Fro Joy Babe Ruth Cards

[danmckee]

SGC nor PSA will grade them any more. BVG will but I doubt they have a clue. Real ones are very easy to tell, paper should be white and graphics good. You should always clearly see both eyes on the Ruth portrait card. Dan.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by danmckee

SGC nor PSA will grade them any more. BVG will but I doubt they have a clue. Real ones are very easy to tell, paper should be white and graphics good. You should always clearly see both eyes on the Ruth portrait card. Dan.

Actually BVG has more of a clue than you think they do. You ought to talk to Mark Anderson or Andy Broome sometime. I assure you, you will come away thinking very differently.

[Clutch-Hitter]

Originally Posted by danmckee

SGC nor PSA will grade them any more. BVG will but I doubt they have a clue. Real ones are very easy to tell, paper should be white and graphics good. You should always clearly see both eyes on the Ruth portrait card. Dan.

Hey Dan,

There's no doubt whatsoever the "...Crack Fielder" we labeled counterfeit is indeed a counterfeit. Your comment also applies to the authentic "....Crack Fielder" card in that Ruth's facial features are much clearer compared to the counterfeit. Which brings up a good point, why doesn't the "...Crack Fielder" from the REA auction display clear facial features, and why does the box/frame on the back have gaps at the corners?

Having said that, regarding the authentication companies, we've provided examples in this thread alone of who and who does not have a clue when it comes to this card issue.

Look at the REA card. The facial features are not crisp and clear, and the box on the back has gaps at the corners. It looks like my reprint. Am I missing something or not seeing something I should be? Why is the card's back so beige? Did Fro Joys come in singles and uncut sheets, and if so, did the singles look different?

Thanks