<< <i>Isn't this the dude that subbed a 55 Mays about 42 times knowing it's trimmed but finally got it in a holder and bragged about it? >>
42.....whew......good guess troll....try 2 times.....I am guessing you want to buy this raw from me so YOU can get it subbed??? This board takes the cake!
<< <i>Isn't this the dude that subbed a 55 Mays about 42 times knowing it's trimmed but finally got it in a holder and bragged about it? >>
42.....whew......good guess troll....try 2 times.....I am guessing you want to buy this raw from me so YOU can get it subbed??? This board takes the cake! >>
No I could never afford such a jewel. I will just stay here in my shanty and pray for tonight's dinner.
<< <i>Anyone got any explanations for this one???? Bueller????? Bueller?????? Always crickets chirping in the background.....lol........
>>
Other than the fact that it's trimmed and in a BGS holder, someone already gave you a clear reason why but you seem to ignore facts and keep riding your high horse.
The bigger problem here is how PSA graded the card. You guys can argue back and forth all you like but isnt the reason we all use TPG to take all the guess work out of this whole mess.
I think regardless of what Bobby says or the folks that think it is not a MB. Why does PSA think it is and where is their accountability???
Question. What is the value of both cards in this grade? Are we talking a huge difference?
Anyone got any explanations for this one???? Bueller????? Bueller?????? Always crickets chirping in the background.....lol........
Maybe if you took the time to actually read and attempt to comprehend the points that others are making rather than being completely oblivious to what's being said, you would realize the scan you just posted points to what they are arguing rather than what you're trying to say. Do you even understand why people are saying your card isn't a MB?
What does it all matter anyway? I am sure Bobby will whine to the powers that be and this thread will either be zapped or carved up to remove any offending posts leaving only OP posts for us all to see.
I haven't read the thread, but I scanned through for an image of the back of bobby's card and didn't see one. Bobby is the back yellow or orange? That's all you need to know. Also, if the white line isn't clearly distinguished from the burlap, meaning a crisp division, it's not a MB. I've seen an uncut sheet from the MB game--I wish I still had the image--because I think it would clear things up a bit for you.
If I recall correctly, the Ryan was surrounded top/bottom/left by football cards. This would account for white borders when miscut and the card viewed horizontally on the left and right sides as well as the top. But such facts are unimportant in this discussion.
If anyone has an image of an uncut sheet, I'm sure we could put this issue to rest for all but one CU member.
<< <i>Anyone got any explanations for this one???? Bueller????? Bueller?????? Always crickets chirping in the background.....lol........
>>
As this thread shows, a white line can appear on any of 3 sides (or maybe 4) if the card is OC enough.
You know how some 1970 Topps cards have a line if they are OC? See these 3 cards. link1link2link3 The lines on these cards appear to me to be the same distance from the word "pitcher". The thing about your card is that the "white line" is so far from the black line....further than on other examples of that MB card. Shouldn't it be the same distance on all of them? I don't know, I'm no expert.
You subed this card correct? Did you put that it was a Milton on the invoice?
Whether he did or didn't, I don't think its his fault if he truly thinks it is legit (not that I know myself but I think we've all been educated on these cards with this thread) but just because I turn in a 33 Ruth Goudey reprint but label it as being authentic on the invoice doesn't mean its going to come back labeled whatever I wrote it off as - I figure that the people at PSA will know a heck of a lot more than we do on this matter and its their job to pick out whats legit and whats not. I'm sure they have books and web tools/programs/guides to help them realize whats authentic. Have they made mistakes, of course but I don't believe that anyone here is an expert (although knowledgeable) on Milton Bradley cards - especially off a scan.
PSA has only recently started labeling the Milton Bradley cards. The card pictured was submitted years prior to PSA labeling Milton Bradley cards. The approximate 6,000 Ryan cards that were graded before this were all labeled as plain Topps cards and you will find a fair number of Milton Bradley cards in the regular Topps labeled holders. Since PSA started identifying the Milton Bradley cards you will now on rare occasion see a card that has been labeled incorrectly. Bobby's card has been labeled incorrectly.
Once again, if a Milton Bradley card is any worse than about 60/40 in either direction left or right, then there will be a distinct sharp start of the white bordered card that was printed next to Koosman or Ryan. Bobby's card is very badly off center to the right. Therefore for it to be a Milton Bradley card there must be only about 1/16" width of mesh pattern showing to the left of Koosman, and then the sharp white border of the football card printed next to Koosman will start.
