1909 E90-1 Cy Young — Real/Fake
 

Hey guys,

Saw this on ebay tonight and wanted to get your thoughts:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-11-E-90...YAAOSwiYFXFCH0

Looking to land a Fan Craze or this one but would rather have one graded just to ease my mind on authenticity.

very...very...BAD!

What are the tell tale signs?

[REMOVED] This forum used to be great, but it's awful now. Arbitrary enforcement of rules by the moderator, plus people who don't know anything about vintage cards and don't care posting over & over again.

Not to mention the stellar feedback.

That's the sense I got. Thank you all.

What?
 

He ain't even got no feedback! My BS filter is set to a much more sensitive level thanks to the Net54 crowd. Thanks guys!

here's a real nice one!

Note how different the background looks. Shadows etc.

and the "quaity" of the type in the name, team...the fake is different...look closely...not the right color either.

Mine

I thought the dot pattern was wrong and I haven't seen registration look like that when outta whack.

which is real?

Any of you selling yours?? :)

Suh-Weeeeet!!!!!

right one

I had one but sold it a few years ago for nothing. I never loved it anyway...it wasn't a particularly nice example. It's one of my favorites and I need another one!

Greg...I like yours a lot!!!!!

Thanks Pete. Hope all is well.

I've tried for a couple on ebay but missed out in the closing seconds over the last 6 months.

What do you guys think about the rest of his cards? I saw the zero feedback but I thought the cards looked good. I didn't notice the Young admittedly.

All bad, IMO. All exhibit similar corner wear....

What about this one? I won it and it hasn't shipped yet, so I can probably just get a refund if it's no good. I'll be a bit embarrassed if everyone thinks it is bad and I missed it.

Could just be bias now but the red looks too bright and solid.

[REMOVED] This forum is done.

That's what I noticed about his T206s. Every one is worn in the same manner and to the same degree. :rolleyes:

Yes it is!!

Hmm, hate to be a contrarian, but not all of these cards are fakes. I actually think they look fine to me. His scans wash them out quite a bit and don't appear to show the details on the corners.

Don't know the seller. Obviously zero feedback is never a good sign, but there's no way his sold T206 are fakes. T205s look good. I don't see any problems with the E95s.

The E90 Young I'd like to see in person.

I don't think these are reprints.

Rob

Take a gamble, Luke. I vote real.

[REMOVED] This forum is done.

Not all E90 Youngs have background shading like the examples posted earlier in this thread. For example, assuming PSA didn't slab a reprint:

http://milehighcardco.com/1909_e90_1...-lot39204.aspx

It wouldn't take a whole lot of editing to fix the horrible picture used in the Ebay listing to make it look pretty good. I also wonder why anyone would make a misregistered reprint, that seems a little too sneaky (though not impossible - bring on the scans of the misregistered reprints!!). The 0 feedback score is worrisome, but with a 14-day return policy you can mail one of these to PSA or SGC and know before the 14 days are up if you need to start your return through Ebay.

I should add that I don't have any e95s/e90s so take the above with a grain of salt.

[REMOVED] This forum is done.

it's not cut and dry as some of you are making it out to be. i agree with bill they are definitely not the mass produced dark color oven baked variety...but i also agree with robert i would like to see the young in a more natural lighting. the washed out colors could just be a bad scan (or a very good home made copy).

his e95 cobb looks real to me, but from feedback and some questionable stuff i would like to see them in person. a couple look kinda weird, but a few are 100% good to me.

edit: checking his ended auctions the t206 mathewson and e95 cicotte is 100% good...of course in my opinion (since i'm an auto guy now giving my opinion to their authenticty).

Why couldn't the seller be salting his auctions with low dollar but REAL cards and high dollar fakes?

David

I also should have added that there are a number of red flags like this one, the 0 feedback , etc.

Luke, if you don't try to cancel the sale I suggest taking a clear video of the entire outside of the package to show it is sealed and open it all without letting anything leave the shot. At least that way you can prove what was in the box and that you don't get one of those rough T205s instead. Can't be too safe.

