Help with '28 Ruth Candy...
 

Posted By: <b>Dave S</b><p>I know some of these came with blank backs. I also know they're widely counterfeited. But haven't handled any before to really tell...real or fake?? Appears and feels authentic, but need help here..Opinions? <br />Measures 1 7/8" x 4"<br /><br /><br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1202530753.JPG"> <br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1202530813.JPG">

Help with '28 Ruth Candy...
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I have handled numerous fakes and even more real ones. As we know these came on 2 distinctly different kinds of stock, with or without writing on the backs. I have never seen a fake one look like this one you posted. If I was guessing from the scan I would say it looks real. Generally speaking the picture and letters are much more grainy looking on the fake ones than on this one....Does it have the feel of 80 yr old paper? That is one of the ways I use to tell fakes in this series.....Take an E121 or E120, feel the paper between your forefinger and thumb, do the same with this candy card....if they feel the same most likely it's good....(also check for uneven gloss, which is almost impossible to fake) regards

Help with '28 Ruth Candy...
 

Posted By: <b>Martin Neal</b><p>For everybody's information, I have seen a fake one slabbed. I can't remember which grading company, but it had been pried open and a fake Ruth slipped in. It was very hard to tell at first glance that the slab had been tampered with. Just a heads up, inspect those slabs carefully if you are purchasing a vintage card that has been known to have been reprinted.

Help with '28 Ruth Candy...
 

Posted By: <b>Dave S</b><p>Appreciate the replies. I thought you dabbled with 'em Leon. I was under the impression SGC wouldn't slab these (like Fro-Joy's), but checked the website and see they will. Off it'll go Monday. Thx again.

Help with '28 Ruth Candy...
 

Posted By: <b>cmoking</b><p>Yours looks like this "low-quality" one that I have:<br /><br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/kingyao/baberuth/websize/1928%20George%20Ruth%20Candy%204%20Blank%20Back%20 PSA%202.jpg"><br /><br /><br />but not as clear as this "high-quality" one:<br /><br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/kingyao/baberuth/websize/1928GeorgeRuthCandy4SGC50HighGrade.jpg"><br /><br /><br />From talking to others, my current opinions are:<br /><br />I believe the "high quality one" is definitely real. FWIW, both REA and Sloate had these cards in SGC holders in their auctions. I have also been told by a prominent collector (I'm not sure if he wants to be named) that one of his elder relatives actually collected these cards as a kid, and it looks like the high quality ones.<br /><br />I believe the "low quality one" may be real or may be fake. I know some knowledgable guys have told me they think it is probably real, but they are not sure. Other guys have told me they suspect they are fake, but they are not sure either. <br /><br />If the low quality one is fake, one thing I am pretty sure of is that it is not a direct copy from the high quality one. The print is too different. Notice the "The" under "4" - they aren't in the same spot. That doesn't mean its real, it could still be a fake or reprint years after the fact. I'm just saying if it is fake, it isn't a copy from the "high quality one".<br /><br />One theory that I think has a chance of being true (or maybe I am just hoping it is true since I own both low and high quality ones) is that these cards were printed in the two different ways (maybe Leon was the guy that mentioned that theory to me, I forget who it was, apologies)...and distributed in different ways and/or different places. Here is the back of the high quality one:<br /><br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/kingyao/baberuth/websize/1928GeorgeRuthCandy2SGC60HighGradeBack.jpg"><br /><br />This back shows "Cleveland". I've heard some people mention they have seen backs that show "San Francisco", I can't remember if I've seen them, if I did. Possibly they decided to stop the promotion and thus issued the low quality one without the back. Or they went cheap and just issued them on different stock, lower image. Or they are fakes. Also, notice that SGC has graded a few #1s through #5s, but no #6s. Maybe the company didn't issue many #6s so that few could get the complete set for a redemption. Or maybe the ones that existed were redeemed and then destroyed or thrown out once they were sent in. This also leads to another thing about the low-quality ones - maybe the #6 card for the low-quality one isn't tough to find (compared to the other cards) because there was no redemption issue. Just a thought. <br /><br />I also know I've seen other lower-quality cards that are even lower-quality than the low-quality ones. Possibly (again, maybe I am only clinging on to this possibility) the "even-lower-quality" ones are fakes off of the low-quality ones. <br /><br />PSA won't grade these anymore, either of the low or the high quality ones. For whatever reason, they are not comfortable they can identify fakes from real ones. They even killed the registry for this particular set. <br /><br />I am not sure, but I do think SGC won't grade the low quality ones. I hope you have luck with it, if they grade yours, that wouldn't bode well for mine.

