1921 Herpolsheimers graded w/o mark

[molenick]

I hate to ask again, but can you please explain why someone finding a matching border specimen from 1930's-1940's means the cards are fake?

All it means is that the border did not originate in the 1970's.

It does not mean the border could not have existed earlier.

I understand that a set can be faked. Any set can be faked. I am just asking why you think this set is faked (besides the fact that someone else said they were fake).

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by molenick

I hate to ask again, but can you please explain why someone finding a matching border specimen from 1930's-1940's means the cards are fake?

All it means is that the border did not originate in the 1970's.

It does not mean the border could not have existed earlier.

I understand that a set can be faked. Any set can be faked. I am just asking why you think this set is faked (besides the fact that someone else said they were fake).

Here's the math:

1930s-1940s minus "1921" equals upper teens to low twenties in years difference from when the design first existed and the argument for the card's year.

In other words, fake set

[calvindog]

Brian,

Why would you destroy your reputation in the hobby over something as dumb as this? It’s painful to watch. Please stop.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Brian,

Why would you destroy your reputation in the hobby over something as dumb as this? It’s painful to watch. Please stop.

Jeffrey,

I apologize, but if ruining my rep saves people from getting ripped off so be the matter. Just a reminder to you about your accusations about Bill Mastro, the criticism you received by the masses on this board and the fact you were correct.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Jeffrey,

I apologize, but if ruining my rep saves people from getting ripped off so be the matter. Just a reminder to you about your accusations about Bill Mastro, the criticism you received by the masses on this board and the fact you were correct.

Except I had clear anecdotal evidence which was immediately corroborated by the FBI who contacted me. In your case you have laughably weak, decades-old hearsay “evidence” from an unknown source — which has convinced no one. To suggest these two sets of circumstances are even remotely similar suggests to me that you’re having some kind of break from reality. And at this point you are not concerned about saving anyone from fraud, as I was as I had no prior axe to grind with Mastro. You’re just being George Constanta driving Susan’s parents out to his fake Montauk house. You always struck me as a decent and honest guy. This thread clearly is eroding that perception. Your choice I guess.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Except I had clear anecdotal evidence which was immediately corroborated by the FBI who contacted me. In your case you have laughably weak, decades-old hearsay “evidence” from an unknown source — which has convinced no one. To suggest these two sets of circumstances are even remotely similar suggests to me that you’re having some kind of break from reality. And at this point you are not concerned about saving anyone from fraud, as I was as I had no prior axe to grind with Mastro. You’re just being George Constanta driving Susan’s parents out to his fake Montauk house. You always struck me as a decent and honest guy. This thread clearly is eroding that perception. Your choice I guess.

Hiccup.

The cards are fake. My apologies about your Cobb.

Happy Holidays

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Hiccup.

The cards are fake. My apologies about your Cobb.

Happy Holidays

No need to offer up any apologies — I can sell it in 5 minutes for at least 50K. If anyone believed you, it would be worthless, much like your reputation now.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Brian,

Why would you destroy your reputation in the hobby over something as dumb as this? It’s painful to watch. Please stop.

In all sincerity, and as someone who has had positive dealings with Brian in the past, this is where I am now as well. Just as a matter of epistemic humility, I would hope that anyone could acknowledge that any particular one of their beliefs has some non-zero probability of being incorrect, regardless of whether there is mounting evidence on the other side of the scale. As trivial a matter as baseball cards are in the grand scheme of things, this has been genuinely upsetting to behold.

[raulus]

Can’t speak for the rest of the group, but the posts from this morning have helped to eliminate a lot of my confusion.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

In all sincerity, and as someone who has had positive dealings with Brian in the past, this is where I am now as well. Just as a matter of epistemic humility, I would hope that anyone could acknowledge that any particular one of their beliefs has some non-zero probability of being incorrect, regardless of whether there is mounting evidence on the other side of the scale. As trivial a matter as baseball cards are in the grand scheme of things, this has been genuinely upsetting to behold.

Glenn,

First, Happy Holidays. I am sorry you feel that way, but from what i have experienced with the cards, although brief, they are fake, and I stand by that assertion.

[Brian Van Horn]

Folks,

Feel free to pull this up in 2004 in addition to now. Nothing in my opinion or accounting of matters has changed. 19 years. No changes. Just additional fraudulent cards.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Glenn,

First, Happy Holidays. I am sorry you feel that way, but from what i have experienced with the cards, although brief, they are fake, and I stand by that assertion.

I appreciate that. Happy holidays to you as well.

[rhettyeakley]

This “debate” has become hilarious in its absurdity.

The only part I feel bad for is the next person that finds some REAL 1921 Herpolsheimer cards. They will potentially have to wade through this mess of a thread and read Brian’s comments that are not based on any actual evidence.

It is just bad for card scholarship to have this amount of misinformation and confirmation bias (by Brian) out there.

