Interesting thread on Net54. If that is the seller, Burgundy definitely got schooled. You'd think Texans would be smarter than that but being from Louisiana I know better.
it is great looking set. the graded cards look great. most of the ungraded cards are nm7 grade. I would be happy with set but I would have stopped at 1500.00 and not a penny more. if you sell the graded stars and then put the commons together in a partial set just like lee said earlier you might break even. the set was a little overgraded in the auction but still a great looking set.
<< <i>Based on the description of the set given by the seller, this is what I would have expected, but not what I was hoping for. I have made a lot of purchases like this from a "gamble" standpoint. You win some, you lose some. But in this hobby, you have to understand that is part of the game. >>
<< <i>Interesting thread on Net54. If that is the seller, Burgundy definitely got schooled. You'd think Texans would be smarter than that but being from Louisiana I know better. >>
<< <i>Interesting thread on Net54. If that is the seller, Burgundy definitely got schooled. You'd think Texans would be smarter than that but being from Louisiana I know better. >>
<< <i>Interesting thread on Net54. If that is the seller, Burgundy definitely got schooled. You'd think Texans would be smarter than that but being from Louisiana I know better. >>
I'll be honest, I have no idea what this thread has to do with this current CU thread.
If it's an attempt at substantiating a previous claim in this thread then I'm going to need further explanation because I just don't see the relevance. If we're going to submit this, counselor, then I suggest we submit the CU thread I linked to above about RonBurgundy selling overgraded cards and ripping off a fellow board member.
Something tells me you're not really a new member. If you are going to go about bandying wild & untruthful accusations that I "ripped off" other members here, please be aware that may not be something you really want to do.
Ron Burgundy
Buying Vintage, all sports. Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
The set is well described with lot's of scans and the option of asking any questions. If you didn't take advantage of this option with the seller, then that mistake falls to the buyer.
I'm looking over the scans of the raw star cards and they all look pretty sharp except for the centering, which is clearly visible. Those raw stars that are not graded are more than likely PSA 7's or PSA 8/9 oc's if sent in for grading and they completely fall within the description of the set : NM to NM-MT. If ONE card, the Jim Kaat, had a small crease that might have been overlooked by the seller..... I'd give him a pass on that $5 card as you can easily find a raw one in NM shape to replace it.
Personally, I'd be happy with the set.
If you bought it to flip it, then you probably overpaid on it and now have buyers remorse.
There were three buyers that bid over $1500 on the set, including another sniper that bid over $2000. You just happen to be the lucky winner, now with buyers remorse. That's a shame.
<< <i>The set is well described with lot's of scans and the option of asking any questions. If you didn't take advantage of this option with the seller, then that mistake falls to the buyer.
I'm looking over the scans of the raw star cards and they all look pretty sharp except for the centering, which is clearly visible. Those raw stars that are not graded are more than likely PSA 7's or PSA 8/9 oc's if sent in for grading and they completely fall within the description of the set : NM to NM-MT. If ONE card, the Jim Kaat, had a small crease that might have been overlooked by the seller..... I'd give him a pass on that $5 card as you can easily find a raw one in NM shape to replace it.
Personally, I'd be happy with the set.
If you bought it to flip it, then you probably overpaid on it and now have buyers remorse.
There were three buyers that bid over $1500 on the set, including another sniper that bid over $2000. You just happen to be the lucky winner, now with buyers remorse. That's a shame. >>
Per your very rational request.....here are the forum rules as of today:
Rule 1) This is not a public forum. This is a PSA forum paid for by PSA and provided for PSA customers to exchange information regarding trading cards and/or memorabilia. We make the rules; this is not a democracy.
Rule 2) Anyone posting crude or vulgar pictures or language will no longer be allowed to post. No more warnings.
Rule 3) Anyone attacking another poster or making disparaging personal remarks will no longer be allowed to post. No more warnings.
Rule 4) Anyone making libelous remarks concerning any individual, any company, or any other entity will no longer be allowed to post. No more warnings.
Rule 5) If you have nothing to contribute to a thread or the forum as a whole, then do not post. Snide remarks and other negative comments will result in your losing your ability to post. No more warnings.
Rule 6) This forum is about collecting trading cards and/or memorabilia. If your post is not directly related to trading cards and/or memorabilia, then this is the wrong forum. Do not post it or your posting privileges may be removed.
