Opinions wanted on card authenticity...

[bobbyw8469]

Originally Posted by Econteachert205

Card is no good in my opinion

What is funny to me is that the vast majority of people on this board think the card is fake. By a wide margin. The majority of people across the street think the card is real. Hmmmmmmmmmm. Any more thoughts?

[Leon]

It's a toss up to me. I actually think the card might be good and has taken on bad characteristics of the scan. If it looked that way with a real good scan, then definitely fake.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

What is funny to me is that the vast majority of people on this board think the card is fake. By a wide margin. The majority of people across the street think the card is real. Hmmmmmmmmmm. Any more thoughts?

I think the people across the street are fake.

[pencil1974]

If they are made of cardboard and you can figure out the year of the fake people there may be a buyer out there for them. Just pop a PSA flip rejection beside them and let the bidding begin.

[drcy]

I'm surprised many people on the other board would say looks real (I understand if people said they didn't know, for example if they don't collect Bowmans), because the front image obviously looks bad. The only reason why I think people would deduce it's real is the flip.

Maybe people who voted real on the other board don't collect Bowmans, but made a guess because there was a chatboard poll. Doesn't mean they were betting their house on it, just making a guess for a chatboard poll.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by drcy

I'm surprised people would say looks real (I understand if people said they didn't know, for example if they don't collect Bowmans), because the front image obviously looks bad. The only reason why I think people would deduce it's real is the flip.

The card looks bad, period. However, I have seen many, many times where a card looks bad due to a bad picture or scan and it wasn't bad. That is the only reason I would say I don't know, as it obviously doesn't look legit.

[vintagetoppsguy]

The people that are saying it looks bad are basing their opinion on the quality of the image. If there is something else they're basing it on, please let me know what you're seeing that I am missing.

I say it's good based on the characteristics of the card - I'm not even considering the quality of the image.

To me, just the tape that's on there is at least 40-50 years old. You can tell that by how yellow it is.

Edited to add: If someone were going to try the real flip/fake card trick, wouldn't they do it with a much better card in order to try and get more money from the scam?

[conor912]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

The people that are saying it looks bad are basing their opinion on the quality of the image. If there is something else they're basing it on, please let me know what you're seeing that I am missing.

I say it's good based on the characteristics of the card - I'm not even considering the quality of the image.

To me, just the tape that's on there is at least 40-50 years old. You can tell that by how yellow it is.

Edited to add: If someone were going to try the real flip/fake card trick, wouldn't they do it with a much better card in order to try and get more money from the scam?

Could 30 year old tape look like that? Just asking, since this set was reprinted in the 80's.

[bobbyw8469]

I don't like that fact that the back has an "aged/stained/dirty" look on the reverse, and the front has a washed out look with nary a stain in sight. Those defects are not complimentary to each other. If the card is "stained" that way on the back, then it should look that way on the front. It is as though the card is trying too hard to look "old".

[TNP777]

The aged tape puts me in the "it's real" camp. Can that be faked as well? I suppose so. I think it'd be much harder to pull off, though.