This is the football card that was printed next to Koosman.
The mesh pattern printed at the top of the football card is actually the left border of the Ryan card, the thin mesh strip to the left of Koosman. So technically the football card in the Ebay listing could be considered a horribly bad miscut Ryan Milton Bradley card.
I appreciate all the insight. The major points overlooked is that fact that my card has BOTH of the telltale signs of the MB card. Different colored back = check....white line = check. If noone really knows what to look for in these Milton Bradley cards then maybe people should stop designating them!?!?! I have shown MB cards with NO white line, and with white lines at the TOP of the card.
Re-read my last post Bobby. It is not possible for a Milton Bradley Ryan to have a burlap border as large as the burlap border on the Koosman side of your card.
Lee....you were the one who posted the scans you jackleg. Saying they were the same color, when they were obviously NOT the same color. I suggest you get your eyes checked.
If he was ever going to follow your advice, it would have happened by now.
-WS
'Sir, I realize it's been difficult for you to sleep at night without your EX/MT 1977 Topps Tom Seaver, but I swear to you that you'll get it safe and sound.' -CDs Nuts, 1/20/14
bobby- Do you think it's a coincidence that 90% of the threads you post complaining about something blow up in your face? You just think people are out to get you? Perhaps take the time to consider that 90% of the time you have zero clue what you're talking about, and then you feel the need to fight to the death your incorrect assumptions when faced with dozens of people who use facts as the basis of their conclusions rather than you who just assumes things with no facts on their side.
Take the time to listen and understand what the countless people on here are trying to tell you. Try and understand what they are saying and why they are saying it. They are using facts and logic, not guesses.
<< <i>Lee....you were the one who posted the scans you jackleg. Saying they were the same color, when they were obviously NOT the same color. I suggest you get your eyes checked. >>
They looked the same to me and I just went to the eye doctor last week!!!
<< <i>Take the time to listen and understand what the countless people on here are trying to tell you. Try and understand what they are saying and why they are saying it. They are using facts and logic, not guesses. >>
He understands. Bobby's listing even says "no returns on 3rd party graded cards."
<< <i>Lee....you were the one who posted the scans you jackleg. Saying they were the same color, when they were obviously NOT the same color. I suggest you get your eyes checked. >>
The comparison is an ever so slight difference and Im guessing it is either scan quality, card fade, or just a mere slight factory difference. You of all people should know that the color difference is much more than that if you are the expert. I know you want it to so badly be a MB but its not. Swallow your pride and see the facts because you make yourself look worse every time you type on the keyboard and click "reply to thread"
<< <i>In this case I dont think you will get a hundred different answers....just not the answer you are looking for. >>
And I think I will....I posted a Jim Brown card....asked for a grade...got a bunch of different answers......
as far as the MB backs, the color shift is so subtle, noone will notice it. I am so tired of rehashing all that I know about the MB cards. I suggest everyone take a step back, and do their own research. I haven't even begun to post pics of all the MB rookies I have seen. Do we really want to rehash every single card I can find??????????
Before you do that. Could you tell us your experience with all those MB how big the white line has been on all the cards centered 100-0 ? Im talking about cards centered the exact same way your curent one is centered with maybe a 5% give. You seem to have handled hundreds of these things. So to make it easier could you just explain the ones that are similar to this one. and not just a bunch of BS.
Yes, what Handyman said. You only posted pictures of the front of cards that had nothing to do with the "problem area" of your card. If you only post pictures of well centered left-right cards then no white section will show at left or right. The card is most commonly found off center left to right, or left to right. Most of the pictures on VCP show this. The Beckett 4.5 sold by tarheeltreasurehunt in 2009, and the Beckett 7 have the best pictures of what the left area of your card has to look like for it to be a Milton Bradley. Every other picture on VCP of cards badly centered to the right have the same white section showing, except for a Becket 5.5 sold on 3/10 which appears to be a Beckett labeling mistake due to the too thick mesh border on the left. So if you're going to look at, or for pictures, please look at pictures that have something to do with the issue of your card.
PSA 8 (OC) sold for $450. PSA 5 sold for $400. There isn't much of a premium from the MB to the regular. Plus people have an aversion to cards with qualifiers, and there is no denying that the card is extremely OC.
And the sky is green over blue is even money as well. Im going with green. But I live under the sea. Ehh
Youre quick to answer an obvious question about price. But you still dont seem to want to accept you are wrong with all the facts given about the white line issue on your card.