Rule 7) This is a PSA forum. Posts promoting or bashing other grading companies or services are not allowed. Those posts will be removed and your posting privileges may be removed as well.
Rule 8) This forum is provided for the education and sharing of information, not as a personal soapbox. If you want to learn and share information about trading cards and/or memorabilia, you are welcome here.
Rule 9) Your signature may contain multiple images and/or links, but it must be limited to a single line. If you would like additional advertising space on this site, please contact our Advertising Department. Violators will have their posting privileges removed.
Rule 10) If you don't like any of the rules outlined above, see Rule 1.
Sincerely, Forum Admin webmaster@collectors.com
(The lines of communication have always been open, and they will continue to be open.)
I love this line, seriously what are your plans if he was? Get a lawyer and explain to him how you want to file a case against a guy you dont know who typed something on a Baseball card message board???
<< <i>am I the only one that thought of the Great Cornholio earlier? >>
Thank goodness I wasn't the only one. Wooohoo!
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
This is such a great thread.. thank you all for making this the train wreck that it is.
Ron, it sucks, I know. I recently bought a set with the intention of breaking and selling it. Once it arrived it was in far worse condition than I expected, unfortunately it was purchased from an AH that I frequent so getting my money back wasn't worth the effort. I listed the set as individual cards and lots, put in hours of work scanning, listing and packing... and I lost $200. I wouldn't wish the effort and frustration on anyone. If you want to request a refund (or partial refund) then go ahead. The seller is obviously a dealer who does the absolute minimum required to accurately describe his cards. Yes, they were technically described correctly, but no one can deny he exagorated the condition.
Unfortunately the difference between a 1973 Topps that uniformily grades a 7 compared to an 8 is a couple thousands dollars.
I love this line, seriously what are your plans if he was? Get a lawyer and explain to him how you want to file a case against a guy you dont know who typed something on a Baseball card message board??? >>
I believe there is already a line to stand in and wait for filing cases against internet comments. Right, Brian Burke?
<< <i>The set is well described with lot's of scans and the option of asking any questions. If you didn't take advantage of this option with the seller, then that mistake falls to the buyer.
I'm looking over the scans of the raw star cards and they all look pretty sharp except for the centering, which is clearly visible. Those raw stars that are not graded are more than likely PSA 7's or PSA 8/9 oc's if sent in for grading and they completely fall within the description of the set : NM to NM-MT. If ONE card, the Jim Kaat, had a small crease that might have been overlooked by the seller..... I'd give him a pass on that $5 card as you can easily find a raw one in NM shape to replace it.
Personally, I'd be happy with the set.
If you bought it to flip it, then you probably overpaid on it and now have buyers remorse.
There were three buyers that bid over $1500 on the set, including another sniper that bid over $2000. You just happen to be the lucky winner, now with buyers remorse. That's a shame. >>
The above post pretty much nails it. No one bids over $2k on a set like this unless either a) they're a retail buyer or b) they're thinking that there are upgrades and/or gem raw cards in there that would make the set profitable. I think B is applicable here... and this was apparently a nuclear snipe gone bad. I don't think OP expected to have to pay that much. The problem with eBay is you're competing against retail buyers, something you have to remember, particularly when sniping.
If I see a lot with a few graded items and a lot of raw items (be it cards, coins, or currency) on eBay, I can pretty well safely assume that the seller isn't going to leave any money on the table... so the best stuff is going to be what resides in the holders, and there most certainly aren't going to be any cherries to pick from the rest, especially if you're dealing with an established seller. Couple that with a relatively clear description and a very clear statement about asking questions... and I feel that OP got what he paid for.
Stolen from the internet and if it's on the internet it must be true----
Dear Word Detective: I’ve recently run into the word “jackleg” — one I’d never seen before. Not that I thought I’d seen every word, but something this odd usually shows up somewhere in the reading I’ve done. I’m assuming it’s a regional word, but I’ve no idea. Apparently it means “unscrupulous” or “without professional standards.” Any idea where this word comes from? — Barney Johnson.
Thanks for asking this question. I’m not just being polite in saying that; I’m really glad you asked it. I did a column on “jackleg” way back in 1998, but I came up somewhat empty-handed. So when I received your question, I went looking to see if anyone had made any progress on determining its origins in the thirteen years since I tackled it. As we say in the word origins biz, bingo. Thanks to the work of several researchers, we have a good hunch about the origin of “jackleg.”
