[Joe_G.]

I'm a bit late to the thread but just wanted to add that auction houses (and sometimes grading companies) over step their knowledge when describing (or grading) our collectibles. With the long winded flowery descriptions Goodwin and others feel compelled to deliver; they place themselves at risk of exposing their lack of knowledge. I can find errors in every Old Judge lot (about the only ones I look at).

The Sam Thompson N173 for example has several errors or questionable claims:

1) ERROR: "In total, 26 of the 27 Old Judge Hall of Famers are known to exist (there is no known Comiskey cabinet), . . ."

CORRECTION: Griffith is only known Old Judge HOFer without catalogued N173, Comiskey is among the easier examples.

2) Misleading: "this just happens to be the only recorded Sam Thompson N173 on the planet!" "This “one of one” museum worthy artifact portrays . . ."

Reality: Does publishing Thompson N173s in a book constitute being "recorded"? Thompson is considered mid-pack w.r.t. difficulty. The Old Judge book shows both brown and red mount examples of Thompson. I'm a black mount away from documenting Thompson in all available mount colors.

3) Misleading to some degree (I think): "His last year in the major Leagues, at the age of 46, he shared the outfield spotlight with Ty Cobb and Sam Crawford."

Reality: I don't believe Thompson ever took the field with Crawford and Cobb but was instead filling in for a short time for an injured Cobb. I would like to confirm this.

4) Strange: "Typical with most N173 cabinets, the yellow toned color has dissipated due to some 120 years of wear, toning and soling."

Just eliminate this, are they suggesting the photo or mount was once a bright or brighter yellow?

It's a great card that I would be bidding on if it were with Detroit. I don't think the description helps its case. Like the Johnson example, it would do fine on its own merit. I do however look forward to Goodwin's auctions; he seems to always put together an interesting offering.