W516-2-1 Real or Fake?

[rdwyer]

I dunno. Not familiar with strip cards. Is this real?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by rdwyer

I dunno. Not familiar with strip cards. Is this real?

Not a fan. It looks sort of washed out.
Here is a scan I stole from the world wide web...

[rdwyer]

Got this picture off of CardTarget.

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by rdwyer

I dunno. Not familiar with strip cards. Is this real?

Speaking of those Babe Ruth Strip Cards, why are there so many reverse-images like the one the OP has shared and why are sellers of such cards never mentioning that?

Certainly, EVERYONE knew and still knows Babe was a Lefty!

I guess strip cards were the bottom of the barrel when quality control was involved, which is how I have always viewed them.

.

[rdwyer]

Here's a better picture.

[Mase]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

Speaking of those Babe Ruth Strip Cards, why are there so many reverse-images like the one the OP has shared and why are sellers of such cards never mentioning that?

Certainly, EVERYONE knew and still knows Babe was a Lefty!

I guess strip cards were the bottom of the barrel when quality control was involved, which is how I have always viewed them.

.

I believe from what I've learned when I was searching the cards I found earlier this spring. The reverse image is a second series , even the copyright symbols are backwards. The ones I found were w516-1 they have the correct image. Also the boxing w521-1
These are in the pre war auction with the rest of the sports in this find at Birmingham auctioneers

Sent from my XT1710-02 using Tapatalk

[rdwyer]

So is this good or fake?

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by rdwyer

Got this picture off of CardTarget.

Personally it looks like a blurry color copy that was made of the card that was shown on Card Target...the registration and other details seem to be a match.

Brian

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by rdwyer

Here's a better picture.

No, it's really not.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by swarmee

No, it's really not.

LOL, the first picture of the fake was better!!

[rdwyer]

It's my iPhone that's blurring the pictures. Here's a scan from my scanner.

[Throttlesteer]

These strip cards tend to lack the QC of their tobacco and candy counterparts. But, i'm leaning towards this one being legit.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Throttlesteer

These strip cards tend to lack the QC of their tobacco and candy counterparts. But, i'm leaning towards this one being legit.

I am still going with "no go" on this one. The back looks to have fake staining too. But maybe I am wrong, I have been before.

[Throttlesteer]

Originally Posted by Leon

I am still going with "no go" on this one. The back looks to have fake staining too. But maybe I am wrong, I have been before.

I just did a little digging and I'm flipping my vote. The W516-2-1 had deeper color and contrast. Also, the centering and near-perfect cut are a bit suspect. There are also a few examples of reprints floating around that look all too similar. So, Leon is probably right again.

[rdwyer]

Is it worth $50 to have graded? I'm getting a lot of yes & no from elsewhere. Would microscope pictures help?

[Throttlesteer]

I would hold off. Look familiar?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/322862522611

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Personally it looks like a blurry color copy that was made of the card that was shown on Card Target...the registration and other details seem to be a match.

I would say no to grading. If you look close at the Card Target card and your card, not only is the registration suspiciously exactly the same, there are various marks that are duplicated on both cards as well.

And being a strip card junkster, the faded and blurred look just doesn't look right.

Brian

[rdwyer]

Brian: I think you're correct. It has many of the same marks, etc as the one from CardTarget.

[Throttlesteer]

Check the completed items on Ebay for Ruth W516-1. They're identified incorrectly, but someone was selling 70-count lots of these.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by rdwyer

Is it worth $50 to have graded? I'm getting a lot of yes & no from elsewhere. Would microscope pictures help?

That or a high res scan. 600 dpi is enough to see plenty of detail. I suspect that at that resolution you'll see a dot pattern in the border that shouldn't be there. If it's there, the entire thing was likely printed on a computer printer, cardboard color and all.

[rdwyer]

600 dpi

[glchen]

I don't think it's good either. It's too faded. It looks like one of those reprints where they try to make it look old. One thing I try to do when I am unsure whether it is good or not is to see what else that seller has. If he has other cards of less popular players from the same set, there's more of a chance it is authentic. If not, then much less of a chance that it's good. Here's mine.

[CobbSpikedMe]

The thing that makes me feel it's not real is the fact that the back is not the same color as the borders on the front. That's a sign that the borders could have been printed when the rest of the card front was printed and they don't match the actual color of the paper stock anymore. Just a thought.