The definition of “jackleg” as an adjective to be found in the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) definitely deserves a round of applause: “Incompetent, unskilled; unscrupulous, dishonest. Frequently used of lawyers and preachers.” The OED pegs the term as a US invention, dates its first appearance in print to 1850 (“A party of some twenty of the most notorious rode up, headed by what is there [i.e. in Texas] known as a ‘jack-leg’ lawyer”), and gives roughly the same period for its use as a noun to mean “An incompetent or unskilled or unprincipled person.” The Historical Dictionary of American Slang gives slightly earlier examples of the adjective, and notes that it has also been used to mean “hastily thrown together, ragtag, shoddy,” often referring to work done by a “jackleg” (untrained) carpenter or builder.
The OED doesn’t suggest an etymology for “jackleg” apart from pointing out that it’s a combination of “leg” and “jack” (short for “John” and often used as a generic name for “the common man”). Pointing to the similar “blackleg” as a colloquial term for a dishonest gambler, the OED notes simply that “As in other slang expressions, the origin of the name is lost,” apparently including “jackleg” in that “lost” group.
Fortunately, back in 2001 the American Dialect Society mailing list rode to our rescue with an interesting discussion of “jackleg.” The British etymologist Jonathon Green suggested that “jackleg” might be related to the 18th century British term “jack-a-legs,” meaning a simple folding knife with a broad, square blade of the sort used by unskilled carpenters who lacked sophisticated tools. In extended use, “jack-a-legs” appeared in the US as the adjective “jack-legged” or “jakeleg,” meaning “unskilled.”
Of course, that just shifts the mystery one step back, leaving us wondering where “jack-a-legs” came from. On the ADS list, Grant Barrett then helpfully pointed to the OED entry for “jockteleg,” a Scots word (with related forms “jacklag,” “jack-o-legs,” “jockeylegs” and others) that means “folding knife” (and thus is almost certainly the same word as “jackleg”). A note in the OED quotes a glossary of Scots compiled by Lord Hailes around 1776: “The etymology of this word remained unknown till not many years ago an old knife was found having this inscription Jacques de Liege, the name of the cutler [knife-maker].” The OED then quotes two other sources attesting to the existence of this Jacques de Liege. So it seems that this knife-maker, by inscribing his name on his knives, gave us the American slang term “jackleg.” The OED expresses some skepticism about this story, but they do say that “On the face of it this account is plausible.”
I suspect that the term “blackleg,” meaning a crooked gambler, might be simply an extra-derogatory variant on “jackleg.” But the real kicker to this story is that this same Jacques de Liege, assuming he actually existed, may also have been the mysterious “jack” in “jack knife.”
<< <i>lol. at least we know where the battle lines are being drawn. spin doctors, spin.
RB, too bad about your purchase foul, live and learn.
as for the nonsense about prior dealings, everyone here seems to have a story, and they're either really good or sour bad, dependent on intentions.
i wish there were more RonBurgundy's to deal with. i own some real nice stuff i got from this seller in years past. >>
Not that I have a particular dog in this fight, but would like to add that I too, have gotten beautiful graded and raw material from itzagoner and RonBurgundy, and trust in the fairness and honesty of both.
<< <i>I used the term Jackleg at work today too. Great word. Not vulgar enough to alarm HR, but dirty enough to get your point across, with the right tone. >>
That is great.
Successful coin BST transactions with Gerard and segoja.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
Agree with many of the previous answers. I would expect to get exactly what you did if I had bought the auction. Any time there are a high number of graded cards as this one had, I assume the cherrys have been picked.
As a seller, I see the exact same thing. Sell a sharp raw set and sell the exact same set with 20 psa 8s and you'll often do better on the raw (depends on who was graded, obviously).
The above post pretty much nails it. No one bids over $2k on a set like this unless either a) they're a retail buyer or b) they're thinking that there are upgrades and/or gem raw cards in there that would make the set profitable. I think B is applicable here... and this was apparently a nuclear snipe gone bad. I don't think OP expected to have to pay that much. The problem with eBay is you're competing against retail buyers, something you have to remember, particularly when sniping.
There's a 3rd type bidder on a lot or set like this, call it a Super B, and unfortunately you're always at a disadvantage when bidding against them. They bid to win knowing they will complain about the set and renegotiate the price after receiving it. The seller doesn't want bad feedback/DSR's and he doesn't want to have to relist or second chance what is now a tainted set to the previous bidders. He also figures the buyer will be switching out some cards if he's forced to return it so he can still make something out of the deal. So the seller buckles and refunds whatever the buyer asks for, which will easily start at $250 or more on a $2k set. This can bring the net cost down sometimes to below what the honest 2nd, 3rd, and 4th bidders would have been happy to pay.
