Any Idea of Why This Went So Cheaply?

[Rob D.]

Originally Posted by sportscardtheory

Oh, don't worry. I'll be walking on egg shells and wording any post I make specifically to appease the uptight and fragile Net54 wonder-kids. Or not post at all. Good day.

Never mind. Not worth it.

[barrysloate]

Sportscardtheory- I asked you not to use an expletive on the board. Calling Mark an A**hole because he disagrees with you is inappropriate. Please don't twist my words.

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Sportscardtheory- I asked you not to use an expletive on the board. Calling Mark an A**hole because he disagrees with you is inappropriate. Please don't twist my words.

Just give it up. The guy was EXTREMELY rude to me when all I did was post my opinion on the photos. There was no need for it. Don't sit here and tell me I have to listen to some a-hole disrespect me and I can't say anything back. Mind your own business.

[barrysloate]

I expected that would be the tenor of your reply. By the way, you can't be anonymous on this board and call people a**holes. How about identifying yourself since everybody else did? My name is Barry Sloate- please share yours.

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I expected that would be the tenor of your reply. By the way, you can't be anonymous on this board and call people a**holes. How about identifying yourself since everybody else did? My name is Barry Sloate- please share yours.

What? This is a message board, I don't have to tell anyone my name. But just for you, my name is Bradd. And apparently you didn't read the insulting, rude and downright nasty reply that guy gave me when all I did was voice my opinion on a couple photos. Because if you did, you would have no reason to keep on me for calling him a "bad name".

[sportscardtheory]

And who calls themselves some kind of photograph specialist and doesn't use any comparative photos. I'm no expert, so who is the guy on the right if he's not the same guy. Show us another photo of both players so we can see if those also differ. I'm just curious.

Edit - So it's the guy on the left that is in question? Like I stated, I'm no expert and was just comparing the two photos. The one on the right IS Radbourne and the one on the left was "supposedly" Radbourne and later changed?

[sportscardtheory]

I understand now. The guy on the left, the auction that was closed, is of someone that "looks" like Radbourn, and that is what is in question. My original assessment was based ONLY on looking at the two photos and forming an opinion based on if they were the same person. Given the details, it seems like if it were the same person, the photo on the left would have to of been taken many years before the other for there to even be a chance. That or Rabourn had all his head and facial hair cut down. I don't really care what someone tells me, they have eerily similar noses, ears and hair-lines. That is clear as day. That's probably what caused the initial mix-up.

[bmarlowe1]

>>>all I did was voice my opinion on a couple photos..

No you did not. Please re-read my response just after you blew up, and also Jim VB's reply - this time s-l-o-w-l-y. The re-read your initial posts, again s-l-o-w-l-y.

Along with photos, you seem to have a problem with word usage and the plain meaning of language.

>>>Show us another photo of both players...

Huh? There are many photos of Radbourne, I posted for comparison one of the best that we know of, which happens to be at an angle that is at least similar to the head of the guy in the Bodie cabinet.

The guy in civies in the Bodie cabinet is unknown - hence we don't have any other photos of him. Get it Bradd?

>>>they have eerily similar noses, ears and hair-lines.

The real Radbourne has clear, obvious hair loss on his left side in the area above the ear. The guy in the Bodie cabinet does not.

-------------------------------

Thanks to all for the support. I was actually harder on Nashville Jeremy a couple of weeks ago, but it all slid off of him like water off of a ducks back. Like faces, people are all different - some more than others.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by sportscardtheory

What? This is a message board, I don't have to tell anyone my name. But just for you, my name is Bradd. And apparently you didn't read the insulting, rude and downright nasty reply that guy gave me when all I did was voice my opinion on a couple photos. Because if you did, you would have no reason to keep on me for calling him a "bad name".

So Bradd, here's my take on it. On this message board you don't have to tell anyone your name, HOWEVER, if you get into a pissing match with someone then I feel they have a right to know who they are (hopefully amicably) arguing with. I am not going to expose your identity at this point because I feel Al nailed it. I think you just got a little sideways with the tone of the conversation, as you and Mark started discussing this picture.

Also, Jim nailed it too. We all have our own areas of expertise and when someone treads into that area they better darned well know what they are talking about and be able to back it up with definitive proof/facts. I get calls from advanced collectors, dealers and grading companies very frequently. (several this week already). They call because they know I study some things more than almost anyone else. This week it was on M101-4/5 Sporting News backs and E94 Overprints. If you jump into those areas, in a discussion with me, you better make sure you have your facts straight as I study the intricacies of those sets (especially the backs) quite a bit. Most folks know I collect very rare and esoteric type cards. I am far from a "know it all" but do have very good knowledge in those areas, so if you go there, just have your facts straight. I love good discussions and debates and have changed my view many times after listening to good arguments. At the Philly show I was asked questions by several folks concerning thoughts on different issues. You don't get those folks asking questions without them knowing you have a good idea of what they are asking about.

