![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
is this card even real?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Looks like a reprint to me. Has a lot of surface wear which makes it tougher to tell but in the legit versions I've seen the letter on his uniform and the bottom border are about the same color. Reprints the letter on his uniform is noticeably lighter than the black line.
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
i dont like the looks of the star studded rectangular box with his name in it.
Maybe it's a flash but the periphery looks odd...almost pasted on? |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
The back has a fair amount of wear as well. I don't think GAI would have even graded that card a 7.5. Looks like a cracked case and switched-out card IMO
__________________
Looking for: Type 1 photos of baseball HOFers N172 Old Judge Portraits Will buy or trade for the above. Check out my cards at: www.imageevent.com/crb972 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Looks like a real card but the top and right side look trimmed therefore it should have received a Auth trimmed in my opinion. I believe that is what PSA and SGC would have graded it that's why it went to GAI.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Minimum bid is $10k, please excuse the banged up holder? No way...
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Why would Goodwin not demand that this card be resubmitted to PSA, SGC, or Beckett before including this in the auction? I can only imagine their reputation would suffer the most if this turns out to be a case in which the current holder has been compromised and the card within has been altered (or is not genuine.)
Best regards, Eric |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Be careful of GAI. There have been several instances where GAI have been sent to other third party graders and have came back as not authentic. I wont touch them personally (even auto cert) with a 10 foot poll.
David |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
That's what I was thinking. I know some GAI stuff is legit, but I'm surprised they would even take something like this on without a changeover to PSA/SGC. Some might think it's overboard, but I wouldn't buy any GAI stuff for anything involving anywhere near that much money.
__________________
T205 (208/208) T206 (520/520) T207 (200/200) E90-1 (120/121) E91A/B/C (99/99) 1895 Mayo (16/48) N28/N29 Allen & Ginter (100/100) N162 Goodwin Champions (30/50) N184 Kimball Champions (37/50) Complete: E47, E49, E50, E75, E76, E229, N88, N91, R136, T29, T30, T38, T51, T53, T68, T73, T77, T118, T218, T220, T225 www.prewarcollector.com |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Maybe it's just my screen. However, there seems to be something unusual going on with the bottom of the black box surrounding Mantle's facsimile autograph. Near the center (again, this is along the bottom) the black line seems to exhibit characteristics of half-tone printing.
Shouldn't the black be solid? |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
http://bbcemporium.com/1952-topps-mi...terfeit-guide/ I think Pete is right in that this card would be downgraded significantly if it had been sent to PSA/SGC - the back is even more obvious to me than the front.
__________________
Herb. ______________________________________________ Successful transactions with: PSACJ, Double-P-Enterprises, RGold, CW, Iron Horse, tiger8mush, dtp717, Hcom24, floyd6294, omegalm1, Baseball Rarities -- among others. Focusing on 1915 Cracker Jacks - high grade or very sharp cards. Please let me know what you have. |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Anyone Who has been active in the hobby for more than a few seconds knows that GAI is suspect. Many of us have purchased GAI cards and have had them turn out fine...but you are rolling the dice for certain.
The facts are the case is beaten to piss. It appears to be over graded...and that the only reason for not reentombing it is because the grade will suffer dramatically. From where I am sitting this does not seem like a very intelligent move for a major auction house...let alone one that is Co-owned by a grading company. Last edited by ullmandds; 05-20-2015 at 04:59 PM. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
It's been withdrawn from the auction.
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Card looks like a real copy that's been trimmed on the top and right side, as some others have mentioned.
That being said, there's one aspect of the card I can't wrap my head around. It's clearly a type B Mantle, and has all the features to go with it, EXCEPT the telltale missing pixel. Despite all the wear on the surface, it's very clear that the missing pixel (which is large and has a distinct shape) is itself "missing" from the card. The fact that there's no missing pixel would be the only reason I have to believe the card is fake. That being said, if it is fake, then it's far and away the best repro I've ever laid my eyes on.
__________________
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. Last edited by poorlydrawncat; 05-20-2015 at 05:42 PM. |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Did someone want to do the "paint shaker" experiment on the GAI holder?
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I get suspicious when... | mintacular | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 6 | 09-10-2011 09:54 PM |
suspicious ebay item | shaunsteig | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 10-04-2010 07:32 AM |
Suspicious eBay seller | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 14 | 03-19-2008 01:09 PM |
Suspicious ....?? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 31 | 07-30-2004 09:21 AM |
Hmmm...suspicious | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 03-15-2002 08:30 PM |