<< <i>The above post pretty much nails it. No one bids over $2k on a set like this unless either a) they're a retail buyer or b) they're thinking that there are upgrades and/or gem raw cards in there that would make the set profitable. I think B is applicable here... and this was apparently a nuclear snipe gone bad. I don't think OP expected to have to pay that much. The problem with eBay is you're competing against retail buyers, something you have to remember, particularly when sniping.
There's a 3rd type bidder on a lot or set like this, call it a Super B, and unfortunately you're always at a disadvantage when bidding against them. They bid to win knowing they will complain about the set and renegotiate the price after receiving it. The seller doesn't want bad feedback/DSR's and he doesn't want to have to relist or second chance what is now a tainted set to the previous bidders. He also figures the buyer will be switching out some cards if he's forced to return it so he can still make something out of the deal. So the seller buckles and refunds whatever the buyer asks for, which will easily start at $250 or more on a $2k set. This can bring the net cost down sometimes to below what the honest 2nd, 3rd, and 4th bidders would have been happy to pay. >>
DING!
Thank you for saying it a lot more eloquently than I did.
So basically my kid won't be able to go to college, but at least I'll have a set where the three most expensive cards are of a player I despise ~ CDsNuts
<< <i>If you run into an a-hole in the morning then, unfortunately, you ran into an a-hole. If you run into a-holes all day long, you're the a-hole. >>
Comments
I would give up my childhood dreams of being a professional card dealer and get a real job.
<< <i>Based on the description of the set given by the seller, this is what I would have expected, but not what I was hoping for.
I have made a lot of purchases like this from a "gamble" standpoint. You win some, you lose some. But in this hobby, you have to understand that is part of the game. >>
i know i have gambled on few sets and have lost.
<< <i>Interesting thread on Net54. If that is the seller, Burgundy definitely got schooled. You'd think Texans would be smarter than that but being from Louisiana I know better.
Link?
<< <i>
<< <i>Interesting thread on Net54. If that is the seller, Burgundy definitely got schooled. You'd think Texans would be smarter than that but being from Louisiana I know better.
Link? >>
http://www.network54.com/Forum/153652/thread/1191977637/
And it is the same seller.
ALL MY PSA SETS
<< <i>Interesting thread on Net54. If that is the seller, Burgundy definitely got schooled. You'd think Texans would be smarter than that but being from Louisiana I know better.
I'll be honest, I have no idea what this thread has to do with this current CU thread.
If it's an attempt at substantiating a previous claim in this thread then I'm going to need further explanation because I just don't see the relevance. If we're going to submit this, counselor, then I suggest we submit the CU thread I linked to above about RonBurgundy selling overgraded cards and ripping off a fellow board member.
Something tells me you're not really a new member. If you are going to go about bandying wild & untruthful accusations that I "ripped off" other members here, please be aware that may not be something you really want to do.
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
RB, too bad about your purchase foul, live and learn.
as for the nonsense about prior dealings, everyone here seems to have a story, and they're either really good or sour bad, dependent on intentions.
i wish there were more RonBurgundy's to deal with. i own some real nice stuff i got from this seller in years past.
If you didn't take advantage of this option with the seller, then that mistake falls to the buyer.
I'm looking over the scans of the raw star cards and they all look pretty sharp except
for the centering, which is clearly visible. Those raw stars that are not graded are more than likely
PSA 7's or PSA 8/9 oc's if sent in for grading and they completely fall within the
description of the set : NM to NM-MT. If ONE card, the Jim Kaat, had a small crease that might
have been overlooked by the seller..... I'd give him a pass on that $5 card as you can easily
find a raw one in NM shape to replace it.
Personally, I'd be happy with the set.
If you bought it to flip it, then you probably overpaid on it and now have buyers remorse.
There were three buyers that bid over $1500 on the set, including another sniper that bid
over $2000. You just happen to be the lucky winner, now with buyers remorse. That's a shame.
<< <i>The set is well described with lot's of scans and the option of asking any questions.
If you didn't take advantage of this option with the seller, then that mistake falls to the buyer.
