net 54 type collection- PART 3

[Archive]

Posted By: tbob

I guess by your rationale then, those horrific looking e-unc that were offered recently are proofs. There are no known dupes of any players and they are blank back. Why aren't these proof too?>

I have a T206 Chief Bender portrait blank back and I do not think it is a proof. I have owned a T205 Snodgrass blank back and do not think it is a proof. A similar example of either has never appeared but these aren't proofs. I think everyone, other than the handful of collectors who wouldn't believe an e-card was a proof if it jumped up and bit them on the ass or appeared in their mail in a heremetically sealed envelope bearing the date and town, 1911 Camden New Jersey, with a letter of the president of the caramel company documenting the envelope included a printer's proof, has tired of this thread. The point was to share with the board a unique card. I have done that. The naysayers have had their say and will go to their grave denying it is a proof simply because they say so, with no evidence it is not a proof. If you deny, like Scott, that the E96 Lajoie proof which was so authenticated by SGC is a proof, why don't you show me what an E95 or E96 proof looks like. Have you ever seen one? Do you think they do not exist? Do you think the printer just slapped the stock on the press without making sure colors were correct, margins and pictures were correctly aligned, etc.?