Help with '28 Ruth Candy...
 

Posted By: <b>cmoking</b><p>Here are the two #3 cards next to each other. Notice the lower quality one has more space between the boy's shoulder/arm and the line than the high quality one. Again, I don't think that's proof that the low-quality one isn't a fake, but it seems to be good supporting evidence that it is legit.<br /><br /><br /><img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/kingyao/baberuth/websize/1928%20George%20Ruth%20Candy%203%20Blank%20Back%20 PSA%204.jpg"> <img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/kingyao/baberuth/websize/1928GeorgeRuthCandy3SGC70HighGrade.jpg">

Help with '28 Ruth Candy...
 

Posted By: <b>cmoking</b><p>I just looked up the set on Old Cardboard's site. <a href="http://www.oldcardboard.com/e/e2/ruth-candy/ruth-candy.asp?cardsetID=906" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.oldcardboard.com/e/e2/ruth-candy/ruth-candy.asp?cardsetID=906</a><br /><br /> They have a #2 card with an ad back with different wording than the one I showed. That doesn't bode well for the blank backs. <br /><br /><img src="http://www.oldcardboard.com/e/e2/ruth-candy/ruth-candy-back90.jpg">

Help with '28 Ruth Candy...
 

Posted By: <b>Dave S</b><p>King...tremendously helpful and informative. I notice on your #3 card (as well as the #4)that same difference with type locations under the number. Interesting..and strange!<br />Thanks again for your insight...

Help with '28 Ruth Candy...
 

Posted By: <b>fkw</b><p>They have 3 backs...<br /><br />blank<br />San Francisco address<br />Cleveland address<br /><br />I see what you mean about the different wording on the Cleveland back. I never knew that. Wonder is the SF back has 2 variations too.

Help with '28 Ruth Candy...
 

Posted By: <b>1880nonsports</b><p>in that the grading companies one relies on - won't grade a standard issue known to the hobby. Most notably it implies they are either unable to confirm what are real original examples upon which to apply OBJECTIVE AND SCIENTIFIC PRINCILES and subsequently compare to a submitted card or that they are unable to determine for whatever reason what is original and what isn't. Maybe it's worse than that - and a grading service is offering more of a subjective grade than an object one when they grade our cards. The whole thing scares me. I like the second look if I'm spending big money - prefer they knew more than me and used TOOLS. Otherwise I do fine by myself most of the time. I REALLY like this series and the fro-joys. I would ABSOLUTELY chase both sets if there weren't so many questions. Lew helped me once with a Fro-Joy question years ago after I bought one from an auction out of PA in SCD that I think might have evolved into CC. It wasn't real - I hadn't paid much - but it left a bad tatste in my mouth......

Help with '28 Ruth Candy...
 

Posted By: <b>fkw</b><p>Here is a #6 with a SF back.<br /><br /><img src="http://centuryoldcards.com/images/1928ghruth_6.jpg"> <img src="http://centuryoldcards.com/images/1928ghruth_6b.jpg"><br /><br /><img src=http://members.aol.com/canofprimo/ruthcandyfakeauthentic.jpg><br />This type of fake (on left) has a smaller number and "Swats" instead of "swats.", also the photo area is cropped.