Personally I wouldn't trust any raw vintage card from a seller who is listing obvious fakes and trying to pass them off as real cards. Add in the 0 feedback and there is no way I take this gamble. And I like to gamble. The payoff isn't high enough and it doesn't seem worth the shipping and grading fees to find out. My advice would be to back out if you can.

What's even more disturbing is the Cobb has $800 inactive bids. This guy must be rubbing his hands together saying "Suckas!"

I meant "in active bids"

I vote bad seller with scans of real cards. Whether he has them and would (could) send them to a buyer is anyone's guess. But, I don't see any fakes.

With respect to the Young, the corners are not "uniformly rounded" particularly when you look at the reverse. In addition, the dot matrix pattern on the face is a strong indicator of genuineness. Reprints do not capture the black newsprint dots. There is definitely something off about the seller, but it may just be an old time collector listing his cards for the first time on eBay. If Luke gets his E95 Young, I believe he will be very happy with it!

The vast majority at least that I have seen and now see on a search have that shading. Why would some, presumably manufactured by the same process, not have it?

you guys should go back to arguing about whether jackie robinson is a hof'er and stop trolling the OP...it's a nice young OP i expect some late biddings don't think you'd be getting it for $800 listed price.

terrible looks like a topps chrome card smiles

Possibly copied from this one?

http://goodwinandco.com/1909-e90-1-a...-lot24234.aspx

It appears to have the same misregistration, the same lower border break, and the same red alignment mark at the center top. But there's a small difference on the back.
Not that that's a lock, mass production being what it is there should be others that are nearly identical. But combined with the other stuff it's a pretty big red flag.

I found it by being lazy just like a reprinter would be, Google look at images, their large scans are probably just about good enough to print well.

Steve B

That looks like an exact hit to me. Look at the upper right border, in the white on the outside, on the edge. There is a telltale dark mark at the exact same place on both cards. At least that is what it seems to look like. Also, directly across, horizontally, is another telltale spot of white on the black border. Those things pointed out I am still not 100% on this as the areas don't match up perfectly (almost perfectly, but not perfectly, from the scans). I doubt I would take a chance on any of them without a return policy. But with one, buyers should be protected. One other thing that is in favor of it NOT being the same card as in Goodwin is the right border of the current one is thinner than the left border, and on the Goodwin one the right border is thicker than the left one.

Goodwin has the typical shading.

I understand there are some very dodgy E90-1 Young - Boston football helmet variation cards that have hit the market. Apparently, they originated somewhere in Texas. Caveat Emptor, Baby

Look at the misregistration at the shoulders, the Ebay card isn't a copy of the Goodwin card. The Ebay card has tilted misregistration that goes into the border on the left side and is further away from the border on the right than the Goodwin card. Pretty close though.

Peter - I don't know why some lack the background shading - I am definitely not an expert on E cards. I just know that one of the first few that I found, which was slabbed by PSA, also lacks it. I can say that I think the cards with the shading look much cooler.

That's funny. Nice one, John.

As for the difference in the shading on various cards, I think some of it has to do with the scan or picture made....They almost all seem to have varying degrees of some shading and I think in person all of them might (I could be wrong). The scan in the holder below is from the auction I bought it from. The other scan is one I just made while typing this post :). I have completely neutral settings on my scanner (pre-set I guess). In person the one I just scanned doesn't have as dark of shading as it has in in this scan. It seems darker on the screen than in hand. But my eyes are getting old too!!

The only thing worse than posting that card again is posting it TWICE again in the same post.

i asked the seller for better pics, figuring if he doesn't reply then it's junk...but he did update his pics and it should be clear to anyone now the card is real as rain.

and peter, the shading is not the smoking gun on the young.

http://net54baseball.com/attachment....1&d=1443990789http://www.net54baseball.com/attachm...8&d=1444513425