T206 Wagner partial back. Really Huggins & Scott?

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

"But it cannot be reasonably said that this is not possibly a partial Honus Wagner."

That is unequivocally the worst equivocal description I have ever read.

Totally agree. It uses double negatives to try to make a positive, without ever saying the positive, which would be:

"But it CAN be reasonably said that this IS possibly a partial Honus Wagner."

Again, just not true.

[Runscott]

I would say that owning this card would be about as exciting as standing next to someone who might have had sex with the most attractive woman on the planet (the assumption being made because he at one time lived next door to her sister).

Boy, the stories I could then tell my friends.

[BobC]

I rarely post and just read the nonsense that goes on with posts like this and get a good laugh. Can't believe I've actually read this entire thread but, having done so, I noticed there are some facts no one has pointed out yet.

As already noted in the thread, supposedly all the sheets with Wagner cards on them were to have been destroyed. If so, that means the Bowerman (and Brown) cards that were next to Wagner would have likewise been destroyed at the same time. The known Wagner cards are all supposed to be hand-cut which, since the Bowerman card in the auction is supposedly machine cut, would rule out the possibility it was actually printed next to a Wagner card on the sheet it originally came from. Still, assume the possibility that somehow the Bowerman card just looks to be machine cut and could have been next to a Wagner.

Are there any known Sweet Caporal backed Wagners that have a misaligned/miscut back on them anything like this Bowerman card? I personally do not know the answer to that but, if there aren't any, then how could there possibly be a Bowerman card with such a miscut/misaligned back that was next to a real Wagner card? You can't have one without the other.

BobC

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by BobC

As already noted in the thread, supposedly all the sheets with Wagner cards on them were to have been destroyed. If so, that means the Bowerman (and Brown) cards that were next to Wagner would have likewise been destroyed at the same time. The known Wagner cards are all supposed to be hand-cut which, since the Bowerman card in the auction is supposedly machine cut, would rule out the possibility it was actually printed next to a Wagner card on the sheet it originally came from.
BobC

Nice, Bob. You just rendered the 'Pony Express' communication theory irrelevant.

[E93]

The silence from Huggins and Scott here is deafening.
JimB

[Sean]

Originally Posted by E93

The silence from Huggins and Scott here is deafening.
JimB

I think that they just accepted the consignor's description of the card (and possibly printed it verbatim) and are now too embarrassed to try to defend it.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by Sean

I think that they just accepted the consignor's description of the card (and possibly printed it verbatim) and are now too embarrassed to try to defend it.

H&S actually put this card on their front page as one of their auction highlights. So even if they just accepted the description of the card from the consignor, IMHO, they're equally at fault for hyping it.

I wonder if Mastro kept the scrap shavings from the trimmed Wagner PSA 8. If he knew just a slice of it could get 5K with this much doubt whether it's even from a Wagner, what would a slice of a genuine Wagner fetch?

[ullmandds]

good point Gary...but I'm guessing they disposed of the "evidence!"

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by E93

The silence from Huggins and Scott here is deafening.
JimB

I'm guessing they were thinking, "This is funny, and no one will bid on it. But, if someone does, then hey, we just got a little richer and some (albeit awful) publicity."

[wonkaticket]

Originally Posted by E93

The silence from Huggins and Scott here is deafening.
JimB

I will say I had a nice call from Bill this evening. He called because he wanted to hear my thoughts on this topic/lot. He was very open in the fact that he didn't know tons on T206's and took the consignors lead and that the consignor presented what looked like a ton of well thought out research.

I happily explained the reasons I felt the card and the claims being made by the consignor were unfounded. I also asked Bill to read this whole thread and not to just take my view on it. Bill's stance was that he needed to read through this thread a bit more to wrap his head around the details shared by all and armed with those details contact his consignor with those findings.

That’s where it left off……thought I would share.

Cheers,

John

[ullmandds]

Yet he knows enough about t206's that he's been collecting miller huggins cards with all the backs for decades...and supposedly was/is hoarding shag shawnessy cards?!?!