Unusual PSA flip

[asoriano]

Now this is an unusual PSA slip (although a legit holder):

http://cgi.ebay.com/1908-09-Cy-Young...item45f752b5cb

[ethicsprof]

frank has convinced me to go down from my(and Jon's) 75 figure to 74.
i will stand corrected by frank ward's expertise 'til the day I collapse.
those who have moved toward higher figures also have my esteemed reverence but not my vote on
this particular occasion!


best,
barry

[shaunsteig]

Originally Posted by asoriano

Now this is an unusual PSA slip:

http://cgi.ebay.com/1908-09-Cy-Young...item45f752b5cb

that's awesome.

as for the PSA flip, some have argued that this is an old but legitimate flip. Now I know that PSA previously did not specify the backs on the T206 flips. And the typeset of their oldest flips looked different than currently. I'm not really aware of any other evolutionary changes to the PSA flips. In this specific case, does anyone have a T206, or any other card, where the PSA flip doesn't specify the set name? For that reason alone, I'd be leery that this is a fake.

[canjond]

I still feel that if this was a fake flip, there would be one of two things... a very high dollar card in the holder, or a card that is really over-graded. In the case at hand, neither applies.

[FrankWakefield]

It matters not to me whether the slip in that slab is genuine, or not. I understand that is of significant concern to some. I have minimal skill in guestimating whether a slip is a new one or an old one. But I see PSA slips that get the 1909, 1910, 1911 dating wrong. All the time. And wrong about poses. And wrong series. And misidentifying players. They have a helluva time.

I do think the card is real. I bid the $50, and I won't be increasing that bid. In looking at the bidding system the next bid is $75, plus $11.25 commission, plus shipping... and that is getting the card up beyond what I think it's worth. My bid didn't reach the reserve so it doesn't matter to me. This is one 'outed' bid, and that's fine with me.

And it may well be a fake slip. I still think the card is real, I bid on that beat up card.

[Bosox Blair]

Guys, we need to avoid putting misinformation out there.

This is not simply an old flip. Not at all.

In every era of the PSA holder, T206 has been identified as T206. With no date whatsoever on the flip. If I'm wrong, show me (but I'm not).

[NOTE: after reviewing post #42 on this thread, it appears that there are a relatively small number of T206 cards that PSA identified on flips as 1911 and not T206. It is not as simple as saying it is an old flip - there are older PSA flips and newer PSA flips that all read only T206 with no date. It is also not tied to the presence of the # on the flip, as many with the # also are identified as T206.]

Yes, the font on this flip is consistent with one of the several older PSA fonts.

The flip in that holder is entirely consistent with how PSA identified Sporting Life cards when PSA was using that font...with the obvious exception that the flip has no reference to Sporting Life after the 1911.

I agree that one would most often expect a fake to be a higher value item. But this one has so many warning bells...not worth getting involved with.

Cheers,
Blair

[4815162342]

Originally Posted by Bosox Blair

In every era of the PSA holder, T206 has been identified as T206. With no date whatsoever on the flip. If I'm wrong, show me (but I'm not).

Yes, the font on this flip is consistent with one of the several older PSA fonts. But PSA has never, ever used those identifiers on a T206 card.

The flip in that holder is entirely consistent with how PSA identified Sporting Life cards when PSA was using that font...with the obvious exception that the flip has no reference to Sporting Life after the 1911.

I agree that one would most often expect a fake to be a higher value item. But this one has so many warning bells...not worth getting involved with.

Cheers,
Blair

I'm glad that someone else saw what I saw.

[CW]

Originally Posted by Bosox Blair

Guys, we need to avoid putting misinformation out there.

This is not simply an old flip. Not at all.

In every era of the PSA holder, T206 has been identified as T206. With no date whatsoever on the flip. If I'm wrong, show me (but I'm not).

First off, I'd like to mention that the Piedmont printing over the back
damage on this card is cause for concern, and I'm not overlooking this
oddity.

Secondly, I don't know why we can't have a simple discussion/debate over
facets of our hobby without getting frustrated and making the claim that
"we're never going to post in this thread." I mean, this is a board
for discussions and we're all adults. Nobody here is questioning anyone's
knowledge or expertise, just offering opinions.

Lastly, I'd like to offer another example of a PSA flip with this same
clerical error. I cannot attest to the validity of this card or slab, but
at least we have another example of both the "1911" and the "#".

Found at:
http://www.nowbatting19.com/aboutuspage.html

[canjond]

Chuck - thanks for posting that. I haven't read this thread since yesterday so I missed about 20 posts. However, I will have to disagree with Blair (in a non-argumentative way). I have seen a few of these 1911 slabs and even owned some. I stick by what I said earlier, they were old style flips. I can't say I've seen hundreds, but have owned at least 3 or 4 and the cards were definitely real and the slabs were also real.