crap, my bad. Apologies!!! though I could've sworn when I wrote my first comment the Title still read "1917 Youth's Companion Babe Ruth Stamp PSA EX-MT 6"

You’re not losing it, unless I am too. It didn’t say anything about Rube this morning so they must have gone in and updated it.

well, still good that they changed it, and glad I'm not nuts!

Changes
 

No Scott, you're not nuts. We originally had Ruth in the title and description. This thread alerted me to the auction and I updated the description.

Changes
 

No Scott, you're not nuts. We originally had Ruth in the title and description. This thread alerted me to the auction and I updated the description.

Kudos on the quick response!

They just added that statement today. When I posted my comment, this statement by them, wasn't there. I also sent a message to Heritage, highlighting the issue to them. I got a response this morning from Peter Calderon, where he told me they were aware, and had updated the description.

Regarding the holder, I thought it was a newer holder.....my mistake.

Steve

I just saw Peter's response in this thread. Thank you Peter, for the fast response!

I would like some Board advise. I read and then reread this post with growing concern, for I hold this card in a PSA 8 with a flip clearly stating it's Ruth. I recall buying it off Ebay sometime back and gave no thought that it could be anybody but the Bambino; the red stockings, the distinctive left handed pitching motion and, of course, the PSA pedigree. My baseball stats book reveals the remarkable year Ruth enjoyed in 1917; he went 24-13 with an ERA of 2.01, 35 complete games, 128 strikeouts, etc. I couldn't find much of anything about Rube M. for that year, so it seems logical that Ruth would be the player to grace the stamp. Who knows? Well, I guess PSA does since they now recognize their error. So what should I do, since my copy is now worth less?

1. Nothing. Just keep it the way it is, have a cold one and move on.
2. Quietly return it to PSA for a new flip and do nothing.
3. Loudly return it to PSA demanding compensation for their mislabeling and causing the value to sink.
4. Send it to SGC and cause as much grief for PSA as possible.
Any thoughts?

#3. This is exactly what the Grade Guarantee is about. #4 doesn't make any sense; sure way to lose money on the transaction. PSA is the only one who can/will reimburse you the difference in values.

BTW the board was instrumental in this change, it wasn't some arbitrary whim by PSA. I believe someone here located the photo the image was taken from and it's a perfect match.

Here's an interesting thought:

What if this stamp was, in fact, meant to show Babe Ruth, but the issuer used the wrong photo?

Just like in other cases such as the E90-1 and E98 cards of "Cy" Young that actually show Irv Young, or the T3 Frank Baker that shows Jack Barry. The only difference with the stamp, is that the company didn't put the player's name on it.

The reason this might be the case, is:

1. The stamp was purportedly issued in 1917
2. Babe Ruth played for the Boston Red Sox from 1914-1919.
3. Rube Marquard played for the NY Giants from 1908-1915, the Brooklyn Dodgers from 1915-1920, Cincinnati Reds in 1921, and the Boston Braves from 1922-1925.
4. The Youth's Companion was an American Children's magazine, and it was based in Boston.

The fact that the stamp was issued in a magazine based in Boston, in 1917, and Babe Ruth played for the Red Sox at the time, while Rube Marquard played in New York/Brooklyn, lead to at least the possibility that the stamp was meant to portray Ruth, but simply had the wrong photo used.

Edited to add this:

Also, Babe Ruth was 22 in 1917, while Rube Marquard was 30. As mentioned above, The Youth's Companion was directed at children. Ruth was in his fourth year in the majors, and was having his best season on the mound. Ruth led the AL in starts, shutouts and ERA in 1916. Marquard on the other hand, was on the downside of his career. Additionally, the Red Sox won the World Series in 1916, defeating the Dodgers. In the World Series, Ruth was 1-0, while Marquard was 0-2. Neither team reached the World Series in 1917.

How would this possibility affect perceptions of the stamp?

Steve

None of it would. People who know would know it's Marquard, and be pissed that the sellers want Babe Ruth money.

everything but a 4 year degree!

I have to agree and would add that who it's SUPPOSED to be is irrelevant without a name on the card.