NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for BSelling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
ebay GSB
T206s on Ebay
Pre-WWII Cards
Post WWII Cards
Vintage Memorabilia
Babe Ruth Cards
Ty Cobb Cards
Lou Gehrig Cards
Mickey Mantle Cards
Goudey Cards
Bowman Cards
T205s on Ebay
Tobacco "T" Cards
Caramel "E" Cards
Vintage Baseball Postcards
Football Cards on Ebay
Exhibit Cards
Strip Cards
Baking Cards
Sporting News
Playball Cards on Ebay

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Main Forum - WWII & Older Baseball Cards > Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-10-2017, 02:35 AM
brianp-beme's Avatar
brianp-beme brianp-beme is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,378
Default PSA N9 designation for an uncatalogued 1915 Cracker Jack variation - Now with scans!

I recently just submitted my first order to a TPG (PSA)...which means of course this long time raw collector has officially moved over to the dark side. Bwwwhahaha!

Ok, to get to my question. I wanted them to grade a 1915 Cracker Jack card I have that is potentially an uncatalogued variation. My card does not have a number on the back. I indicated on the form that this was an uncatalogued NO # variation. I got back the result of N9, which I looked up on their website and evidently is used to indicate either a card that does not fit their holders, or that it is an obscure issue that they do not grade.

Of course, this card is neither. It is just something that has not been seen before. With my examination of the card it appears to be a legit variation, but I wanted a grading company to examine it and confirm. Is PSA unwilling to provide that type of service? Should I try SGC instead? Is there an appropriate way for me to request a grading company to actually authenticate this potential variation? I of course would be interested if anyone has come across this situation before, or has some useful advice. Thanks.

Brian
Attached Images
File Type: jpg crackjackvaughnnonumber987.jpg (77.7 KB, 607 views)
File Type: jpg crackjackvaughnnonumber988.jpg (79.1 KB, 608 views)
File Type: jpg crackjackvaughnnonumber989.jpg (72.8 KB, 608 views)
File Type: jpg crackjackvaughnnonumber990.jpg (43.6 KB, 600 views)

Last edited by brianp-beme; 06-12-2017 at 12:49 PM. Reason: changed title to reflect scan status
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-10-2017, 02:50 AM
Griffins Griffins is offline
Anthøny N. ex
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,133
Default

I've found they won't grade a variation until it has been cataloged as such. I jumped thru a bunch of hoops getting them to final grade the Peterson RedCap variation in the '49 Leaf set as such, and it was only after I produced a few articles about it that they agreed to designate it. I suspect you'll have to have an article or two written about it before they'll decide to grade it.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-10-2017, 02:58 AM
brianp-beme's Avatar
brianp-beme brianp-beme is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,378
Default

Thanks Anthony, that is what I suspected...not willing to go out on the limb with their own examination. I would think that their expertise should be able to determine whether it is indeed a legit 'lacking number' card that has not been tampered with, and be willing to stand by it.

Is SGC any different in this regard?

Brian
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-10-2017, 04:43 AM
glynparson's Avatar
glynparson glynparson is offline
Glyn Parson
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Blandon PA
Posts: 1,885
Default I do not think sgc will grade

There was a time that a variation needed to be catalogued before it's graded. Not sure about now. Why not call and ask them then you will know for sure. I do not know how much research one expects for the nominal grading fees. If you expect all kinds of research etc. expect grading fees to be considerably more then current rates. Like Anthony stated do a little work try and get some articles published on it. The payoff would probably be worth the effort if you could get it catalogued. A rare variation from a popular set should realize some very good money.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-10-2017, 07:49 AM
edhans's Avatar
edhans edhans is offline
Ed Hans
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Buffalo, N.Y.
Posts: 817
Default Re: Cracker Jack Variation

I went through the same thing when I was trying to get the Pfeffer Chicaco variation cataloged. PSA and SGC wouldn't grade it until it was cataloged. Krause wouldn't catalog it until multiple examples had been certified by the grading companies. I wound up taking it to Beckett, who both cataloged and graded them.
__________________
Please visit my website at http://t206.monkberry.com/index.html

Last edited by edhans; 06-10-2017 at 07:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-10-2017, 08:04 AM
rainier2004's Avatar
rainier2004 rainier2004 is offline
Steven
Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Spartan Country, MI
Posts: 1,994
Default

It would be cool to see a scan.