I'm looking over the scans of the raw star cards and they all look pretty sharp except
for the centering, which is clearly visible. Those raw stars that are not graded are more than likely
PSA 7's or PSA 8/9 oc's if sent in for grading and they completely fall within the
description of the set : NM to NM-MT. If ONE card, the Jim Kaat, had a small crease that might
have been overlooked by the seller..... I'd give him a pass on that $5 card as you can easily
find a raw one in NM shape to replace it.
Personally, I'd be happy with the set.
If you bought it to flip it, then you probably overpaid on it and now have buyers remorse.
There were three buyers that bid over $1500 on the set, including another sniper that bid
over $2000. You just happen to be the lucky winner, now with buyers remorse. That's a shame. >>
Per your very rational request.....here are the forum rules as of today:
Rule 1) This is not a public forum. This is a PSA forum paid for by PSA and provided for PSA customers to exchange information regarding trading cards and/or memorabilia. We make the rules; this is not a democracy.
Rule 2) Anyone posting crude or vulgar pictures or language will no longer be allowed to post. No more warnings.
Rule 3) Anyone attacking another poster or making disparaging personal remarks will no longer be allowed to post. No more warnings.
Rule 4) Anyone making libelous remarks concerning any individual, any company, or any other entity will no longer be allowed to post. No more warnings.
Rule 5) If you have nothing to contribute to a thread or the forum as a whole, then do not post. Snide remarks and other negative comments will result in your losing your ability to post. No more warnings.
Rule 6) This forum is about collecting trading cards and/or memorabilia. If your post is not directly related to trading cards and/or memorabilia, then this is the wrong forum. Do not post it or your posting privileges may be removed.
Rule 7) This is a PSA forum. Posts promoting or bashing other grading companies or services are not allowed. Those posts will be removed and your posting privileges may be removed as well.
Rule 8) This forum is provided for the education and sharing of information, not as a personal soapbox. If you want to learn and share information about trading cards and/or memorabilia, you are welcome here.
Rule 9) Your signature may contain multiple images and/or links, but it must be limited to a single line. If you would like additional advertising space on this site, please contact our Advertising Department. Violators will have their posting privileges removed.
Rule 10) If you don't like any of the rules outlined above, see Rule 1.
Sincerely,
Forum Admin
webmaster@collectors.com
(The lines of communication have always been open, and they will continue to be open.)
<< <i>Ron, are you threatening me? >>
I love this line, seriously what are your plans if he was? Get a lawyer and explain to him how you want to file a case against a guy you dont know who typed something on a Baseball card message board???
Bowman Baseball -1948-1955
Fleer Baseball-1923, 1959-2007
Al
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
<< <i>am I the only one that thought of the Great Cornholio earlier? >>
Thank goodness I wasn't the only one. Wooohoo!
Ron, it sucks, I know. I recently bought a set with the intention of breaking and selling it. Once it arrived it was in far worse condition than I expected, unfortunately it was purchased from an AH that I frequent so getting my money back wasn't worth the effort. I listed the set as individual cards and lots, put in hours of work scanning, listing and packing... and I lost $200. I wouldn't wish the effort and frustration on anyone. If you want to request a refund (or partial refund) then go ahead. The seller is obviously a dealer who does the absolute minimum required to accurately describe his cards. Yes, they were technically described correctly, but no one can deny he exagorated the condition.
Unfortunately the difference between a 1973 Topps that uniformily grades a 7 compared to an 8 is a couple thousands dollars.
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." Dr. Seuss
<< <i>only a jackleg would sub a common for grading >>
another use of jackleg, I am not sure why exactly but I have seen it used twice in two days and it causes a smirk each time.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
<< <i>am I the only one that thought of the Great Cornholio earlier? >>
I actually had a video clip ready to post last night but decided against it
1994 Pro Line Live
TheDallasCowboyBackfieldProject
<< <i>
<< <i>Ron, are you threatening me? >>
I love this line, seriously what are your plans if he was? Get a lawyer and explain to him how you want to file a case against a guy you dont know who typed something on a Baseball card message board??? >>
I believe there is already a line to stand in and wait for filing cases against internet comments. Right, Brian Burke?
No. But I will defend my reputation as I deem appropriate.
This will be my last post on this thread.
Buying Vintage, all sports.
Buying Woody Hayes, Les Horvath, Vic Janowicz, and Jesse Owens autographed items
<< <i>Reggie:
No. But I will defend my reputation as I deem appropriate.
