This is not Uncataloged

[oldjudge]

https://m.ebay.com/itm/1887-N172-Old...wAAOSwNchaJxK0

Not sure why seller thinks it is. This is pose three in the Old Judge book--pictured and all.

[greco827]

Would SGC or PSA even slab it with a grade rather than an "A" if it weren't cataloged?

[jcmtiger]

Maybe he thinks its uncataloged because the ad is cut off at bottom?

Joe

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

https://m.ebay.com/itm/1887-N172-Old...wAAOSwNchaJxK0

Not sure why seller thinks it is. This is pose three in the Old Judge book--pictured and all.

Don't know if it is the case here, but I have seen some people assume that if the particular pose isn't pictured with a particular year format that it wasn't known. They don't seem to realize that posting pictures of every pose with every possible year format would be too large a task (not that getting a picture of nearly every pose wasn't already large enough).

I believe some of these people probably didn't even read the book and just use the picture guide (and probably the rare cards guide) and ignore any of the very informative text.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by bn2cardz

Don't know if it is the case here, but I have seen some people assume that if the particular pose isn't pictured with a particular year format that it wasn't known. They don't seem to realize that posting pictures of every pose with every possible year format would be too large a task (not that getting a picture of nearly every pose wasn't already large enough).

I believe some of these people probably didn't even read the book and just use the picture guide (and probably the rare cards guide) and ignore any of the very informative text.

Yes, looking at pictures only would suggest lots of uncataloged poses. Not so good. And as far as ads being cut off, I don't think this one was...but it was accounted for that way by the TPG.