risk just like you did Jeff. Leave a little meat on the bone so that the buyer could have them graded.

Tough call from here to tell if they are good. A picture of each with different lighting might be very helpful.

I think the Gehrig and Anson are genuine. It looks like these cards were originally glued to a scrapbook. The scrapbook may have had water/moisture damage that caused the cards to look that way. The surface of the cards might’ve gotten slightly stuck onto the previous scrapbook page.

I'm not saying you, or anyone else, is emphatically wrong in questioning the authenticity of the OP's posted cards. Don't know about the rest of you, but the scanned image by the OP appears to me to show all of the cards as a bit more "monotone" or faded than you would normally expect. Could it possibly be due to a bad scanner or image setting? The T205s definitely look faded, but oddly, that only appears to be the case on the top half of the T205 Mathewson, but on all of the T205 Clarke. Kind of reminds me also what could happen back in the day at outdootr flea markets when sellers would leave cards out on their tables in direct, bright sunlight. In looking further though, the bottom half of the T206 Young card may also appear to be a bit brighter and less faded than the top half of that card as well. And upon closer inspection, I then realized that on just the backs of the Mathewson and Young cards that there is a bluish discoloration or stain of some sort, that pretty much corresponds exactly to the portions of those two cards that appear to be the normal, brighter images on the fronts. I'd definitely like/want to see these cards in hand before making a final determination.

I will pull the cards out and try getting better pictures for the group

The backs of both the Gehrig and Anson look good and that adhesive residue would be hard to fake. The fronts look a little faded, which is to be expected given the backs. I'm far from an expert on either set, but I don't see anything in particular to worry about as far as either being fake.

Thanks Jeff.

And any idea what that weird bluish tint is on the backs of the Mathewson and Young cards? The fact they seem to correspond exactly with what looks like brighter colored sections on the front of those two cards has me thinking some liquid or chemical got spilled on those two, and was absorbed into the cardboard to where it affected their fronts and backs.

I really hope all these cards turn out to be legit for you. (Here's where I'd place a "fingers crossed" emoji, if we had one.)

Are you saying that it is impossible to mount a fake card in a photo album?? That's a new one on me. Also that doesn't bother you that the Anson is missing at least 3 colors on the card??

Or here's a weird twist that just occured to me. Could it be that there was some liquid or chemical that got spilled on all those cards, causing them all to look faded and not be so bright, except it somehow missed the bottoms of the Mathewson and Young cards, leaving them normal?

I'd really like to see these cards in hand, alongside other clean, authentic versions of cards from each of the same sets. That could really help.

Thanks, Leon. You're right, it took me quite some time to read through the story of Larry, the Happy Meal Bandit. It is one of the craziest yet interesting threads I have read on this forum.

The Gehrig #160's are typically less vibrant than the #92's, that said, the one posted in the OP is very washed out, it looks like someone soaked it in the past to try and remove the glue and paper.

Hi Everyone

I took alot more photo's to the best I could

I put them all on my Flickr Account(IN LINK BELOW)

and they are in the "RAW FOLDER"

Let me know what you think.

Then I am moving forward with moving them 2 way or another

appreciated

That Anson looks 1,000 times better in the Flicker account than it does on here. To the point, I reverse my "fake" statement. Still not sure about the Gehrig.

And while I didn't care for the way the Gehrig borders' colors looked in the first picture they look fine in this one.

What a difference a clear image can make...both the Anson and Gehrig appear to be nice authentic cards. Congrats on your 5 year ago pickups!

Brian

definitely appears to be glue on back - I'm guessin a good soak would remove most of that old type glue - yes?

And I stand by my original not fake diagnosis!

appreciate the update all

And obviously my bad for not taking better photos and clearer ones.

Thanks

I will let everyone Especially Leon know about what I will sell on the front page auction

Wish I had a box laying around with some cards like that in them, all of my "hidden stashes" seem to be 1987 Topps and 1990 Fleer.

Hey, what happened to the weird bluish tint on the backs of the Mathewson and Young cards? If they really are gone on the flkr images, that must have been something scanner or camera related causing the original issues and questions.

I think they were shadows you were seeing.

Hi Everyone

Thanks for everyone's advise

I will be "auctioning" on the Front Page with Leon at some point in the future when he says it is my turn the Young Card, The Mathewson Card, The Clark Card, and the Keeler Card as 1 Patch.

The Anson Card and the Gehrig Card I will be taking PM or emails if anyone wants to give me some fair offers. IF not then I will have them slabbed.

Thanks