Closing Tonight - Love of the Game Late Summer Premier Auction

[BioCRN]

I was keeping an eye on the fuzzy-looking SGC 4 N172 Bill Hutchinson (Hutchison) and bowed out at $500. Seeing it hammer for $1500 final price was a bit surprising to me.

I overpaid ($390) for a nice looking T200 Fatima Chicago Nationals SGC 2 with a pen mark and glue residue on the back because it's been a couple months since I even spent more than $30 on anything involving the hobby and I really like how the front presents. I display the oversized pieces out in the open and having good front presentation is really important for me.

[oldjudge]

The one that has me scratching my head the most is the signed ‘51 Bowman Mantle. Yes, it’s his rookie card, but the signature is not from when he was a rookie—it’s a sharpie and was probably signed at some show in the 1980s or 1990s. Whoever got it signed could have just as easily gotten a 1968 Mantle signed or his exhibit signed. Speaking of exhibit, I think the signed Mantle exhibit went cheap considering that since it is a ballpoint signature it was probably signed a lot earlier than the 1951 Bowman was. Also, the signature looks a lot nicer on the exhibit.

[oldjudge]

Originally Posted by BioCRN

I was keeping an eye on the fuzzy-looking SGC 4 N172 Bill Hutchinson (Hutchison) and bowed out at $500. Seeing it hammer for $1500 final price was a bit surprising to me.

I overpaid ($390) for a nice looking T200 Fatima Chicago Nationals SGC 2 with a pen mark and glue residue on the back because it's been a couple months since I even spent more than $30 on anything involving the hobby and I really like how the front presents. I display the oversized pieces out in the open and having good front presentation is really important for me.

The Hutchinson was a mislabeled 1890 NL card, a fact that apparently slipped by both the grader and LOTG. In fact, it probably went cheap given its’ scarcity.

[BioCRN]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

The Hutchinson was a mislabeled 1890 NL card, a fact that apparently slipped by both the grader and LOTG. In fact, it probably went cheap given its’ scarcity.

SGC tosses 1889 on almost all their 1890s. They change things so much with labeling and they'll probably correct it at some point...then change it again for some reason a year later.

Here's one of mine labeled like that (not from this auction).