In all my time buying and selling CJs, I have only found one other card without the number and the TPG determined it had been removed. Scans? You got me really interested here.

Last edited by rainier2004; 06-10-2017 at 10:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-10-2017, 12:00 PM
brianp-beme's Avatar
brianp-beme brianp-beme is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,378
Default

Hi All, I will post scans of the mystery Cracker Jack card (I have decided to be one of those posters who keeps everyone hanging in suspense) in the next few days.

And Steven, determining if the card's number has been removed or not is exactly what I would want the TPG to do. And I scream out to the world, is this too much to ask? Maybe I will try contacting them(is that too much to ask of me...perhaps).

A few years back I had a raw, unconfirmed M116 variation that I sent to an auction house, and the auction house sent it to the grader and it got encapsulated. Do I just not have enough pull, or is it like Glyn suggested, that my $45 bucks was just not enough for them to do the extra legwork?

Brian
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-10-2017, 12:06 PM
brianp-beme's Avatar
brianp-beme brianp-beme is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by edhans View Post
I went through the same thing when I was trying to get the Pfeffer Chicaco variation cataloged. PSA and SGC wouldn't grade it until it was cataloged. Krause wouldn't catalog it until multiple examples had been certified by the grading companies. I wound up taking it to Beckett, who both cataloged and graded them.
Maybe that could be a route to take...send it to Beckett with a note explaining that it is possibly an uncatalogued variation, get them to grade and note it on their flip, then send to SGC or PSA and say, hey cross over this Cracker Jack variation. Or just leave it in the Beckett holder as a reward for their reasonable service.

Brian
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-10-2017, 12:36 PM
drcy's Avatar
drcy drcy is offline
David Ru.dd Cycl.eback
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,740
Default

A bit back, a board member (Peter U.) had a NNOF T206 that he had Scott F. and I examine in person for our collective opinion. We posted that the card was untampered with, and REA agreed. PSA then graded it. Though that wasn't a card variation for a catalog, but a printing error/anomaly. I don't know as I've never talked to anyone at PSA, but assumed PSA wanted such opinions before they grade it.

The card

Last edited by drcy; 06-10-2017 at 12:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-10-2017, 06:52 PM
paul's Avatar
paul paul is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 994
Default

I find it funny that PSA would rely on the unknown methods of a cataloguer, but not their own expertise, to determine if a variation is legit or not. I used to send uncatalogued cards to Bob Lemke all the time, and all he wanted from me was a black and white photocopy. They all ended up in the Standard Catalog.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-12-2017, 12:42 PM
brianp-beme's Avatar
brianp-beme brianp-beme is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,378
Default

Ok, I posted the scans on the original post which include a close-up of the top back of the mystery Cracker Jack card with no number visible...Mr. Vaughn. I swear it is not a size- shifting card, despite the scans that seem to indicate otherwise.

What do you all think?

Brian
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-12-2017, 12:53 PM
bobbyw8469's Avatar
bobbyw8469 bobbyw8469 is offline
Robert Williams
member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 5,862
Default

You have precendence......

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=89755
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-12-2017, 01:35 PM
bnorth's Avatar
bnorth bnorth is offline
Ben North
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 5,485
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by drcy View Post
A bit back, a board member (Peter U.) had a NNOF T206 that he had Scott F. and I examine in person for our collective opinion. We posted that the card was untampered with, and REA agreed. PSA then graded it. Though that wasn't a card variation for a catalog, but a printing error/anomaly. I don't know as I've never talked to anyone at PSA, but assumed PSA wanted such opinions before they grade it.

