![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Tim Newcomb
Or am I missing something? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bob
Tim- You've got me. I think its an E92 blank back as the background color looks "off" from the color of my E90-1 McLean. I have long suspected that PSA's habit of misnaming players and mislabeling sets results from the submitter's mistake on the submission form and they (PSA) just follow what is typed on it. This may be the case here. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dylan
Well someone will be pretty upset if winning a fairly common E92 for the going rate of the E90 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Paul Kaufman
It's an E92 alright. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Judge Dred (Fred)
How does that PSA buyback policy work? Yup, this looks like a prime candidate... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Larry
This E90-1 McLean is my card and I got it graded by SGC first as E90-1 then switched to PSA with same results. I also got another E90-1 McLean with regular back and BOTH have exactly same front image including the name & team at bottom. Are there anybody trying to buy McLean cheaper by brainwashing others not to buy this??? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dave
Larry is probably right here..shouldn't this have waited until after the auction was over? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: dan mckee
Great point Larry, if the fronts are the same and the back is blank, who is to say which E issue it is. I think it could be E90-1 as easily as E92. And it is labeled E90-1 so why not? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: E, Daniel
Definitely a bad discussion to be having WHILE the auction is running. I'd be pissed |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Tim Newcomb
Sorry, but I don't think this should have waited until the auction is over. There's a material issue about the description and the claims made for the card. Calling it to people's attention is no different from posts that question whether an active auction is authentic or a reprint. (This card is not a reprint, I realize, but I do question whether it is what it's claimed to be.) |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Tim- I agree with you, but if you were printing the label what would you call it? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Mark
Funny thing, I have a E90/2 Bemis - Blankback that was labeled as a E92 Dockman; but I have always wondered how is it “matter-of-factly” an E92 and not necessarily an E90? With quality control being what it was during the early 20th century, isn’t it plausible that Blankbacks could come in all E issues? I noticed several E93 Blankback’s have been turning-up lately on the ‘Bay. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Scot Reader
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Scot- I think the grading services have specific policies regarding how to label cards of questionable origin. I think the "Unc." might be what they would choose, but not the other two. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dylan
If you can not with certainty identify which set a card is from then the card should just have a grade and no set designation, it most certainly shouldnt be whatever the psa grader guesses it to be. E92's are far more likely to be blank backed then E90's. And ive found you can not judge an E card by color tone alone. You can look at countless examples where a specific card from one set has several different shades of a color. There's so many things that can darken or lighten or even change the color of a card. I would never trust that as an indicator alone. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barrysloate
Dylan is right. You never see blank backed E90-1's, but do see the occasional E92. Still, they are just guessing. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: E, Daniel
He states, and there is absolutely no reason to not believe him, that the card was originally graded by SGC as an E90-1. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Larry
Hey Tim... To remind you that I was the owner of this blank back McLean. I'm asking you a question... Is it possible that the factory pressing machine broke down or out of ink or plate broke or worker forgot to turned over cardboard after front was printed that makes the backs blank? We all know that old factories don't make perfect cards like today's machines. What about the miscuts, off centers, misspelled, ghost images & missed colors? They all are factory mistakes and it could be anything including blank backs. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: JimB
The E93 blank backs originated from the same source that produced two E93 uncut sheet sets (in panels) that Mastro auctioned off a year or so ago. I would assume there were three sets and the original owner cut up one of the sheets (or more accurately, a partial sheet) into individual cards. To my knowledge, those are the only E93 blank backs known. So each one is unique. I think there were 19 of them total with no duplicates when the group was sold as a lot in Mastro. The winner has just broken up the group to make a little cash. I have been a bit surprised that they have not sold for more. Perhaps it is because t hey all came to the hobby at once and thus did not seem that rare. I think when they fade away into collections, that in the future they will be thought of as quite desirable. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: fkw
Most if not all of the blank backed cards (Ive seen) correspond exactly with the E92 checklist. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: RC McKenzie
That card did pretty well for what the seller described as "an excellent low grade filler". |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: JimB
I don't know if he lurks on this board, but Muskycaptain is a pretty knowledgeable guy when it comes to E cards. I imagine he knew what he was bidding on. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: robert a
Just for the sake of argument... |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Tim Newcomb
I don't mean to perpetuate a controversy since the auction is over but since you asked me directly, here's what I would say to your questions: |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Tim Newcomb
Why the |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Noel
Tim, |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Larry
You make me sounds like a bad seller??? You said "You took advantage of the grading company's decision and advertised that you KNOW what it is." THAT'S A LIE!! I NEVER KNEW IT TIL YOU BOUGHT THIS UP. I DID BOUGHT IT AS A E90-1 IN SGC HOLDER FOR MY SET then I got a better grade one to replace this blank back one. I honestly believe it was E90-1 all the time til now. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
I have collected E90-1 cards since the mid-1980's. I completed a 120 card set and have |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Larry
It's great to hear from someone who collects E90-1's for years like you and I do agree with Tim on error labels but the point we were talking about is which E card it belongs to. Not only PSA but SGC too labeled it as E90-1 which makes me believe it's a E90-1. Been wondering why BOTH PSA & SGC said it's a E90-1 instead of E92? Are the E92's the only ones with B-B??? Any of other E cards have B-B?? More informations would be appreciated since I do collects E90-1's. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: leon
I am not a set collector. Is Miller-fielding (the big glove pose) in E90-1? thanks guys |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
Indeed, Dots Miller is in the E90-1 set with a pix of him with an oversized 5-finger glove. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: leon
The reason I asked (see scan)....also, I have owned several Mclean blank backs..he seems to be a more common blank backed version....Miller fielding is found with the rare red Crofts back too.... |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Tim Newcomb
Hi Larry, |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ted Zanidakis
I have problems with the BB card Grading industry, so even if 4 or 5 Grading Co. looked at your |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Dylan
Did you send the card in with it already in the sgc holder? Perhaps psa just looked at what was on the holder and never really tried to evaluate what set its from. Plus its been brought up many times that psa will place whatever set designation the submitter has written down on the slab without checking if its correct. Either way i dont trust psa to get it right in the slightest. So really all your card has going for it is that ONE grading service said it was an E90, but we haven't seen a scan to prove that it was ever in an sgc holder as an E90, so thats speculation. And SGC is not above making mistakes even though i generally hold them in pretty high esteem. So if thats all you can bring to the table as proof your card is an E90, its pretty safe to assume its an E92(not to mention ive been tracking E90 and collecting the set the last year and never have seen, let alone heard of a blank backed E90) |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Funky Exhibit Auctions | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 53 | 08-22-2008 12:28 PM |
Funky PSA Cobb? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 19 | 12-17-2007 07:35 AM |
E90-1 and PSA holders - calling E90-1 experts | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 11-19-2006 02:11 PM |
E90-1 Tinker psa 5 and E90-1 Sam Crawford PSA 6 for sale | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 1 | 05-06-2005 05:06 PM |
Funky looking Cobb | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 10-17-2002 03:15 PM |