![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
No problem. One thing that just came to mind is that the blue ink(?) stain on back seems pretty strong. Many times a strong stain like that will bleed through to the other side. I do not see evidence of that.
Just something to consider. Brian |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
the ink not fading through to the front would be the biggest tell for me that it is re-backed, beyond just the fact that we've never seen a SLer, to my knowledge, with anything other than a P350/OMSL/Hindu back.
The only other explanation I could think of is that this was a scrap, that they had the fronts for the SLers designed at the time the 150 series was being printed, and this was printed as a one-off test of some kind and discarded. But if that is the case, I feel like we'd have seen a few other random examples pop up over time. If this is a re-back, its also kind of an odd choice. You understand why people would try to fake a HOF like Matty or Cobb with a front/back combo that doesnt exist, but a random SLer with a P150 back is a few notches below that. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Here is a T206 Ball Piedmont 150 that I have with very similiar looking initials and placement of those initials.
Brian |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
If rebacked it is a decent rebacking.
That one is not previously known is not evidence it is rebacked. Previously unknown T cards still arise pretty much every year - I've found a few that surprised me. It is not out of the realm of plausibility that a sheet or two early on in pre-release production may have used the earlier backing. With a T card survival rate that appears to be below 1% it wouldn't be odd to have a single card found of such a sheet. No opinion on either option as this one is good enough to pass in a scan if it is rebacked, but both are fully plausible. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
One way of verifying that it hasn't been Frankensteined is by checking out the edges, and that would appear to be very difficult to carry out.
__________________
"Don't mistake activity for achievement." – John Wooden |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It was probably rebacked and then chewed up around the edges to conceal the evidence.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I am no expert on rebacking but I can't see any evidence of it.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
So I did a little digging on the forum about rebacking and how to potentially identify it - that I hadn't thought of -
Weigh the card. I have a small scale for coins that should do the trick. I will weigh it vs. some controls when I get home. Calipers - I ordered a set on Amazon and will put calipers to the card vs. controls when it arrives tomorrow. Blacklight- I did hit it with the blacklight and didn't see any glowing - but I didn't focus on the edges - so I will hit it again - presumably glue residue may show up under blacklight? I also have a digital microscope that I haven't put the card under to see if I can see any other signs of rebacking. Anybody else have any other ideas? Soaking? I've never soaked a card as the thought of putting cardboard in water just sounds like trouble - I know that soaking is a widely used and an accepted way to remove scrapbook backing. Could make the card separate if it was rebacked? Fine otherwise? All that being said - let's assume the card is genuine. What do I do with it? Have it graded? I've never sent a card off for grading, but I do have a handful that I should. I prefer SGC slabs, but would there be any reason that would argue for PSA? Given its uniqueness does it need special instructions? Hand it off to an auction house to take care of it? I realize something like this is worth whatever someone will pay for it, but does anybody have thoughts on what it would be worth if genuine and unaltered? Anybody know what could be used as a comp? |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
If you could successfully get that graded I would think it could be worth quite a bit. Being a one of a kind, $10,000+?
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The edges will tell a lot.
It does seem an odd candidate for rebacking. A sort of common but not southern leaguer with a common back it supposedly never came with. I can maybe see changing a piedmont 350 to an old mill or either to Hindu. The edge wear is a bit concerning, as it might hide a very slight seam. The stain not showing through doesn't concern me. The stock for many T206s was coated, and stains shouldn't show through the coating. (a big field of study that hasn't been looked at really at all is how often the coated stock was used. If it isn't rebacked, I would think of it as a sort of scrap. The opposite of the 150 only card with a 350 back. Which I think is probably leftover fronts being used up to fill a Piedmont order. Here there may have been Piedmont 150 backs leftover that were printed with whatever front was current to use them up. Or P150 backs used as setup sheets for a front run, and accidentally mixed with the production sheets sent to cutting. (Or not if it's truly hand cut scrap) |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
WTB T206 Southern Leaguers PSA 3-4 (Old Mill Back) | T206CollectorVince | T206 cards B/S/T | 3 | 08-27-2021 06:38 PM |
FS: Piedmont Southern Leaguers SGC Graded | txaggie00 | T206 cards B/S/T | 1 | 08-01-2020 06:38 AM |
WTB: Piedmont southern leaguers | Rob D. | T206 cards B/S/T | 0 | 06-21-2013 01:06 PM |
WTB Hindu Back Southern Leaguers | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 06-15-2008 08:45 PM |
Hindu Back Southern Leaguers | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 09-03-2002 11:09 AM |