Some of the mysteries and myths surrounding the most famous card in the hobby.

[steve B]

I only have one T card I might be able to trace back.
And that's assuming I still have the auction reciept somewhere. (It was a heap card in an auction of what was supposedly an original collection that included a Wagner. )

I do think very convincing fakes could be made, but it would be very difficult to make one that would survive serious examination.

Even a great fake may not really succeed.

Back early -mid 80s I was hanging out at my LCS, and they handed me a 51 Mantle and just said be careful with this, it's not ours. ANs tell me what you think.
Very nice card, today would get a decently high grade, maybe 8? Maybe better.
But after a while I handed it back saying that it was really great looking, but also fake.
It had been to several other dealers, plus the local guys, and that was the opinion of everyone. A wonderful fake. Odd thing was, nobody could say why.

So either someone shopped a very very well done fake 51 Bowman around with no takers, or a lot of experienced dealers passed on an incredible card.

[Lorewalker]

The Wagner is obviously an important card but as has been alluded to by a few, at least, who back then paid attention to this stuff like we do now? I doubt many thought it was going to be important.

This example only became a NM-MT example in recent years, due to the trimming that Mastro did. Prior to that it was simply a Wagner that was in better shape than most but had an irregular cut which was apparent to everyone who owned or saw it, if I have followed this correctly. Not sure back in the day that makes it any more remarkable than one that was mangled.

If what Greg wrote is correct, that only a few Wagner's have their complete chain of ownership traced, then it is really not a big deal that this Wagner cannot be traced? In my opinion it does not make it any less suspect of being legit.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

If what Greg wrote is correct, that only a few Wagner's have their complete chain of ownership traced, then it is really not a big deal that this Wagner cannot be traced? In my opinion it does not make it any less suspect of being legit.

We should be able too settle this, using a logical evidentiary basis.

Here's 47 known Wagners: https://t206resource.com/Wagner-Gallery.html

Which of these can anyone trace their history all the way back to where they were in 1909? What is our provenance documentation for these, if any, that we can?

Are all the others, or all 47 if none can be actually traced, fakes?

[RCMcKenzie]

The reason people are asking where the guy found it is because of the high grade. See the Black Swamp Find. There should be a quaint story behind the card's discovery. Flea market in the 1980's does not sound reasonable to me.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by RCMcKenzie

The reason people are asking where the guy found it is because of the high grade. See the Black Swamp Find. There should be a quaint story behind the card's discovery. Flea market in the 1980's does not sound reasonable to me.

I think the logical assumption is that the card did not exist as a single card much before Ray possessed it. It likely was cut off of a printer's scrap or a salesman sample. That could explain why Ray was vague. Not that he was vague because there was someone printing these. If they had printed them in the 1950s why have we not seen more of them? Seems like a lot of effort to do a one off.

And by the way, there are far too many collectors who think the BS find consists of counterfeit cards or at least that was their belief once the find was made public.

[Casey2296]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

And by the way, there are far too many collectors who think the BS find consists of counterfeit cards or at least that was their belief once the find was made public.

Even if the BSF is genuine and I'm not saying they aren't, 100+ year old cards just don't look right in pristine condition.

[G1911]

I cannot see any logic in this card having to be traced back to 1909, when no other Wagner is held to that standard (because then all or almost all would be fake). Treating it different because that is the only way to justify the outcome people evidently want is not reason. If the highest grade Wagner must be held to a different standard (which is of course, not reasonable in the first place; one of any group of surviving items will be the nicest), then that standard is still not even applicable to this card, an altered card (for which the evidence led to a conviction in criminal court). Even if we just call it the best anyways, if we toss it out as a fake the current #2 becomes the nicest. Can it's provenance be traced back to 1909? Is it fake if it cannot? What will be the justification this time for why this card and this card alone is to be held to a different standard, uniquely made up because there is no actual evidence?

I do not know where this was found; Sevchuk's testimony is evidence, he was the dealer and deeply involved. It ain't a lot of evidence. It was not so long ago that it is necessarily lost to time. This was a good and reasoned question, to see if we can produce any evidence here for any outcome. Thus far we've got 1) a conspiracy theory that appears to reject evidence at a conceptual level and 2) an untruth. If the answer is "we got nothing else", then that's the answer. Juicy BS being invented hurts, not helps.

[Peter_Spaeth]

There are a number of people still among us, including some with great expertise, who have seen it unslabbed. Has any one of them suggested it didn't look like an authentic T206? This is aside from the issue of being sheet cut trimmed blah blah.

Unsubstantiated rumors of 1950s reprints do not for me shift the burden of proof here. But Corey, how in your estimation would one forensic test it without damaging it?