They will re lable it for free as it was there error. He subed it so he cant claim damages for a mis lable. He would have to send it back to be corrected
Comments
<< <i>Isn't this the dude that subbed a 55 Mays about 42 times knowing it's trimmed but finally got it in a holder and bragged about it? >>
42.....whew......good guess troll....try 2 times.....I am guessing you want to buy this raw from me so YOU can get it subbed??? This board takes the cake!
<< <i>
<< <i>Isn't this the dude that subbed a 55 Mays about 42 times knowing it's trimmed but finally got it in a holder and bragged about it? >>
42.....whew......good guess troll....try 2 times.....I am guessing you want to buy this raw from me so YOU can get it subbed??? This board takes the cake! >>
No I could never afford such a jewel. I will just stay here in my shanty and pray for tonight's dinner.
<< <i>No I could never afford such a jewel. I will just stay here in my shanty and pray for tonight's dinner. >>
Smart move troll....what got you banned from PSA in the first place??
<< <i>Anyone got any explanations for this one???? Bueller????? Bueller?????? Always crickets chirping in the background.....lol........
Other than the fact that it's trimmed and in a BGS holder, someone already gave you a clear reason why but you seem to ignore facts and keep riding your high horse.
I think regardless of what Bobby says or the folks that think it is not a MB. Why does PSA think it is and where is their accountability???
Question. What is the value of both cards in this grade? Are we talking a huge difference?
Dave
1957 Topps 99% 7.40 GPA
Hank Aaron Basic PSA 7-8(75%)
Maybe if you took the time to actually read and attempt to comprehend the points that others are making rather than being completely oblivious to what's being said, you would realize the scan you just posted points to what they are arguing rather than what you're trying to say. Do you even understand why people are saying your card isn't a MB?
If anyone has an image of an uncut sheet, I'm sure we could put this issue to rest for all but one CU member.
<< <i>Anyone got any explanations for this one???? Bueller????? Bueller?????? Always crickets chirping in the background.....lol........
As this thread shows, a white line can appear on any of 3 sides (or maybe 4) if the card is OC enough.
You know how some 1970 Topps cards have a line if they are OC? See these 3 cards. link1 link2 link3
The lines on these cards appear to me to be the same distance from the word "pitcher". The thing about your card is that the "white line" is so far from the black line....further than on other examples of that MB card. Shouldn't it be the same distance on all of them? I don't know, I'm no expert.
Whether he did or didn't, I don't think its his fault if he truly thinks it is legit (not that I know myself but I think we've all been educated on these cards with this thread) but just because I turn in a 33 Ruth Goudey reprint but label it as being authentic on the invoice doesn't mean its going to come back labeled whatever I wrote it off as - I figure that the people at PSA will know a heck of a lot more than we do on this matter and its their job to pick out whats legit and whats not. I'm sure they have books and web tools/programs/guides to help them realize whats authentic. Have they made mistakes, of course but I don't believe that anyone here is an expert (although knowledgeable) on Milton Bradley cards - especially off a scan.
<< <i>Not a Milton Bradley?!?...
Whatever it is, the white border on this thing is a helluva lot more definitive than the vague scruff that's on Bobby's card.
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
<< <i>
<< <i>Not a Milton Bradley?!?...
Whatever it is, the white border on this thing is a helluva lot more definitive than the vague scruff that's on Bobby's card. >>
Agreed. Bobby's is not a MB.
Now the sticker residue doesn't seem like such a big problem.
Needs'
1972 Football-9's high#'s
1965 Football-8's
1958 Topps FB-7-8
Yay yay yay!
PSA has only recently started labeling the Milton Bradley cards. The card pictured was submitted years prior to PSA labeling Milton Bradley cards. The approximate 6,000 Ryan cards that were graded before this were all labeled as plain Topps cards and you will find a fair number of Milton Bradley cards in the regular Topps labeled holders. Since PSA started identifying the Milton Bradley cards you will now on rare occasion see a card that has been labeled incorrectly. Bobby's card has been labeled incorrectly.
Once again, if a Milton Bradley card is any worse than about 60/40 in either direction left or right, then there will be a distinct sharp start of the white bordered card that was printed next to Koosman or Ryan. Bobby's card is very badly off center to the right. Therefore for it to be a Milton Bradley card there must be only about 1/16" width of mesh pattern showing to the left of Koosman, and then the sharp white border of the football card printed next to Koosman will start.
