Any Idea of Why This Went So Cheaply?

[bmarlowe1]

OK - I figured out how to see the H&G photo in Hi-res.

The left ears are similar (more so than I expected) - but they are different - it's not that hard to see. There are other differences (like the nose as pointed out above). The cabinet is not Radbourne.

And yes - why did SGC authenticate this?

[bmarlowe1]

THis reminds me of the phony Barnes:

[oldjudge]

Thanks Mark

[barrysloate]

Matt- I'm with you 100% on this one. Given how careful SGC usually is, often to the extreme, it seems to me they authenticated this with insufficient documentation. And like you said, you were able to offer far more proof and had trouble getting yours slabbed. Wish there was more consistency.

[Jacklitsch]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Matt- I'm with you 100% on this one. Given how careful SGC usually is, often to the extreme, it seems to me they authenticated this with insufficient documentation. And like you said, you were able to offer far more proof and had trouble getting yours slabbed. Wish there was more consistency.

Don't get me started.....

[barrysloate]

I know Steve, I know...

[E93]

Lucky it wasn't PSA that did this.

[Matt]

Upon further review, I believe I've identified the person depicted in the cabinet.

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

OK - I figured out how to see the H&G photo in Hi-res.

The left ears are similar (more so than I expected) - but they are different - it's not that hard to see. There are other differences (like the nose as pointed out above). The cabinet is not Radbourne.

And yes - why did SGC authenticate this?

That's the same person.

[bmarlowe1]

Sportscardtheory -

Now that SGC is going to "unauthenticate" the identification - what's your theory?

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

Sportscardtheory -

Now that SGC is going to "unauthenticate" the identification - what's your theory?

The first photo looks like a younger version of the guy on the right. Same ears, same nose, same hairline. Just a little older with less hair in the one on the right. The nose simply looks a little different due to angle the photo was taken. Look in his ears to see it's almost certainly the same guy. The inner ear ridges are the same.

[sportscardtheory]

How many years apart could those photos have been taken? It really looks like the same guy, just more "aged" in the right photo.

[bmarlowe1]

>>>Same ears, same nose, same hairline.

No - different ears, different nose, different hairline. If you think otherwise - give Huggins & Scott a call - With the sale wisely cancelled I'll bet you can get a real deal on that photo. It might make sense because surely you'll find someone like yourself to buy it for more than you paid.

The ear thing on this one is simple - the photos are clear enough to see that the outer shape of the left ears are not the same - end of story. The inside of the ears are also very different. If you think they are the same then shape matching is not your strong point.

Sorry I am being so unpleasant on this but you have no idea what you're talking about and you really do represent why so many fraudulently identified photos have been sold over the years.

Shooting from the hip doesn't cut it. There are both scientific articles and articles (and one book that I know of) for the general public on this subject. Either educate yourself or continue to sound foolish.

[bmarlowe1]

BTW - the Bodie cabinet is dated 1888. Radbourne was wearing a Boston Jersey in the comparison photo. He was with Boston (NL and PL) 1886-1890. Your explanation for the hairline difference is.....

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

>>>Same ears, same nose, same hairline.

No - different ears, different nose, different hairline. If you think otherwise - give Huggins & Scott a call - With the sale wisely cancelled I'll bet you can get a real deal on that photo. It might make sense because surely you'll find someone like yourself to buy it for more than you paid.

The ear thing on this one is simple - the photos are clear enough to see that the outer shape of the left ears are not the same - end of story. The inside of the ears are also very different. If you think they are the same then shape matching is not your strong point.

Sorry I am being so unpleasant on this but you have no idea what you're talking about and you really do represent why so many fraudulently identified photos have been sold over the years.

Shooting from the hip doesn't cut it. There are both scientific articles and articles (and one book that I know of) for the general public on this subject. Either educate yourself or continue to sound foolish.

Wow. You are a freaking LOSER. I just posted my opinion, I never claimed to be an expert. You really need to check yourself, there was no need to act like that.