|
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Ed cicolte? Was this ever corrected?
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
No, same on all.
I will say that is very strong embossing on the Cicotte, most of the two part cards have weak embossing. Could be that the soiling just highlights it. Either way, the highest it would have graded based on the wear would have been a 1. I don't think the label hurts the card(value) at all, it's still Cicotte and a tougher T204 as they get bought up and held. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Scott probably knows more about Ramlys than all of us put together. He was involved in a big Ramlys find years ago and really is your go-to guy with any questions about this beautiful set. I still have a super Jimmy Collins in my PC he sold me at the National years ago.
|
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thanks so much for posting scans for me, Bobby. It is much appreciated.
Scott, thanks for the information. I can say the back seems deeply embossed and does not look smooth, although obviously I can't say to what extent until I have it cracked. I can, however, say that the card looks better than the high res scans would suggest. It may have gotten a 1.5--a T210 Series 8 Cohen that I won in one of your recent auctions looks a lot worse IMO, and it got a 1.5 in the same submission. Who knows? Scott, you should definitely ask Old Cardboard and the PSA site, among others, to add this information under the T204 entry. It will be very useful, to many of us. |
![]() |
|
|