All this being said almost all members on the board are valuable in one way or another. Just be cordial to each other, have respect for their expertise, and all will be good. Many times it's the "way" something is phrased that sets people off on a chat board. Re-phrasing something can often quell confrontations and make for a much friendlier discussion. Best regards and happy holidays

ps...Huggins and Scott did the right thing on this cabinet. The good guys almost always do the right thing in these situations....that's why they are the "good guys".

[Orioles1954]

My name is James Feagin and I'm the Senior Writer for Huggins & Scott Auctions

[sportscardtheory]

Originally Posted by Leon

So Bradd, here's my take on it. On this message board you don't have to tell anyone your name, HOWEVER, if you get into a pissing match with someone then I feel they have a right to know who they are (hopefully amicably) arguing with. I am not going to expose your identity at this point because I feel Al nailed it. I think you just got a little sideways with the tone of the conversation, as you and Mark started discussing this picture.

Also, Jim nailed it too. We all have our own areas of expertise and when someone treads into that area they better darned well know what they are talking about and be able to back it up with definitive proof/facts. I get calls from advanced collectors, dealers and grading companies very frequently. (several this week already). They call because they know I study some things more than almost anyone else. This week it was on M101-4/5 Sporting News backs and E94 Overprints. If you jump into those areas, in a discussion with me, you better make sure you have your facts straight as I study the intricacies of those sets (especially the backs) quite a bit. Most folks know I collect very rare and esoteric type cards. I am far from a "know it all" but do have very good knowledge in those areas, so if you go there, just have your facts straight. I love good discussions and debates and have changed my view many times after listening to good arguments. At the Philly show I was asked questions by several folks concerning thoughts on different issues. You don't get those folks asking questions without them knowing you have a good idea of what they are asking about.

All this being said almost all members on the board are valuable in one way or another. Just be cordial to each other, have respect for their expertise, and all will be good. Many times it's the "way" something is phrased that sets people off on a chat board. Re-phrasing something can often quell confrontations and make for a much friendlier discussion. Best regards and happy holidays

ps...Huggins and Scott did the right thing on this cabinet. The good guys almost always do the right thing in these situations....that's why they are the "good guys".

Thank you for the response. I do apologize for the wordage I used. I simply don't take being disrespected well, I guess. I simply formed an opinion on the two photos without knowing the backround well enough. I appreciate boards like this because I can find help if I ever need it when it comes to pre-war cards. Sorry if I offended anyone.

[birdman42]

Originally Posted by Leon

The good guys almost always do the right thing in these situations....that's why they are the "good guys".

Much better to be known as a "good guy" than as a "great guy."

Bill

[Al C.risafulli]

I think it's really easy to get riled up over stuff that's written on message boards, because there's no TONE involved - just words. Something somebody writes quickly and posts can easily be perceived as being more rude than it was meant to be, because you can't see the person's facial expressions or hear their tone when you read it an hour after they posted it.

That said, when you post something on a message board, "mind your own business" no longer applies, does it? Because you post it in a thread where everyone else can post, and where everyone else can read what you posted. If you want your business to remain your business and not be subjected to the responses of everyone, I'd suggest using the board's private message function. This way, nobody else can read it, except for the person you're addressing.

My opinion is that the photo is not Radbourne. My opinion is also that this may have been one of those cases where I made a run at something based on the authentication and the low price. H&S did a service by cancelling the sale when faced with evidence. Mistakes happen all the time in authentication; I think the important distinction to make is not that a mistake happened, but how the offending party responds to the mistake. When faced with issues like this, some companies stand their ground or run in the opposite direction, and others own up to the mistake and make the appropriate restitution.

That's not just in sports memorabilia, by the way, its in the identification of any type of historically important memorabilia. I can't imagine that mistakes aren't made when identifying unsigned sketches, handwritten letters, photos, locks of hair, etc.

It really does illuminate one of the challenges and risks of being a collector of historical memorabilia of any kind. I own precisely one cabinet photo of a player not wearing a uniform; it's Eddie Collins, who is pretty easily identified by the giant wings on either side of his head.

-Al

Edited to add: My sentence above makes it appear as if I DID make a run at the cabinet. I did not. I didn't bid. I meant to imply that this might have been one of those items I made a run at - IF I HAD ANY MONEY TO SPEND ON CARDS RIGHT NOW. Which I don't.