Fake Shoeless Joe Sporting News

[Eric72]

Paul,

I do not doubt your ability to spot a fake here; however, I am curious as to what the red flag was. After digging through an old guide, I saw a picture of an M101 from 1916 which lacked an apostrophe in the line of text on the back which reads, "FIVE CENTS THE COPY." Granted, this listing read, "1916 Sporting News M-101-4" and the ebay auction is titled, "1918 M101-5." That said, something caught your eye and I would like to know what it was.

Please let me know. Thanks, in advance, for your help.

Best Regards,

Eric

[CobbSpikedMe]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the large spacing between the black border and the actual image a dead give away here?

Thanks.

AndyH

[Shoeless Moe]

Originally Posted by Eric72

Paul,

I do not doubt your ability to spot a fake here; however, I am curious as to what the red flag was. After digging through an old guide, I saw a picture of an M101 from 1916 which lacked an apostrophe in the line of text on the back which reads, "FIVE CENTS THE COPY." Granted, this listing read, "1916 Sporting News M-101-4" and the ebay auction is titled, "1918 M101-5." That said, something caught your eye and I would like to know what it was.

Please let me know. Thanks, in advance, for your help.

Best Regards,

Eric

Not sure the term for it, but all those lines, the cracking look, I see it all the time on bad reprints. Fake aging. Of course maybe that was due to this card surviving "The Perfect Storm."

[nolemmings]

There are multiple problems with the card's back. Of course, the fact that that card does not exist with that back might also be a clue.

[Eric72]

I found an M101-5 (1915 Sporting News) listing in another guide. The photos still lack the apostrophe shown in the ebay auction. Perhaps I am missing something?

Please know that I am here to learn and would greatly appreciate input from everyone here.

Best Regards,

Eric

[Runscott]

Simply reading his scamster explanation is enough to know it's a fake:

"This card is stiff from the water damage. That said, I must adhere to EBAY rules and say this could be a novelty/reproduction card"

[Bwstew]

I learned the hard way by buying a fake. The black border should be closer to the picture. I think that's correct any way. What I look for now. BW

[nolemmings]

Eric,

Your guide is outdated and flawed. M101-5s do not exist with Sporting News backs. Moreover, you've already noted the forger's puctuation error, and if you were to look at a real TSN back you would see the obvious differences between it and this garbage--check ebay now. Finally, there is the tell-tell gap between frame and photo edge on the front of the card, and it lacks any semblance or remnants of gloss--probably some sort of laser copy of a reprint.

The real version of this card comes up for auction every so often, and you will see that it is an m101-4 Jackson #87. Review archived auctions from any of the major auction houses and you can see from the scans there how different this fake is from the real deal.

[Buythatcard]

Check out the link to "Detecting Card Alterations And Reprints" which will give some good clues to look out for. The space between the border and pic is usually a good indicator.

BTW, the link is at the top of Net54 page.