1968 Nolan Ryan RC Fake or Cut Long?

[TXLeaguer]

I bought a Nolan Ryan RC not too long ago off of comc. It passes all the authenticator tests in my view. My only issue is that the card seems to be in between 1/16-1/8" long.

Have any of you heard of something like this for 1968 Topps?

[TXLeaguer]

[IMG][/IMG]

[thatguywithadot]

Originally Posted by TXLeaguer

I bought a Nolan Ryan RC not too long ago off of comc. It passes all the authenticator tests in my view. My only issue is that the card seems to be in between 1/16-1/8" long.

Have any of you heard of something like this for 1968 Topps?

Not that egregious however i can make out elevation changes at the corner spots on your card that indicate pancaking which could be do to pressing or long term screwdown although in my experience pressing is the culprit for a card like this that looks like it is ABSOLUTELY the wrong shape period.

If you trace the edges with your eyes you will be able to see that fattest portion at the middle edge and it should go super thin at the corners to the point it may or may not measure .001-.004 mm with machined caliper if measured ( I do not recommend this!!!!!) you could damage your card as paper and sharp calipers are not a happy marriage! it could not even register if a corner is significantly frayed under scope as the fiber weave of the stock is no longer as dense as original by a large margin and pressing or the screwdown situations will make a paper thin corner as a result!

Atypical card thickness for same same only different brands and sports through the years from 60s on on paper issues has been between .016-.019 inches and this applies to topps fleer and donruss and upper deck etc. there are always a few anomalies in my documentation but they are quirky designs to begin with or chrome cards, uv coated, etc. or anything other than the run of the mill cheap glossed layered paper productions that have anchored the card collecting community!

If you do happen to do as instructed and trace the edges with your eyes and see that it thins out at the corner you should have no problem refunding that as i am sure they did not advertise it as altered stock which is what it will get. If it is just a minor change its not a killer completely but again depends on what you paid and its true provenance as if that crease which appears to be pressed down through the middle really is you have no recourse other than the hail mary BVG but things have tightened up across the landscape with these companies due to their internal QC issues!

[thatguywithadot]

post a pic of the backside if you can also as the matte backs of the cards can make it easier to see the elevation changes from pressing or corner smashing due to no gloss and relaying as good as good is gonna get for identifying shadows in minute form to see elevation changes and then interpret accordingly as to whether or not its warping or in your case clearly to me pressing intentionally to reduce that crease and pancaking the corners as a result!

[thatguywithadot]

The card definitely is real though! it has the proper fills where it should and half toning elsewhere in atypical commercial precision for crisp detailed brilliant imagery!

[TXLeaguer]

Avery, Thank you for the detailed responses. The flatting/pancaking makes a lot of sense. I will take a pic of the back when I get home from work and I'll post it.

[thatguywithadot]

Not a problem my man! That is what this forum is hear for and what the core collective community is all about. I could tell you bluntly no but that falls into that whole teach a man to fish mantra and i choose to live by that!

I created a thread for the 1968 Topps Milton Bradley Nolan Ryan fake identification freshly after replying to your post earlier and theres lots of detailed breakdown you may or may not know or just need a reminder to pay attention too! i will finish uploading pics and examples for contrast when i get to it soon i am just juggling my store and couple kids and a ticking sleep time bomb on my end lol

anybody feel free to chime in and let him know what you know! i am just a freshly 30 year old whose studied and handled a ton of cards and studies in our field that are pertinent but an old timer may very well have a different view on these things or refute something i am saying and we want to hear that for balance and discussion!

[TXLeaguer]

[IMG][/IMG][IMG][/IMG]

[TXLeaguer]

Originally Posted by thatguywithadot

Not a problem my man! That is what this forum is hear for and what the core collective community is all about. I could tell you bluntly no but that falls into that whole teach a man to fish mantra and i choose to live by that!

I created a thread for the 1968 Topps Milton Bradley Nolan Ryan fake identification freshly after replying to your post earlier and theres lots of detailed breakdown you may or may not know or just need a reminder to pay attention too! i will finish uploading pics and examples for contrast when i get to it soon i am just juggling my store and couple kids and a ticking sleep time bomb on my end lol

anybody feel free to chime in and let him know what you know! i am just a freshly 30 year old whose studied and handled a ton of cards and studies in our field that are pertinent but an old timer may very well have a different view on these things or refute something i am saying and we want to hear that for balance and discussion!

Just read the MB Thread. Bravo sir. I have 60x loupe that I use and a black light.

[thatguywithadot]

no worries and thanks figured it would be good to put up as i was looking lately and seeing quite a bit of fakes out there long standing ebayers were selling lol.

For some reason i swear i am seeing a bit of warping on your card backside left middle edge zone and bottom right edge. Looks like a wrinkle starting at left mid edge going right under the word jacksonville LOL just remembered you had a crease on front ...

it must have been attempted to work and press it out and if i am picking up warping very well could have been expanded soaking to work it and too much pressure wet and while drying stretched the card out...you could always measure the edges all around in sleeve with a caliper or just grab another 68 card if you have any and see what the measurement is and i can tell you any of the 68s i have next to me here if you dont have any as this would be the cause if thinner of pressing obviously...hope you didnt pay too much but when you said comc i cringed lol

[cornhusker]

Original question was can they sometimes be cut 1/16 in long? - yes, at times.
I would not get too hung up with miscut long or measuring corner thickness on a card that appears to have a crease running through the center. This shows as a decent looking card for what it is.
Also, while you can measure card stock thickness w precision measuring tools, it's not possible to measure .001 mm (1 micron) with a caliper.

