Help with Authenticity - Ruth, Mantle, Mays

[redauto5]

Originally Posted by irv

It's hard to tell with your pics and the fact the cards are in cubes, but to me the 52 Topps Mays looks way off.

Same, but not as bad, is the Mathews card.



Curious. Are those cards in recessed cubes or just flat surfaced cubes? If real, and depending on how tight the cubes were screwed down, and assuming they're real, they may only get an "A" if graded due to them being flattened/squished if the cubes are not recessed?



The 56 Mantle also looks suspect to me as well but I can offer no opinion on the others.



Good luck.

Thanks. I think they are flat surface cubes, and yes I've heard PSA especially gives a lot of these cards out of old screw downs A's because the card has been compressed and is now thinner than originally. Does SGC do this as well?

I'm assuming both Mantles, the Mays and the Ruth are fakes at this point. I'm curious on the Mathews, and will remove both the Mays and the Mathews from the screw downs and compare them. The surface feel, smell, card width. He has a few other low grade '52 commons I can compare the Mathews too as well.

It may be safest to assume all the authentic cards in screw downs will only grade A, but man that's a blow to any offer I give him and I want to be fair. Regardless, I'm having a blast trying to figure all this out!

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[irv]

Originally Posted by redauto5

Thanks. I think they are flat surface cubes, and yes I've heard PSA especially gives a lot of these cards out of old screw downs A's because the card has been compressed and is now thinner than originally. Does SGC do this as well?

I'm assuming both Mantles, the Mays and the Ruth are fakes at this point. I'm curious on the Mathews, and will remove both the Mays and the Mathews from the screw downs and compare them. The surface feel, smell, card width. He has a few other low grade '52 commons I can compare the Mathews too as well.

It may be safest to assume all the authentic cards in screw downs will only grade A, but man that's a blow to any offer I give him and I want to be fair. Regardless, I'm having a blast trying to figure all this out!

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

I don't know for sure, but I would assume?

Hopefully Mays and Mathews are real. Both look really nicely centered and that is hard to find, especially with the Mathews. Pricey card, as is Mays.

[JustinD]

Sadly, looks like the person with that collection had more money than skill. Would have been best to stick to graded.

Most of the valuable ungraded looks very fake and bad fakes on some. The 52 Mays is godawful. The Ruth is absolutely fake, as is the 56 Mantle and 52 Mathews. The 53 Mantle is a maybe at best without a better pic as is Payton.

The graded look somewhat good by percentage, but there are a few that need a bit of closer examination. Unfortunately, I have very strong doubts on your Goudey Lou Gehrig not being a reseal, so much looks wrong with it. The graded sport kings look good as does the Gretzky.

It’s a very dangerous mix.

[gonefishin]

Not saying this is the case with your seller, but many times a scam artist will include a couple of authentic, lower valued, cards in the mix to throw you off on the authentication process. Look for all the obvious clues, coloring, format, etc.

If all seems ok, take a bright light and shine it through the back of the card for transparency - no light should come through in the 50s and earlier cards.

Then take a loop, or magnifying device that can magnify up to 100x. Use the loop, or device, and check the print dots on the card. Counterfeit operations, in most cases, cannot duplicate the printing methods of the 40s - 50s. Go on-line and read about modern print dots as compared to print dots in the 50s and earlier.

If it passes all these steps, and they probably won't, you can be about 50-65% sure they are real.

Hope this helps.

P.S. I always walk away from a deal if I find any counterfeits - one bad apple does spoil the bunch for me - unless it is someone that I've known a long time.

[redauto5]

Originally Posted by gonefishin

Not saying this is the case with your seller, but many times a scam artist will include a couple of authentic, lower valued, cards in the mix to throw you off on the authentication process. Look for all the obvious clues, coloring, format, etc.



If all seems ok, take a bright light and shine it through the back of the card for transparency - no light should come through in the 50s and earlier cards.



Then take a loop, or magnifying device that can magnify up to 100x. Use the loop, or device, and check the print dots on the card. Counterfeit operations, in most cases, cannot duplicate the printing methods of the 40s - 50s. Go on-line and read about modern print dots as compared to print dots in the 50s and earlier.



If it passes all these steps, and they probably won't, you can be about 50-65% sure they are real.



Hope this helps.



P.S. I always walk away from a deal if I find any counterfeits - one bad apple does spoil the bunch for me - unless it is someone that I've known a long time.

I'm definitely souring on the deal, but truly believe the seller is not a scammer. His avenue of buying was a mistake. PMed you some details, don't want to divulge any details on a public forum for the sellers privacy. I'm going to go in with as much knowledge as possible and just be honest with him.

I'll definitely get a loupe and a light and will start practicing, thanks for the direction.



Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by gonefishin

...I always walk away from a deal if I find any counterfeits - one bad apple does spoil the bunch for me - unless it is someone that I've known a long time.

This.

If there are counterfeits mixed in, the seller either (a) doesn't know what they're doing or (b) knows exactly what they're doing.