I echo Jeff’s thoughts on this being a painful thing to watch.

[molenick]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Here's the math:

1930s-1940s minus "1921" equals upper teens to low twenties in years difference from when the design first existed and the argument for the card's year.

In other words, fake set

You are adding the words "first existed" when no one is claiming that. We are just saying that it existed, which means it was not a 1970's disco pattern.

We all agree that the 1921 Holsum Bread cards are real and from 1921 (don't we?). And yet that border pattern is in the book as well.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by molenick

You are adding the words "first existed" when no one is claiming that. We are just saying that it existed, which means it was not a 1970's disco pattern.

We all agree that the 1921 Holsum Bread cards are real and from 1921 (don't we?). And yet that border pattern is in the book as well.

Please click the link and read the paragraph in the white below the book page:

https://archive.org/details/LanstonM...e/n23/mode/2up

A typographical specimen booklet containing borders and ornaments for casting on the Lanston Monotype Composition Caster, Lanston Monotype Type-Caster, Lanston Monotype Giant Caster and Monotype-Thompson Type-Caster. This booklet is from a Lanston Monotype specimen book (binder) bearing the general title "Monotype Type Faces." It is undated, but based on internal evidence elsewhere in the binder it is from the late 1930s or early 1940s.


The last time I checked late 1930s or early 1940s eliminates 1921 in origin.

[molenick]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Please click the link and read the paragraph in the white below the book page:

https://archive.org/details/LanstonM...e/n23/mode/2up

A typographical specimen booklet containing borders and ornaments for casting on the Lanston Monotype Composition Caster, Lanston Monotype Type-Caster, Lanston Monotype Giant Caster and Monotype-Thompson Type-Caster. This booklet is from a Lanston Monotype specimen book (binder) bearing the general title "Monotype Type Faces." It is undated, but based on internal evidence elsewhere in the binder it is from the late 1930s or early 1940s.


The last time I checked late 1930s or early 1940s eliminates 1921 in origin.

The binder was from the late 1930's or early 1940's. That does not mean that every pattern in the book was new to that binder. In fact, some patterns, such as the 1921 Holsum Bread pattern, were around since at least 1921.

Are you also saying 1921 Holsum Bread cards are fake? Because that pattern is in the book, which using your logic means it eliminates 1921 in origin.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by molenick

The binder was from the late 1930's or early 1940's. That does not mean that every pattern in the book was new to that binder. In fact, some patterns, such as the 1921 Holsum Bread pattern, were around since at least 1921.

Are you also saying 1921 Holsum Bread cards are fake? Because that pattern is in the book, which using your logic means it eliminates 1921 origin.

I have been waiting for this response from you. You have the Holsum which has been known for years. That eliminates it from your argument.

Now, as for the Herpolsheimer "back" similarity on the website link:

https://archive.org/details/LanstonM...e/n23/mode/2up

A typographical specimen booklet containing borders and ornaments for casting on the Lanston Monotype Composition Caster, Lanston Monotype Type-Caster, Lanston Monotype Giant Caster and Monotype-Thompson Type-Caster. This booklet is from a Lanston Monotype specimen book (binder) bearing the general title "Monotype Type Faces." It is undated, but based on internal evidence elsewhere in the binder it is from the late 1930s or early 1940s.

So:

1.) An honest dealer waiving his hand over the case in May 1999 indicating the cards are fake.

2.) The pattern on the back that looked and still does like a disco floor or coffee table (also from the 1970s) pattern.

3.) Reference to above:

It is undated, but based on internal evidence elsewhere in the binder it is from the late 1930s or early 1940s.

4.) First fakes of pre-WWII ever. No.

5.) Possibility of a person who works as a printer who has knowledge of cards including a love of Pre-WWII back in the 1970s. What a concept. A printer who collects cards and the thought of producing a group of the cards with a pattern which he may have seen on a disco floor which inspired him. The guy would have access to paper from the 1920's. Still, paper from the 1920's and pattern from the late 1930's or 1940's. Oh, we have the basis of a movie here. Alan Alda, however, is too old and Mr. Mint can no longer sue him. Oh, but I digress. My accurate memory despite a cold and Stage 2 Astrocytoma (Brain Cancer) doesn't get in the way.

[horzverti]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Oh, we have the basis of a movie here. Alan Alda, however, is too old and Mr. Mint can no longer sue him. Oh, but I digress. My accurate memory despite a cold and Stage 2 Astrocytoma (Brain Cancer) doesn't get in the way.

I meant to quote this above ↑↑

"Brian,
You seem to have been a bit tongue-in-cheek with some of your posts, so I also hope that you are only kidding about brain cancer. I don't know you outside of this board, so I can't really gauge if this is your sense of humor or not. If you are serious, then I sincerely also wish you the best with beating it and recovery." -me, two mins ago