The card
That whole ordeal was a joke. They labeled it with a MC qualifier. I did learn that the methods used to remove ink on a modern card does not work on T206 cards. I also am not saying the card was altered but there was a lot of stray ink specks on the side and top borders with none on the bottom border.
__________________
T210 Series 3 Ft Worth, looking for low end examples and especially ones with a Y shaped hole punch. I also have some extra T210's for trade.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-12-2017, 04:57 PM
Aquarian Sports Cards Aquarian Sports Cards is offline
Scott Russell
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,537
Default

I am not a fan of the fact that the words "Pitcher of the Chicago" all show signs of erasure at the top. Even "James L Vaughn" shows light fading. I think the card is altered. Sorry, I know that's not what you wanted to hear.
__________________
Check out http://www.birminghamauctioneers.com Always looking for consignments 717.327.8915 We sell your less expensive pre-war cards individually instead of in bulk lots to make YOU the most money possible!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-12-2017, 05:37 PM
brianp-beme's Avatar
brianp-beme brianp-beme is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards View Post
I am not a fan of the fact that the words "Pitcher of the Chicago" all show signs of erasure at the top. Even "James L Vaughn" shows light fading. I think the card is altered. Sorry, I know that's not what you wanted to hear.
Hi Scott, glad to get your input. Of course I would love for it to be unaltered, but I am perfectly ok if it proves not to be an uncatalogued variation. I purchased this card in a group lot of Cracker Jacks from board member Jerry on one of his ebay listings about a year ago. He mentioned in passing in his lot description that this card might be a no # variation. I won the lot with the assumption that paper damage removed the number. When I looked at the card with magnification I could not see evidence of any paper loss, and it appeared unlikely that erasure or sanding had occurred (keep in mind I am no expert in the field, otherwise I would have a lot more unknown variations in my collection!). I see what you mean by the top line of text, but to my untrained eye it doesn't appear to have been caused by abrasion of some sort.

That is why I wanted PSA to check it over, which of course was obviously silly of me to have considered. I would love to hear other opinions about the card. I might eventually take the route of having some expert check it over in person to have a more definitive answer.

Brian

Last edited by brianp-beme; 06-12-2017 at 05:48 PM. Reason: clarified my nonclarified self
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-20-2019, 11:58 AM
FrankWakefield FrankWakefield is offline
Frank Wakefield
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Franklin KY
Posts: 1,982
Default another

I got this in Scott Brockelman's auction

http://www.net54baseball.com/attachm...1&d=1571587095

I think it's the same card. I see it's lighter, I don't think it was 'removed', I think there are other no number Vaughn's out there somewhere.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Cracker Jack Vaughn front.jpg (77.6 KB, 442 views)
File Type: jpg Cracker Jack Vaughn back.jpg (80.4 KB, 408 views)

Last edited by FrankWakefield; 10-20-2019 at 12:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-20-2019, 01:33 PM
brianp-beme's Avatar
brianp-beme brianp-beme is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,378
Default

It is definitely the same card, as I was the consigner. It was determined under close examination that the number had been there, and the ink probably just erased. Cool card nonetheless, and glad a real fine collector ended up with it.

Brian
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-20-2019, 01:37 PM
brianp-beme's Avatar
brianp-beme brianp-beme is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,378
Default

It is possible that the printing 'strike' (I am obviously a printing expert) just didn't have ink in the upper portion, as you can see that the top part of the upper line on the right side seems to be missing too.

Brian
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-20-2019, 09:34 PM
bigfanNY bigfanNY is offline
Jonathan Sterling
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,063
Default

The darker area where the print is indicate to me that the area outside of that was lightened by some process. ..
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-23-2019, 02:31 PM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is offline
Leon
peasant/forum owner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 28,147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigfanNY View Post
The darker area where the print is indicate to me that the area outside of that was lightened by some process. ..
Are you talking about the white glare?
__________________
Leon Luckey
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-23-2019, 04:17 PM
BigBeerGut's Avatar
BigBeerGut BigBeerGut is offline
Michael Durrett
member
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Henderson NV
Posts: 87
Default

erased!

MJD
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
1915 Cracker Jack ? Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 1 09-19-2001 05:22 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:04 AM.


ebay GSB