|
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Larry, did you happen to notice the scans Leon posted for me? That is the same reprint these two guys have, it was made back in the 70's supposedly, as I was told by the dealer who gave it to me. I've had mine since 1991 and it was old looking then. I have 656 real t206's and my Wagner, which looks exactly like their Wagner, does not look like any of those real t206's. There is no doubt it is a fake card, the back looks real but the front has so many problems it's literally unreal.
Trust me when I say this, I dont like work that much, if I had a real Wagner I wouldn't have it anymore and I certainly wouldn't have a job. Well, I would still be a writer but I wouldn't be working at a restaurant too. These guys do not have anything except the same reprint I've had for 20 years. If someone now wants to believe because an unknown grading company gave their word it's real, let me know, I'll sell mine for one dollar less than whatever 6 figure price you'd pay for the other one. Reminded me just now that back in the day an unknown grading company graded a Mathewson reprint as real and then came on the board trying to defend their position...we never heard from them again. I suspect the same thing will happen with this company edit: I have a good memory from 9 years ago, proof that I've been around here waaay too long http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...son+grade+tech
__________________
Please check out my books on baseball history. They include the bio of star second baseman Dots Miller. A book featuring 20 Moonlight Graham players who got into just one game. Another with 13 players who were with the Pittsburgh Pirates during the regular season, but never played a game. There's also one about 27 baseball families, as well as a day-by-day look at the worst team in Pittsburgh Pirates history. All five can be found here: https://www.amazon.com/stores/John-D...hor/B0DH87Q2DS Last edited by z28jd; 10-15-2011 at 07:18 PM. Reason: felt like it |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
If I remember correctly, wasn't that what Dan Mathewson got all upset about and disappeared over?
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Leon,
I have just one question. Why isn't ACA Grading one of the links available for grading companies in the Vintage Links section? You've got PSA listed Hey all you PSA lovers, take it easy....Could you imagine if some numnut one actually bought this card at auction.
__________________
fr3d c0wl3s - always looking for OJs and other 19th century stuff. PM or email me if you have something cool you're looking to find a new home for. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
I dont need a loupe for any of those counterfeits either, but I guess that's because I know what I am doing. If you need a loupe to tell that card is fake you know nothing about T206's. if you have been around snce the 1980's and need a loupe to tell that is fake you have not learned very much about your hobby.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Is it just me... or... "Mr Bud Abbott & Costello Reincarnated!?!?"
Ahhh... Never mind...
__________________
Life's Grand, Denny Walsh |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true. https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/ Or not... |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Nice try, but you are forgetting something. If you look closely at the earlobes......
karu baseball honus wagner.jpg Thus, my vote is in: the_three_stooges_image__3_.jpg They are practically cobbedwards.jpg Lovely Day... Last edited by iggyman; 10-17-2011 at 01:26 PM. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
It would clearly seem that you have voluntarily chosen to fall within the category of those befallen by prejudice and/or arrogance, prefering to decide the issue presented on the basis of who these people who own the card are and how different they are from you, when what is really important are the actual facts pertaining to the card itself. You can attempt to rebutt me all you like, but you can't kid yourself about what you really see deep inside you, and you won't change the actual facts about your behavior until you yourself change! Your hostility is only indicative of the truth of the above, which, when you've been brought face to face with it, brings about resentment on your part, and the nastiness comes through. I feel sorrow for your pent-up hatred, which causes you to behave in a manner which you most likely would not prefer, and tends quite strongly to make a complete fool out of you. Best wishes on a successful metamorphis, becoming a person more willing to objectively consider various sources of actually relevant information, rather than jump to a conclusion based on all the wrong reasons. Remember, my initial post in this thread merely indicated I would like to have more objective information conderning the card itself, rather than people's reactions to the identity of the would-be seller. I did not take any position with regard to the card's validity at all, and most assuredly did not start the nasty comments, but as you have readily seen, am more than capable of defending my position against them. Larry Last edited by ls7plus; 10-21-2011 at 05:25 AM. |
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Larry, you seem to be very lost about this card so let me give you history on it. It appeared on ebay many times before anyone knew anything about the sellers so saying someone based their opinion on the card solely based on their opinion of the sellers is extremely way off base, you couldn't be more wrong. Also in response to Glyn you start mentioning the reasons you need a loupe for t206s that have nothing to do with THIS card which is what he was referring. I don't know if you can't see the cards posted in this thread but if you can AND you're still trying to defend your position against it, no one is taking your serious anymore. This card is well known, its been around way too long to still try to have meaningful discussions on the possibility they might be right/wrong
Hundreds of legit people have said this card is fake based on legit knowledge while two people now with no apparent knowledge of t206 cards have said it could be from that era based on paper samples of the back of the card which means they would also say the same thing about a child's drawing of Honus Wagner glued to the front of a t206 card peeled in half. If I posted my card which is the same exact reprint they have and kept pushing it as real I would instantly have zero credibility and I've done well over 200 deals with various board members. Wouldnt matter what I did in the past or how many deals I've had, I'd be done
__________________
Please check out my books on baseball history. They include the bio of star second baseman Dots Miller. A book featuring 20 Moonlight Graham players who got into just one game. Another with 13 players who were with the Pittsburgh Pirates during the regular season, but never played a game. There's also one about 27 baseball families, as well as a day-by-day look at the worst team in Pittsburgh Pirates history. All five can be found here: https://www.amazon.com/stores/John-D...hor/B0DH87Q2DS |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
So do you actually believe there's any chance it's real?