This is the football card that was printed next to Koosman.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/200813901098
The mesh pattern printed at the top of the football card is actually the left border of the Ryan card, the thin mesh strip to the left of Koosman. So technically the football card in the Ebay listing could be considered a horribly bad miscut Ryan Milton Bradley card.
Hopefully they leave the sticker off this time.
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
http://app2.sellersourcebook.com/members/watch/enlarge.php?vers=5&aid=&eid=119-97-110-100-119-45-97-117-99-116-105-111-110-115&enc=1&cc=us&stu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fsch%2Fmerchant%2Fwandw-auctions&img=73693/img334_1346458095.jpg&imlist=img332.jpg~img334_1346458095.jpg
The back of the card is clearly not possibly a Milton Bradley card.
You're right, Bobby. You. Are. Right.
thanks for the tip on using WD-40 on Memory Lane stickers.
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
If he was ever going to follow your advice, it would have happened by now.
-WS
-CDs Nuts, 1/20/14
*1956 Topps baseball- 97.4% complete, 7.24 GPA
*Clemente basic set: 85.0% complete, 7.89 GPA
Take the time to listen and understand what the countless people on here are trying to tell you. Try and understand what they are saying and why they are saying it. They are using facts and logic, not guesses.
<< <i>Lee....you were the one who posted the scans you jackleg. Saying they were the same color, when they were obviously NOT the same color. I suggest you get your eyes checked. >>
They looked the same to me and I just went to the eye doctor last week!!!
<< <i>Take the time to listen and understand what the countless people on here are trying to tell you. Try and understand what they are saying and why they are saying it. They are using facts and logic, not guesses. >>
He understands. Bobby's listing even says "no returns on 3rd party graded cards."
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
<< <i>They looked the same to me and I just went to the eye doctor last week!!! >>
And they looked different to me and different to Brick. I guess ask 100 people an opinion and get 100 different answers.
<< <i>Lee....you were the one who posted the scans you jackleg. Saying they were the same color, when they were obviously NOT the same color. I suggest you get your eyes checked. >>
The comparison is an ever so slight difference and Im guessing it is either scan quality, card fade, or just a mere slight factory difference. You of all people should know that the color difference is much more than that if you are the expert. I know you want it to so badly be a MB but its not. Swallow your pride and see the facts because you make yourself look worse every time you type on the keyboard and click "reply to thread"
<< <i>He understands. Bobby's listing even says "no returns on 3rd party graded cards." >>
which is silly, 'cause eBay rarely sides with a seller in a dispute.
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
<< <i>which is silly, 'cause eBay rarely sides with a seller in a dispute. >>
He could argue: "Industry leader PSA says the card is a Milton Bradley. The buyer is not a professional grader and is either lying or ignorant."
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
<< <i>
<< <i>They looked the same to me and I just went to the eye doctor last week!!! >>
And they looked different to me and different to Brick. I guess ask 100 people an opinion and get 100 different answers. >>
In this case I dont think you will get a hundred different answers....just not the answer you are looking for.
<< <i>In this case I dont think you will get a hundred different answers....just not the answer you are looking for. >>
And I think I will....I posted a Jim Brown card....asked for a grade...got a bunch of different answers......
as far as the MB backs, the color shift is so subtle, noone will notice it. I am so tired of rehashing all that I know about the MB cards. I suggest everyone take a step back, and do their own research. I haven't even begun to post pics of all the MB rookies I have seen. Do we really want to rehash every single card I can find??????????
Bobby will be committing fraud if he sells that card as a Milton Bradley.
<< <i>The color is irrelevant. It can't be a Milton Bradley card based on the reasons previously mentioned. There's no gray area here.
Bobby will be committing fraud if he sells that card as a Milton Bradley. >>
For the love of Milton Bradley, spare us your fraud comments. I have no idea on the card, but know a troll when I see one.
<< <i>I have no idea on the card >>
Exactly. So refrain from commenting.
Whats the over/under this sells for $1000.00??
Needs'
1972 Football-9's high#'s
1965 Football-8's
1958 Topps FB-7-8
PSA 8 (OC) sold for $450. PSA 5 sold for $400. There isn't much of a premium from the MB to the regular. Plus people have an aversion to cards with qualifiers, and there is no denying that the card is extremely OC.
Im going with green. But I live under the sea.
Ehh
Youre quick to answer an obvious question about price. But you still dont seem to want to accept you are wrong with all the facts given about the white line issue on your card.