This will be my last post on this thread. >>
Promise?
<< <i>Reggie:
No. But I will defend my reputation as I deem appropriate.
This will be my last post on this thread. >>
Havn't we heard this before?
<< <i>The set is well described with lot's of scans and the option of asking any questions.
If you didn't take advantage of this option with the seller, then that mistake falls to the buyer.
I'm looking over the scans of the raw star cards and they all look pretty sharp except
for the centering, which is clearly visible. Those raw stars that are not graded are more than likely
PSA 7's or PSA 8/9 oc's if sent in for grading and they completely fall within the
description of the set : NM to NM-MT. If ONE card, the Jim Kaat, had a small crease that might
have been overlooked by the seller..... I'd give him a pass on that $5 card as you can easily
find a raw one in NM shape to replace it.
Personally, I'd be happy with the set.
If you bought it to flip it, then you probably overpaid on it and now have buyers remorse.
There were three buyers that bid over $1500 on the set, including another sniper that bid
over $2000. You just happen to be the lucky winner, now with buyers remorse. That's a shame. >>
The above post pretty much nails it. No one bids over $2k on a set like this unless either a) they're a retail buyer or b) they're thinking that there are upgrades and/or gem raw cards in there that would make the set profitable. I think B is applicable here... and this was apparently a nuclear snipe gone bad. I don't think OP expected to have to pay that much.
The problem with eBay is you're competing against retail buyers, something you have to remember, particularly when sniping.
If I see a lot with a few graded items and a lot of raw items (be it cards, coins, or currency) on eBay, I can pretty well safely assume that the seller isn't going to leave any money on the table... so the best stuff is going to be what resides in the holders, and there most certainly aren't going to be any cherries to pick from the rest, especially if you're dealing with an established seller. Couple that with a relatively clear description and a very clear statement about asking questions... and I feel that OP got what he paid for.
RIP Mom- 1932-2012
<< <i>
<< <i>am I the only one that thought of the Great Cornholio earlier? >>
I actually had a video clip ready to post last night but decided against it
I think I need tp for my bunghole.
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep."
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans."
Collecting:
Any unopened Baseball cello and rack packs and boxes from the 1970's and early 1980s.
Always buying Bobby Cox inserts. PM me.
Dear Word Detective: I’ve recently run into the word “jackleg” — one I’d never seen before. Not that I thought I’d seen every word, but something this odd usually shows up somewhere in the reading I’ve done. I’m assuming it’s a regional word, but I’ve no idea. Apparently it means “unscrupulous” or “without professional standards.” Any idea where this word comes from? — Barney Johnson.
Thanks for asking this question. I’m not just being polite in saying that; I’m really glad you asked it. I did a column on “jackleg” way back in 1998, but I came up somewhat empty-handed. So when I received your question, I went looking to see if anyone had made any progress on determining its origins in the thirteen years since I tackled it. As we say in the word origins biz, bingo. Thanks to the work of several researchers, we have a good hunch about the origin of “jackleg.”
The definition of “jackleg” as an adjective to be found in the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) definitely deserves a round of applause: “Incompetent, unskilled; unscrupulous, dishonest. Frequently used of lawyers and preachers.” The OED pegs the term as a US invention, dates its first appearance in print to 1850 (“A party of some twenty of the most notorious rode up, headed by what is there [i.e. in Texas] known as a ‘jack-leg’ lawyer”), and gives roughly the same period for its use as a noun to mean “An incompetent or unskilled or unprincipled person.” The Historical Dictionary of American Slang gives slightly earlier examples of the adjective, and notes that it has also been used to mean “hastily thrown together, ragtag, shoddy,” often referring to work done by a “jackleg” (untrained) carpenter or builder.
The OED doesn’t suggest an etymology for “jackleg” apart from pointing out that it’s a combination of “leg” and “jack” (short for “John” and often used as a generic name for “the common man”). Pointing to the similar “blackleg” as a colloquial term for a dishonest gambler, the OED notes simply that “As in other slang expressions, the origin of the name is lost,” apparently including “jackleg” in that “lost” group.
Fortunately, back in 2001 the American Dialect Society mailing list rode to our rescue with an interesting discussion of “jackleg.” The British etymologist Jonathon Green suggested that “jackleg” might be related to the 18th century British term “jack-a-legs,” meaning a simple folding knife with a broad, square blade of the sort used by unskilled carpenters who lacked sophisticated tools. In extended use, “jack-a-legs” appeared in the US as the adjective “jack-legged” or “jakeleg,” meaning “unskilled.”
