Black swamp Cy Young

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by steve B

I don't want to take this too far off the topic of the thread, and waited some time before posting what I did.

For those with no interest in modern stuff the short tale is this.

There's a handful of 89 Fleer Ripken errors that are very different from a normal 89 fleer card. On the site linked there are some good closeup scans and links to two different opinions about the odd card. One that lists a few reasons why it's fake, the other looks at it a bit more technically and reaches the opposite conclusion.

I'm ambivalent about the card. Some of the points that are made concluding it's fake are good ones. But the overall list has some errors of a technical nature that at least to me make it less credible.
There are a few things in the analysis that concludes it's real that I find convincing.

I wouldn't say that either analysis is a home run. I'd also say that at the moment I think the card is probably fake, but not as poor a fake as it's claimed to be. And I can easily see it passing at any grading company.
There are a few things that would convince me either way, but I haven't seen either addressed yet by anyone.

If I was doing the authenticating/grading I'd decline slabbing it pending more information.

I'd be happy to discuss the Ripken in detail over in the postwar section. (Or by email) I don't think it's productive or desirable to continue that discussion here.


Steve B

Steve,

I don't feel that we took the thread of topic, it kind of drifted of topic on its own when others questioned the authenticity of the Black Swamp cards.

One member commented, "I'm not sure a good counterfeit wouldn't get by a tpg" and then another member added to that, "I have a friend that sent in 2 counterfeit cards that both came back as PSA 9's."

That's when Glyn commented, "Sorry I do not believe you about your friend..." basically calling the guy a liar. The member posted a link showing the differences between a real card and a counterfeit along with a picture of the counterfiet in a PSA slab.

Instead of apologizing to the member for calling him a liar, Glyn followed up by saying, "I do not believe they have knowingly put fake cards on holders." Well, nobody ever said they knowingly did it, but regardless, they did it.

The original question (comment) was, would a good counterfeit get by a TPG? It was proven so. That said, the era of the card shouldn't matter to prove or disprove the question. It's either a yes or a no.

Last, I have included a scan of the counterfeit (left) with a scan of a real graded card (right). How can you say there is no difference? All you have to do is look at the left and right borders of the picture. See how the picture is cropped on the counterfeit and you see more of the picture on the real card? I'll ask the question again, "What more 'proof' do you need?"

[tschock]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Last, I have included a scan of the counterfeit (left) with a scan of a real graded card (right). How can you say there is no difference? All you have to do is look at the left and right borders of the picture. See how the picture is cropped on the counterfeit and you see more of the picture on the real card? I'll ask the question again, "What more 'proof' do you need?"

David,

First, I am not saying you are incorrect in the Ripken instance regarding the fake and cropping, but cropping variances alone are not proof of fake cards in other instances. I believe the 1963 Topps (along with other issues as well) have quite a bit of cropping variations of what is displayed within the border.

Cropping differences are definitely something to look for, but I just wanted to point out that these differences alone are not a validation of a counterfeit in all cases.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Steve,

I don't feel that we took the thread of topic, it kind of drifted of topic on its own when others questioned the authenticity of the Black Swamp cards.

One member commented, "I'm not sure a good counterfeit wouldn't get by a tpg" and then another member added to that, "I have a friend that sent in 2 counterfeit cards that both came back as PSA 9's."

That's when Glyn commented, "Sorry I do not believe you about your friend..." basically calling the guy a liar. The member posted a link showing the differences between a real card and a counterfeit along with a picture of the counterfiet in a PSA slab.

Instead of apologizing to the member for calling him a liar, Glyn followed up by saying, "I do not believe they have knowingly put fake cards on holders." Well, nobody ever said they knowingly did it, but regardless, they did it.

The original question (comment) was, would a good counterfeit get by a TPG? It was proven so. That said, the era of the card shouldn't matter to prove or disprove the question. It's either a yes or a no.

Last, I have included a scan of the counterfeit (left) with a scan of a real graded card (right). How can you say there is no difference? All you have to do is look at the left and right borders of the picture. See how the picture is cropped on the counterfeit and you see more of the picture on the real card? I'll ask the question again, "What more 'proof' do you need?"

Yes, the pictures are cropped differently.

But remember we're talking about a card that has what? at least 3-4 different corrected versions. And in a set where another card has several different versions to cover up a billboard that shouldn't have been shown.
Fleer also used multiple printing plants during that time, as did Donruss and Topps. There are so many differences it's nearly impossible to track them all. (Almost like T206 )

So different cropping alone isn't enough to condemn the card.

It's different enough that I'd need something more concrete wither way.

The dissenting opinion from the same site is here.
http://www.billripken.com/mystery/mystery1b/report.html

I can't tell if you only read the one opinion, in which case you're missing a few bits of information. Or if you read both and disregarded one that didn't match your opinion of TPG. Either is fine, but I have less respect for disregarding something that doesn't match what you want to hear.

None of which makes the card real or fake.
It does mean that it's debatable.
And for that I wouldn't have slabbed it.

It's odd that there's only 5 or 6 known. Maybe there are really hundreds, and they're lost in the millions of other Ripkens, but that's very unusual for a counterfeit. Nearly all of the ones produced during that time were produced by the hundreds if not thousands.
And I don't believe it was printed on a photo printer from a photoshopped scan.
If someone has a scanner that can duplicate the detail shown in the other report I linked to above they wouldn't have any reason to use photoshop to rearrange the entire front of the card. They could simply use the detailed scan and have it appear identical.

If you want, I'll gladly go into detail about where both opinions are weak, but I do think we should take that discussion somewhere else.

I'll even start the thread over in the post 1980 area if you want. Or anyone else for that matter, does anyone want to discuss 89 Fleer in detail?


I would also agree that TPG has slabbed fakes. It's bound to happen on occasion, maybe with the Ripken, certainly with Fro-Joys.

The sheer number of people who saw the E98s before slabbing and after who know cards very well and see no problems with them makes me think the black swamp cards are just fine.

Steve B

[bnorth]

Link to Bill Ripken PSA 9 discussion. http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=175607