![]() |
Gehrig results
Memory Lane, yesterday:
1932 Caramel Gehrig, PSA 8 - $39k 1933 Goudey Gehrig, 92 PSA 8 - $302k 1933 Goudey Gehrig, 160 PSA 8 - $185k Can someone explain this? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Spending/bidding in auctions is a rush/thrill addiction just like gambling. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
THE CARD THE PLAYER ARTICLES Like Jimmie Foxx, Lou Gehrig is represented twice in this wonderful set. Unlike Foxx, it is Gehrig's high number that it actually more difficult. Card #160 is seen far less frequently than his #92 card and rarely seen in PSA NM-MT 8 or better. In addition, it is usually found with whiter borders and a lighter blue coloration than the #92 card. Along with the common condition obstacles associated with the issue, both Gehrig cards often suffer from a general lack of eye-appeal from subpar focus and color. While these two Gehrig cards are not quite as popular as the two from the 1934 Goudey set, they are keys to the set and have been, arguably, underappreciated for some time. From his first full season in 1927 through 1932, Gehrig posted RBI totals of 175, 142, 126, 174, 184 and 151. Not even Babe Ruth himself could match Gehrig in that regard. |
Ok cool ! Maybe I’m thinking the 33 Low Number 53 Ruth, I always felt that was the hardest of the 4 in series to find nice.
|
Gehrig usually batted 4th. There was another darn good hitter batting 3rd, maybe helped Gehrigs RBI numbers.
|
Quote:
|
3 Attachment(s)
every thread needs a card, or cards in this case.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
https://luckeycards.com/r316gehrig.jpg |
As my friend Pete Lalos said to me when we were discussing oddball many many years ago, sometimes the only thing rarer than the supply is the demand.
|
Leon - super nice slabbed Gehrig.
|
That's a great one Peter
Quote:
|
Quote:
https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...-Alexander.jpg |
Leon, your R316 Kashin premium photo is gorgeous!
|
Quote:
|
Neither one of those Goudeys looks like 8's. #92 has bends/dings on both bottom corners and #160 is o/c.
#160 price seemed fine, 3x the last sales in 2019. But the Caramel sold for the same as 2019, that makes no sense. And #92 price is ridiculous, another 8 sold in May for $84k. I am not a pre war collector so someone please explain (1) why such a difference between the two Goudeys and (2) why the Caramel went so cheap. Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:07 AM. |