….
 

[QUOTE=Balticfox;2515431]Looking over this thread, you yourself have been the worst offender in that regard.

I’m just giving what I get. There’s a lot of keyboard warriors on this forum who hurl insults and are just blatantly rude. So If you can’t beat em, join em.

So how did I know it was real? Confident enough to buy it and now sending to authentication just to prove a point. Maybe, just maybe…I know what I’m looking for, hence the name.

Using Rob Gs comparison photo I'll circle the weird shadows on his arms and face. If it's real it's a crazy print anomaly. I mean his jersey stripes literally look like somebody shaded them in with a pencil compared to the 2 examples that are good. His face looks like a mime that went crazy with eyeliner.

I also noticed the before and after photos a black mark on his face disappeared. This card must've been stored in a toolbox.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...9fc35d8581.jpg

Looking at the placement of that pinhole, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Merkle's Boner yet.

lol I like your style!!!

How is he going to save you $100, your bet was you’d pay for the grading service, and if it comes back an A(which it will) you pay me $100….what am I missing?

Manners.

…
 

Hypersensitive much?

That's a pin prick.

I have no dog in this fight, and I definitely have no expertise in this, but I'm betting on the Kid. Looking forward to being proven right--or wrong--though I do wonder if this will end at all. Not clear to me that the grader's word will be accepted by the other side....

Bob, I don't see where anyone won anything. Don't ask "Yoda" for $100. It is what it is. I think it's a $15 card and real, others disagree. Yoda was the original board-op, so he should get some slack in my opinion. Good luck collecting, and enjoy your card.

I have no idea what you mean? He was the original board op? What’s that have to do with being completely wrong? He made a public bet and now is reneging on it. Gone completely quiet and won’t respond to my pm.

I am not reneging on anything. I sent you a PC declaring the bet is on as long as you first post a picture of the card you submitted and the submission form. My bet, as stated, only applies to the 1st scan posted, not subsequent ones. As stated, I will cover the grading cost, so send me a pm with the amount and I will send you a check. If scan #1 card comes back with an A I will pay you the $100 and eat all my Greg Jefferies RCs. If a reprint, well you know.. John Spencer

Here is the submission form.

Alright the submission is in! Don't be shy about letting us all know what SGC grades it as!

FYI your address and phone number are both still visible through the lighter part of the black marker...I can make out everything except the first numbers of the zip but that can be located based on the city so you may want to redo the pic...

Can't wait until you let us know what SGC says!

After that revised scan it looks 100% good to me now. That OG scan was really misleading.

Mr. Toe Moss
Great. Our bet is now in the hands of SGC. Part of the bet stipulations was a scan of the card you submitted. Not there in your post. If it is other than scan #1, then the bet if off. Several legitimate Merkle CJ scans have been posted and should not be used for this exercise.
As promised, I owe you you $30 for the submission and can send you a check, but need your address to do that. If you like, we can settle up once the card is returned and all will be revealed.

I posted the card once is received it from the seller. It’s in a couple posts up (front and back pics) do I need to post it again? You think I might have 15 CJ Merkles laying around that I’d cut up to send off for grading just to win a bet? Lmao

No, I trust you sent the card to SGC that you posted images. Just I have been caught in a couple of bait and switch attempts and wanted to be careful. Let the chips fall where they may. I almost wish your card comes back with the scarlet letter to show how SGC's grading is currently degrading.

…
 

Hey John, just private msg me settle the bet. Of course I’ll post a better scan when SGC uploads its tonight but this just popped.

Robert, that's an impressive catch based on those first scans.

His user name is well deserved!:)

Well done!

I think this is one of the best examples of a photo with flash, which bleaches the hell out of the appearance of the card and also creates weird contrast issues, vs a scan of a card, which, if undoctored, presents a much more accurate image.

I will say that was a helluva catch by Robert based on the initial photo!

I'm kinda wanting to see this video instead.

Wonder if James will swallow his pride and admit he was inherently wrong….

Thanks for the follow-up. Fun to watch this post evolve start to finish.

As surprised as I am, I will ,of course, honor my bet. Pls PM me your address and I will send you a check for $100. I really thought the print was way off and it was a reprint. But now it can be a nice part of your CJ collection.
The 1/1 video of me eating Greg Jefferies Rc's is available for $100.

Pics
 

As promised…Hi res photos from SGC.

And beside it is the original image that was posted when it was for sale. Congrats on knowing what attributes to look for in really bad Cracker Jack scans. Based upon the original image, my guess is that very few vintage collectors would think it was authentic.

Now perhaps understand that the rest of us lowly not worthy collectors were reacting to an image that made it look inauthentic as hell.

Brian

+100

That was a piss poor attempt at admitting defeat but I’ll take it. You sound saltier than a peanut. Haha

Thanks Finley!!!

I bet you thought it was fake as well. Thankfully there’s TPGs for guys like you.

Everything about the original pic made it look fake as a $3 bill. Yes, I will admit I was wrong.

Apparently not if I got it right but at least you have the balls to come back and admit you’re wrong. Kudos to you.

-
Leon should change the name of this thread to "How To Be a Gracious Winner".
-

100% agreed!

I’ve stayed silent in the background for along time on here and watched the attacks and personal shots some on these members take on others. Now that the tables are turned all of a sudden you n54 vets get butt hurt.

I, along with the majority that participated on this thread, were wrong. I stated my opinion of the card as shown in the original post, and I was wrong.

So what. My peanuts of choice are roasted, but unsalted.


Brian

The card to be fair is still a print anomaly like I've stated before. Half of Fred's face being black isn't normal. Still, cool that it's real.

Let's have more fun. Here is another test for everyone. Real or not authentic?

Brian

In the future, I think a picture of the seller holding the card between his thumb and forefinger would be telling. I think the card should naturally flex/bend, right? Also, I haven't seen many cut Cracker Jack cards. I'm no expert. Just a casual observer. But I wonder if there is any time period where cards were more likely to be cut by their young owners?

It may be authentic, but it's totally trashed. The original question on whether to buy it or not, should still be no. Not understanding the fanfare, and I'm basically agreeing with Finley's cartoon.

Boy you just don’t concede, it’s real…that was the original question asked.

And I’m basically saying, you’re a clown 🤡

This proves you’re a clown 🤡

Because it is the honorable thing to do, I will honor my bet and send you a check by the end of the week. I will say that I got fooled by the 1st scan with all the quirky shading into thinking it was a reprint. The card in the holder has none of the defects shown in the first scan.

+1000

I certainly was leaning towards fake myself. Every post blaming it on the photo makes Robert's positive ID even more impressive.

….
 

Thank you Scott!

Everyone seemed fixated on the front to make there determination where it was on the back where the texture of the cardstock is that cemented it for me. I tried to show comparison examples but I guess it went unnoticed.