Do you think T206 cards....

[Blunder19]

"where the gold at"... I just came back from jamaica and the stuff they smoke will have you buzzed for a week

Barry and Chris.. thanks for checking out the card and letting me know its ok..


But i just want to clear up that I didnt mean I thought this card was re-backed by taking a fake back and applying it to a real front...(two different pieces of paper carefully attached)
I was asking if anyone has heard of a common back being shaved off... and then someone being able to print a rare back on the newly shaved back..so printing on the back of the original card.... you would need some sort of an Uzit template for this... but if the t206museum guy was able to print the exact overstamp on the old mill back.. then I would imagine its possible that cards out there could have carefuly shaved backs and then been printed over with a rare back template...

am I still explaining this poorly? it feels like it.. has anyone ever run into that type of fraud on t206s?

[T206Collector]

The trick would be to bleach out the ink on the back and then reprint a scarce back on the reverse. I'm sure it could be done with varying degrees of success. And could probably get past even SGC if done well.

Heck, you could take some pretty beat up Red Cobbs and then print the Cobb back on the reverse.

I don't think you should worry about it, however. Though I can see what you are concerned -- the reverse of that UZIT does look like a back that has been skinned. Though I really, seriously would doubt that you're dealing with a forgery.

[bbcard1]

I have a green background Cobb I suspect has been rebacked, (with a piedmont back) I think it probably came out of a scrapbook and the back separted and someone at sometime glued it on another back. It looks good..both parts are legit and it has fine eye appeal. i have no doubt it is "legit" in a sense of speaking and I paid about 5% of book value for a green background cobb, such as it is, with good eye appeal. I am ok with it, but I also realize if I want to sell it the market will be limited. I figure what I paid more than mitigates that.

[Bosox Blair]

Frankly, I'm shocked this issue does not come up much more often given that the new rage seems to be T206 back collecting...have you guys really not heard of this before as a serious issue?

The first conversation I had with a big-time T206 dealer over 20 years ago, he told me not to focus much on backs as there were a ton of fakes out there created by rebacking and/or reprinting of backs. It is possible, even probable, that TPGs have helped to cut down on this, but this has been a long-standing issue...

Cheers,
Blair

[fkw]

Re-Printing a new back would be basically impossible to do right IMO.

But its easy to skin 2 cards and Frankenstein them together.

There in no red flags on the Uzit back at all, its what a worn example should look like.

Funny thing is some of these Frankenstein cards have made news in the past as new discoveries, ie the T206 Wagner batting which was really a caramel card combines with a T206 back. Funny how it would fool some experts back in the 1970's, the caption design is not even close. Also there was at least one "Hustler" rebacked T206 too.

The more recent one would be the T206 Matty port with the red Hindu back from a few years ago. If I remember right, its was an impossible back but was graded by PSA at one time.

[teetwoohsix]

I can't see how re-backing (or re-fronting) would be easy for someone to pull off. I would think that there would be some dead giveaways one would see.......I'd be more concerened about someone doing what T206Collector said- bleaching out the backside and printing out a rare back in place of the old common one,,,,now that's scary.

Clayton