Quote:
Originally Posted by Cozumeleno
I promised myself ahead of time that I would keep this to one response. But you've stated a few inaccuracies that cannot be let go.
If you looked at the checklist last night and saw Toole still there, it was merely a cache issue with your computer as I removed the name several days ago. Either your computer's cache was very behind, you're mistaken, or you are blatantly making that up entirely. I am not sure which but I certainly did not wait until yesterday to remove the name. If I did, I'd have zero problem admitting it. The site is not my full time job.
Second, you absolutely did respond to people personally. In fact, virtually all of your responses here were in response to what someone else said. In one post, you demanded that the 'big guns' step up and do the right thing. In another, you indirectly called someone an idiot. In another, you mocked the OP for saying it was a period piece. Just because you didn't say their name? Come on. You ran around and took random shots at anyone that disagreed with you. It was rude and basically just uncalled for.
To your point about the design, so you basically took a card that looked similar but is clearly different, and determined that, since the two cards were not exactly alike that the one is obviously a fake. There are 143 cards in the set. If you look up all of the images of them on OC, you will see plenty of cards that are similar but not the same pose with plenty of discrepancies. And while the pose is not the same as any other in the set, neither are some others (i.e. Wood, Von Der Ahe, etc.).
You also seem hung up on this size and stock thing, so let's address that. There were at least three different types of posters. Your argument is that one card from any one poster is 1/8" taller so it's no good. I would be floored if all of the poster cuts were all exactly the same size. We're talking 1/8" here, not a full inch. And to the stock, how could you determine it is wrong without seeing the card in person? There are at the very least two, and more likely, three, different stocks based on this thread. The stock doesn't really tell us anything here if we can't see it in person.
You're entitled to your opinion and you may even be right. I do not believe you are but that's my own educated guess and nothing more. I could have this 100% wrong. Wouldn't be the first time by a long shot. But regardless of that, to say unequivocally that the card is an outright fake with so many variables seems just as reckless as you seem to think that saying it is real is. |
First you didn't just tell yourself that you were going to keep your response to one reply you stated it in your previous post. Which was like the 4th time you posted in the thread. But please do not limit yourself and keep on posting to the thread.
For clarity I never "demanded" anyone do anything. I responded to a post that said me stating the card was a fake and said that it was reckless and I said That I think saying the card looks good without examining the card in person was more reckless. When the OP who has clear vested interest said it was definitely a period piece with nothing to back that up. Yes I wrote LOl. I thought it was funny.
I think guessing having a hunch is fine But this thread says New Buchner not what is this? It is not a card that is part of the Buchner set. A few folks have chimed in and said the card needs to be examined closely. I 100% agree and did not respond to them but those that just chime in and say I think it comes from an imaginary sheet that no one has seen before again I think that is dangerous. It gives license to card fakers to keep em coming.
I can count and know my opinion is not the popular one but if I stop and the thread fades away and the card then Becomes a card cut from an unknown sheet that no one ever saw. And it gets passed on to another collector. I do not think that is the right thing to do. And you can call me Rude or any other name you like. But I think I am doing the right thing.
I will stop when 2 things happen, 1) the card is listed in the fake category based on the last couple of posts opinion is moved away from this card being part of Gold coin set. And 2) the thread title is edited to say Gold coin fake or unknown issue.
The size of the card is the size of the card. And 1/8 inch is significant. And larger I believe is more significant than smaller because as I stated before ciggarette pack size is a known so either the card fits or it dose not. As I stated I owned a 3 card strip of gold coins all St Louis players if I remember correctly and all matched up in size. So again saying that you can imagine a card from an imaginary sheet being a different size is in my opinion a very weak argument.
As for the fact this pose dose not match up and you say "Von der ahe" is a unique card
Yes that card was definitely a one off pose, But St. Louis was a big team in 1887 Old judge also did a series of "Champions" but Toole was not a significant figure. And again the Wood stealing base is consistent with Old judge and other issues of the day that used similar poses. This pose is different because it is so poorly drawn Ears, Baseball ...
The card stock looks artificially aged and the color not consistant with other cards cut from sheets (in my opinion) that is why I say stock dose not match up. Both of those things I can see from the picture and do not need to hold in my hand.But agree 100% in hand this should be a much easier decision.
So to sum this up I know mine is not popular opinion but I think sitting on the sideline in this case is the wrong thing to do.