Having seen the black and white pic of it slabbed I still don't buy it. There's no or nearly no border to the image area, which is typical of a reprint. Even the proof has a clear border. The name and team are darker than the "Pittsburg" on the uniform. On all the pics I have of known real Wagners that lettering is either the same or lighter. There's a serious loss of detail above TSB on the uniform. A lack of detail seen on no other Wagner. Loss of detail is typical of a rescreened printing (Read reprint) The aging is very atypical of actual aging. The aging IS typical of a modern reprint dipped in tea or something similar. That highlights cracks in the glosscoat, which is what we see on the card in question. It appears to have a slight diamond cut, not unusual for a T206 ....But on the sides which is unusual if not unique for a T206 So if we're to believe it's real then we also have to believe that a very early borderless proof printed from a stone etched entirely differently than any other T206 including unreleased players was somehow finished with the production back as NO other proofs were, and glosscoated as only a very few T206s were(Some of the Cobb backs are the only glosscoated ones I've heard of) And then for some reason cut by machine like a production card, but differently than very nearly all of the production cards. And that that unique unreleased T206 just happened to be a Wagner. All that is objective. If my mother found that card I'd think it was a reprint. If it wasn't Wagner I'd think it was a reprint. Yes, the loupe can be handy. I use a 30X one myself, as well as high resolution scans if I want to have a good close look at something. And I use it more as my eyes get old. 20 years ago I could see the dot patterns on fakes without the loupe. Not so much today ![]() Yeah, I'd like to see a 1200DPI scan. Or have the card in hand. If only to remove the .000009% chance it might be real. Steve B Quote:
|
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
WOW. This card is like a bad cold, it never seems to go away. No one cares what ASA says about this card. The hobby has known it is a fake from the first time it surfaced and it will be a fake until it finally disappears in the night. The strands of paper taken from the back may be from a real T206 but the front is a $.10 fake seen from 1 ft or 100 ft away. I don't care if Bill Gates or Larry the Cable guy owns it. It's still fake and to have pushed this to the point of getting it slabbed as a proof is a slap in the face to every know T206 in the hobby. They got more than their 15 minutes, now I'm hoping they will just fade away. The discussion of it here of having to see it close up or looped is even more perplexing.
|
|
#12
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
The legitimacy of this card is no longer questioned, and hasn't been for many, many years, by anyone who has any understanding of lithography and/or scammer behavior (either will do). It was a laughable fake then, and it still is. I was surprised when it first came out and anyone even bothered saying 'why' it's a fake - it's a fake because it's an obvious fake, even from photographs. All the things they did to it to try to make it look real are irrelevant. If they really wanted to pass it off as real, they could have picked a better reprint to start with. Okay, so throw that card away, next thought: there are just not very many t206 Wagners existing. If we were to ever see a 'previously unreleased version' of ANY t206, do you really think it would be drastically different from all other t206's in every respect other than size, and do you really think it would be of a t206 as rare as the Wagner? I doubt the existence of any such card in a Wagner version, so much, that you would have a hard time showing me one with a blue or red background, with his name spelled wrong, with ANYTHING on it that's different fro a 'normal' Wagner, and convincing me that it was legit, MUCH less if you wouldn't even let a respectable grading company look at it.
__________________
$co++ Forre$+ |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Last edited by glynparson; 03-05-2022 at 05:49 AM. |
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
|
Probably the most idiotic thing I’ve ever watched😳😳
|
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Recent passing of a relative of Honus Wagner! | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 02-14-2011 11:43 PM |
| another wagner going on the block | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 09-15-2008 07:21 PM |
| Wagner HBO Real Sports...what do you think? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 42 | 08-24-2006 01:05 PM |
| meant to follow up on the Wagner thread-- Context | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 12 | 09-06-2005 07:37 PM |
| Cobb vs. Wagner | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 90 | 07-03-2005 11:50 AM |