[thatguywithadot]

yes not accurately to the 4th or ten thousandths decimal!++++++

3rd decimal is thousandths and in most cases you can find decently priced calipers with accuracy to .001 + or - that work great in machinist shop...
that being said yes not accurately to the .001 exact right? unless you use mity cals lol

i would not get caught up either on measuring however i mentioned it simply due to fact if you are tracing card edges and see a skinnier corner i have tracked cards through my time like this to identify pressed and screwdowns too tight to these measurables consistently! Again if it looks skinnier to your eyes significantly it really doesn't matter especially like you said with the crease situation present...

My original non paraphrased message entirely though referenced measurements to the 16 to 19 thousandths consistently and if its much under that should be alarming as ultimately this info can help you choose who not to waste money if you sub.

sgc is on record as saying they understand paper tolerances in production facilities to not be exact so they allow up to 1/16 off if they like the cut...psa is a no fly zone period on marquee cards especially although worth the price of a few shipment costs for the free chance to slab as others have attested too!

As far as why i bought this up to him is due to fact card is in toploader and i can see elevation changes with my depth perception in corner regions so i mentioned this all to him not to deter but to save the time and energy and stress of uncertainty. Definitely will keep the nerd detailed knowledge to myself at this point lol

This card definitely displays nice for what it is and i told him it was authentic as we can all see obviously.

[thatguywithadot]

some of us have completely different approaches to how we process and view cards fundamentally and methodologically and therein lies the beauty of our collective hobby! Plenty of different lanes for us to operate and find domicile in and be able to connect with one another. Definitely was not trying to cause any paranoia or distaste as much as make sure his investment is protected simply put.

[steve B]

.001mm is only 0.00003937 inch. Of course it can be measured, but not using any typical handheld caliper. Just handling it would change the size enough to put it off.
And you'd usually specify what temperature the measurement was taken at.

Now if it's .001 inches, that's a different matter entirely. That can be done reliably with a $40 caliper by nearly anyone.

[jchcollins]

Even if it's not pressed, cards of that era coming out of the pack a bit large or small is not unheard of. I've had multiple 50's and 60's cards over the past few years that will not quite fit into a One Touch holder because they are slightly too large.

[thatguywithadot]

+++ temperature and humidity of course matter...wish someone would let our friends at PSA get a briefing of environmental impact of humidity changes through the years a card being exposed to can change the overall size in minute fractional amounts...-_-

Absolutely right though Steve. Its just a rough ballpark as i stated the measurement zonage to define a loose area i have observed. Anything outside that area doesnt mean pressed or bad but its a good baseline ive measured way too many times for reference.

For the sake of correction i did typo the mm in the first paragraph but if you read the entire posting it is in measurement for thickness in inches LOL My bad tho gotta recheck my typing as i go fast and mind is running a mile a minute with everything i am always doing. Apologies for any confusion

[thatguywithadot]

We were definitely miscommunicating there off my own end as i was talking about the measurement in inches as i referred him to that originally. I did read to see i put mm in the first part of my post but did label inches afterward. Bonehead typo but could always read the entirety of the posting too to help a knucklehead out lol

[steve B]

Don't feel bad.

I worked on a project thirdhand for NASA. They sent a drawing based on my prototypes that included a dimension shown as radius when it should have been diameter. Or if not, the correct radius.
Every time we exchanged drawings and comments I mentioned the discrepancy. To my knowledge they never corrected it.

Long bizarre story follows

It's possible they were protecting a supplier they liked working with from competition. A few times I'd bid government work, only to see my exact information supplied come back to me as a request for quote from another supplier who bid low then refiled partway through to get approval for cost overruns. They NEVER did any of the actual engineering, just had a friend pass along other places quotes.

I solved that one!
I translated all units into obscure obsolete units, and not necessarily from the same system (Like old imperial French weights per square cubit for pressures- especially fun as those units of mass varied between cities.. ) . And described US standard fittings by their DIN or ISO numbers...

Pre internet that was pure conversion hell. Their guy called me very upset that I had done that and demanded that I provide a translation so they could complete the contract they had low bid under me. (I have doubts that the bid process was "sealed bid" for all bidders .)
I told him I would supply that for about what I'd quoted for the job.
He had some expensive engineers figuring it out and had the govt purchasing agents boss lean on me. he wasn't happy when I told him I'd deliberately used those units and specs because I kept losing to one place that always seemed to have my exact numbers and exact design on every quote he beat me on.
That boss was NOT happy...
And since the other guy never paid me he paid his engineers making at least double what I made somewhere around three weeks work to look it all up.
And when he didn't look up the parts specs... He got quoted on those items as if they were "special" items... Like 4x list price.

Never had a problem competing honestly for those government jobs after that.

[thatguywithadot]

LOLOLOLOLOLOL that is hilarious my man! The bidding process for gov contracts has long been corrupted wildly even in my inner experience on the inside as an employee...