T206 Wagner partial back. Really Huggins & Scott?

bobbyw8469 · #1 11-05-2013, 10:39 AM

The bottom line is - is anyone here going to bid $5,000 for this $30 card!?!?!?!?!?! I can't wait to see the outcome of this auction!

wonkaticket · #2 11-05-2013, 10:56 AM

Brock, I haven’t typed why its way off as I figured it would be a waste of time as you seem to be way into the fantasy world of belief with the Huggins Team on this. The only argument that Huggins is hanging their hat on is that this card must have been next to the Wagner because of the strip that once belonged to Wagner.

That proof strip is very cool but in no way is a final production sheet clearly that can be seen from the graphic elements missing from the strip.

Using this to assume this is how the sheets were laid out. Let alone make the claim that a factory cut production card has remnants of Wagner’s back is an absolute leap of blind faith at best if you’re a collector. If you’re an auction house with any shred of integrity its downright glorified unfounded bull.

Brock reputable auction companies don’t do stuff like this. You will never see an 18th dynasty Egyptian artifact that looks high-end and might have come from a royal court. Try and tie the item to most likely but not for sure belonging to King Tutankhamun. With some drawn out story about how they have pictures of Lord Carnarvon and Howard Carter in the tomb with a similar item so this one could be Tut’s.

There are countless other little nuances and bits of info taken over the years from collectors who share knowledge much is right here on the board to read. All of these also put further death nails in this cocked up story spun by Huggins & Scott.

Hope this helps….

What a surprise this has ties to Patrick Chan even more reason to run for the hills on this epic yarn.

Leon · #3 11-05-2013, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wonkaticket

What a surprise this has ties to Patrick Chan even more reason to run for the hills on this epic yarn.

Did I miss something? How does this tie to Chan?

wonkaticket · #4 11-05-2013, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josh Wolf

It should also be noted that this card was recently purchased from T206 Museum.

http://t206museum.com/page/store_bkmiscut.html

Josh

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leon

Did I miss something? How does this tie to Chan?

Use the search feature you newbie. (Kidding)

markf31 · #5 11-05-2013, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wonkaticket

Using this to assume this is how the sheets were laid out. Let alone make the claim that a factory cut production card has remnants of Wagner�s back is an absolute leap of blind faith at best if you�re a collector. If you�re an auction house with any shred of integrity its downright glorified unfounded bull.

Brock reputable auction companies don�t do stuff like this.

I agree for the most part with your points here John, however, as I was reading through the thread and forming my own opinion a thought came to mind.

Some of you may venture from time to time over to the memorabilia side, more specifically the game used memorabilia side of not only the board here but of the hobby as well, but some of you may not. My observations are that in general vintage equipment, uniforms and to a degree pre-model bats all (baring rock solid personal provenience) are determined to be "game used" by nothing more than conjecture based on a set of at times very lose criteria.

Outside of personal provenience, its an educated guess at best based on a set of limited available information if a pre war jersey or piece of equipment is in fact game used. Yet, that doesn't prevent auction houses and other companies from authenticating the pieces and labeling them as being genuine game used equipment when they're consigned. They are in fact making a very similar leap of faith with a lot of the vintage pre war "game used" equipment that gets consigned and auctioned. The information available to authenticate these pieces is sparse and pretty limited if not non existent in some cases. Just because a glove matches the type/style used by Ty Cobb, or a pre-model bat matches the kind of bat used by Lou Gehrig does not grantee that Cobb or Gehrig every touched that piece of equipment let alone use it in a game. Yet they can be authenticated as such because they meet a set of limited and sparse qualities and attributes.

I'm not saying this is right or wrong, I'm just stating that the same type of assumptions and leaps of faith are made all the time by auction houses when they auction vintage game used equipment.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
T206 Walter Johnson Portrait /w Scarce Partial Factory 30 Number on Back PSA 3.5	Sean1125	T206 cards B/S/T	12	08-23-2013 11:42 AM
Honus Wagner T206 Piedmont Back	BlueDevil89	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	30	01-10-2013 03:59 PM
t206 Wagner & 350 Piedmont Back	pirates60	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	3	03-11-2011 06:08 AM
T206 Honus Wagner with Chesterfield back? :)	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	4	04-24-2009 07:52 PM
Is that freaking NASA T206 Wagner back?	Archive	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	3	01-17-2002 11:19 AM