Either scenario is generally bad for a buyer.

[redauto5]

Originally Posted by Eric72

This.



If there are counterfeits mixed in, the seller either (a) doesn't know what they're doing or (b) knows exactly what they're doing.



Either scenario is generally bad for a buyer.

This is a common sense, conservative strategy to make sure one doesn't get burned absolutely. If the seller won't allow me to buy just the cards I'm comfortable with I will walk away. He's giving me every opportunity to figure out what I'm comfortable with which gives me confidence I can figure it out with enough determination. Cheers.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by redauto5

This is a common sense, conservative strategy to make sure one doesn't get burned absolutely. If the seller won't allow me to buy just the cards I'm comfortable with I will walk away. He's giving me every opportunity to figure out what I'm comfortable with which gives me confidence I can figure it out with enough determination. Cheers.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

The strategy to which I made reference is different than what you mention here. You're talking about comfort level. I'm talking about counterfeits.

A fake card is fake, regardless of one's comfort level. If someone is trying to sell a fake, and I've identified the card as fake, I won't deal with them.

Period.

[redauto5]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Sadly, looks like the person with that collection had more money than skill. Would have been best to stick to graded.

Most of the valuable ungraded looks very fake and bad fakes on some. The 52 Mays is godawful. The Ruth is absolutely fake, as is the 56 Mantle and 52 Mathews. The 53 Mantle is a maybe at best without a better pic as is Payton.

The graded look somewhat good by percentage, but there are a few that need a bit of closer examination. Unfortunately, I have very strong doubts on your Goudey Lou Gehrig not being a reseal, so much looks wrong with it. The graded sport kings look good as does the Gretzky.

It’s a very dangerous mix.

Thanks for the detailed examination. I'm bummed on the Mathews, guess I need to add that to the fake list. I will get detailed photos of all the presumed fakes just to put it to bed, and with all the other big ungraded cards looking like fakes I'm assuming the '53 Mantle is as well. Surprised on the Payton but with the trend on this collection I guess I shouldn't be.

The Gehrig breaks my heart that it's even a question. What in particular about it gives you such misgivings? I'll definitely take better pictures of it and will research the frosting/resealing possibility. The SGC slab was created in 2008 and the cert checks out, but obviously it would with a reseal.

I'm glad about the Gretzky. He's got the set, bought it as such. That may end up being by far the most valuable real card.

I feel like I'm wading through a waist deep swamp with gators all around!

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by redauto5

The Gehrig breaks my heart that it's even a question. What in particular about it gives you such misgivings? I'll definitely take better pictures of it and will research the frosting/resealing possibility. The SGC slab was created in 2008 and the cert checks out, but obviously it would with a reseal.

Several items draw curiosity, enough to give me pause. Those older sgc cases open very easily, I have opened one myself just with an accidental drop that separated perfectly. The left side does seem frosty from the photo. The card itself has what looks to be a very unnatural wear pattern, especially on the lower right. Goudeys are not a ultra crisp print, but it seems a little off. That could be the case, just can’t tell from the poor photo and glare. We need a good front and back scan as the back red bleed and text definition will tell plenty.

[bnorth]

The 52 Topps Mays and Mathews look bad to me.

[redauto5]

Originally Posted by JustinD

Several items draw curiosity, enough to give me pause. Those older sgc cases open very easily, I have opened one myself just with an accidental drop that separated perfectly. The left side does seem frosty from the photo. The card itself has what looks to be a very unnatural wear pattern, especially on the lower right. Goudeys are not a ultra crisp print, but it seems a little off. That could be the case, just can’t tell from the poor photo and glare. We need a good front and back scan as the back red bleed and text definition will tell plenty.

I zoomed in off my initial photo, do these help? I do see what could be described as frosting on the top left of the slab. I'm also wondering what the black line could be on the bottom middle. I see what you mean about the unnatural corner wear.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Bestdj777]

Not to sound mean, but you shouldn’t be buying any of these cards. It doesn’t seem like you have a ton of experience detecting fakes at this point, and the seller is either inexperienced or crooked as well. So, you have two people going in to a sale that have no idea. It may be worth just waiting a bit until you’ve got more experience.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by redauto5

I zoomed in off my initial photo, do these help? I do see what could be described as frosting on the top left of the slab. I'm also wondering what the black line could be on the bottom middle. I see what you mean about the unnatural corner wear.

I think you need to have someone skilled look at that up close. Difficult with the photo quality for me to make a definite call personally. Any frosting at all would be bad, remember it’s just superglue and just takes a couple dabs to get it closed. Sgc cases won’t frost the entire sides when popped on those old ones because they are not sealed in the same way as psa.

Take up one of the offers from a local member to check or maybe a good auction house like heritage could look at the Dallas Show. I wouldn’t use the local card shop check personally unless they specialize in vintage. Most local card shops know less than my wife on this and just know modern and Pokémon.