N403 Yum Yum Welch Pitching

[chalupacollects]

To me sounds like Beckett went the extra step putting it under a microscope to verify paper composition where SGC didn't. Also with the fading and wear, could be some chemical reaction between elements of ink and paper in the book and with the card... Also where the book was stored for over 125 years may factor in also...

[oldjudge]

I absolutely no faith in Beckett knowing anything about 19th century cards. SGC has graded enough of these cards so that they should know what they are talking about.

[Ricky]

If I had a history of sending a lot of cards to SGC for grading, before I accepted a counterfeit ruling, I'd want to hear from them why they graded it that way. It sounds as though Beckett applied some science to their determination. Certainly, for the amount of money and business that you give SGC, an explanation could be warranted in a unique case like this.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

I absolutely no faith in Beckett knowing anything about 19th century cards. SGC has graded enough of these cards so that they should know what they are talking about.

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

How do you know that SGC did not "go the extra mile"? Even if they did not "go the extra mile" it would shock me if they got it wrong on a counterfeit 19th century card. I assume they have graded more than PSA. I would guess this is the first Beckett has graded. Not saying they are wrong but SGC is the expert in this area.

It's a good thing it wasn't a signed card.... SGC's got a great track record of "authenticating" signatures on older cards....

Edited to add - it looks like the pictures/scans are not the same but we've seen where different scanners and settings provide a different image of the same type of cards.

[Tao_Moko]

Leon - have you considered letting an authenticator of documents review it? I would think that they could give you a more professional analysis of the stock and ink. Baseball cards are infants in the realm of ink on paper. http://www.cohascodpc.com/appraisal.html

[Fred]

Eric, in this case it's an albumen photo adhered to stock.

[Tao_Moko]

Originally Posted by Fred

Eric, in this case it's an albumen photo adhered to stock.

Right.

[oldjudge]

Leon-Bring it to the National. I will be able to tell you if it's good.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by chalupacollects

To me sounds like Beckett went the extra step putting it under a microscope to verify paper composition where SGC didn't. Also with the fading and wear, could be some chemical reaction between elements of ink and paper in the book and with the card... Also where the book was stored for over 125 years may factor in also...

How do you know that SGC did not "go the extra mile"? Even if they did not "go the extra mile" it would shock me if they got it wrong on a counterfeit 19th century card. I assume they have graded more than PSA. I would guess this is the first Beckett has graded. Not saying they are wrong but SGC is the expert in this area.

[ccre]

It doesn't look good to me. I hope I'm wrong.