Of course, that just shifts the mystery one step back, leaving us wondering where “jack-a-legs” came from. On the ADS list, Grant Barrett then helpfully pointed to the OED entry for “jockteleg,” a Scots word (with related forms “jacklag,” “jack-o-legs,” “jockeylegs” and others) that means “folding knife” (and thus is almost certainly the same word as “jackleg”). A note in the OED quotes a glossary of Scots compiled by Lord Hailes around 1776: “The etymology of this word remained unknown till not many years ago an old knife was found having this inscription Jacques de Liege, the name of the cutler [knife-maker].” The OED then quotes two other sources attesting to the existence of this Jacques de Liege. So it seems that this knife-maker, by inscribing his name on his knives, gave us the American slang term “jackleg.” The OED expresses some skepticism about this story, but they do say that “On the face of it this account is plausible.”
I suspect that the term “blackleg,” meaning a crooked gambler, might be simply an extra-derogatory variant on “jackleg.” But the real kicker to this story is that this same Jacques de Liege, assuming he actually existed, may also have been the mysterious “jack” in “jack knife.”
<< <i>Where is Rogermnj when you need him. Roger that! >>
I miss him. Both as a poster and a seller of cool stuff.
<< <i>lol. at least we know where the battle lines are being drawn. spin doctors, spin.
RB, too bad about your purchase foul, live and learn.
as for the nonsense about prior dealings, everyone here seems to have a story, and they're either really good or sour bad, dependent on intentions.
i wish there were more RonBurgundy's to deal with. i own some real nice stuff i got from this seller in years past.
Not that I have a particular dog in this fight, but would like to add that I too, have gotten beautiful graded and raw material from itzagoner and RonBurgundy, and trust in the fairness and honesty of both.
<< <i>I used the term Jackleg at work today too. Great word. Not vulgar enough to alarm HR, but dirty enough to get your point across, with the right tone. >>
That is great.
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.
As a seller, I see the exact same thing. Sell a sharp raw set and sell the exact same set with 20 psa 8s and you'll often do better on the raw (depends on who was graded, obviously).
ebay id Duffs_Dugout
My Ebay Auctions
The problem with eBay is you're competing against retail buyers, something you have to remember, particularly when sniping.
There's a 3rd type bidder on a lot or set like this, call it a Super B, and unfortunately you're always at a disadvantage when bidding against them. They bid to win knowing they will complain about the set and renegotiate the price after receiving it. The seller doesn't want bad feedback/DSR's and he doesn't want to have to relist or second chance what is now a tainted set to the previous bidders. He also figures the buyer will be switching out some cards if he's forced to return it so he can still make something out of the deal. So the seller buckles and refunds whatever the buyer asks for, which will easily start at $250 or more on a $2k set. This can bring the net cost down sometimes to below what the honest 2nd, 3rd, and 4th bidders would have been happy to pay.
<< <i>The above post pretty much nails it. No one bids over $2k on a set like this unless either a) they're a retail buyer or b) they're thinking that there are upgrades and/or gem raw cards in there that would make the set profitable. I think B is applicable here... and this was apparently a nuclear snipe gone bad. I don't think OP expected to have to pay that much.
The problem with eBay is you're competing against retail buyers, something you have to remember, particularly when sniping.
There's a 3rd type bidder on a lot or set like this, call it a Super B, and unfortunately you're always at a disadvantage when bidding against them. They bid to win knowing they will complain about the set and renegotiate the price after receiving it. The seller doesn't want bad feedback/DSR's and he doesn't want to have to relist or second chance what is now a tainted set to the previous bidders. He also figures the buyer will be switching out some cards if he's forced to return it so he can still make something out of the deal. So the seller buckles and refunds whatever the buyer asks for, which will easily start at $250 or more on a $2k set. This can bring the net cost down sometimes to below what the honest 2nd, 3rd, and 4th bidders would have been happy to pay. >>
DING!
Thank you for saying it a lot more eloquently than I did.
http://forums.collectors.com/messageview.cfm?catid=11&threadid=841079
<< <i>If you run into an a-hole in the morning then, unfortunately, you ran into an a-hole. If you run into a-holes all day long, you're the a-hole. >>
Raylan Givens is a wise man.