![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
IF this card is authentic, we have a new discovery to our hobby. I believe it is the first E98 with an Orange Background to be found with an Old Put stamped back. Collectors of the past at one time believed that all Old Put stamped E98s came only with a red background. We now know that there are 5 documented and pictured examples of E98s with a blue background. Well if this example that I now own is authentic, then we have one with an orange background as well as the reds and blues known. I'm 99% sure that this card and the stamp on the back is authentic. I have talked with Pete C. who also specializes in E98s, and he feels that this card is authentic as well after discussing its background with the seller.
The card itself- The thickness, size, and feel of the card feels correct to me and I have handeled easily at least 200 E98s in my years of collecting them. The colors are correct- front of the card, name on front, and the checklist on the back. I feel that this card is 100% an E98. The Back Stamp- The color is correct. Old Puts vary on the richness and darkness of the purple stamp. For example- Pete's Wagner has a deep, dark purple color, Leon's Bresnahan has a faded purple, while mine such as the Young and Brown have an average purple look like the one on this Davis. The font on every letter is correct in size and the vein look of the purple in the letters is similiar to others. Even the T matches other Old PUts in which if you look carefully it gets skinnier as it goes up to the cross bar in T. I'm 99% sure this is an authentic stamp. Of course, I don't have anyway to test it or look at it the way a TPG might. The Kicker!- Here's the only problem and complication to this card in my opinion.- It's Laminated! I know in the 80s many collectors laminated their cards for protection. Why? Not sure. I gues it was a craze, sort of like schelacking an autographed ball to preserve it. Some might argue that it is fake and they laminated it to cover up a fake stamp. I don't buy it because it's a Davis that is damaged and would only grade a 10 or A anyway. If you were going to fake an Old Put and try to seal it somehow with laminate to keep it from being authenticated, wouldn't you do it with a more expensive card/player? A couple questions for board members out there. 1. Do you think it is an authentic Old PUt Back? 2. Is there any way to get the laminate off without damaging the card. 3. Would SGC grade it AUTHENTIC with the laminate on it. I know they grade cards with scotch tape on them, so why not laminate? Thanks for any thoughts on this New Discovery. Tim Kindler Last edited by Tim Kindler; 02-05-2014 at 09:25 PM. |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Modest Discovery in my collection (T206 back) | TobaccoKing4 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 11-29-2011 07:43 AM |
Sweet Cap back wet transfer on front of card with Sovereign back | sesop | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 06-25-2009 01:09 PM |
I can't hold it in anymore ...... A NEW HOBBY DISCOVERY - Don F of SCD please help | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 46 | 11-09-2008 09:01 PM |
New discovery of Old Mill Double Bars Overprint Back | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 17 | 08-08-2008 09:33 AM |
New Discovery - New E121-Like Back Variation Found! | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 21 | 07-21-2008 08:49 PM |