is this 33 Ruth authentic?

Ahmanfan · December 21, 2010 1:16PM

1933 Ruth

MantleMarisFordBerra · December 21, 2010 1:56PM

I don't see anything that screams "obvious fake", but I am not an expert and that is one of the most reprinted/counterfeited cards in the history of the hobby. Buying an ungraded example on ebay is almost always a recipe for disaster. I did a quick scan through his feedback and didn't see a single auction that closed for over $20, now he shows up with a '33 Ruth? Hmmmmm....not saying he's for sure doing something shady, but his ebay name is "Dr. Cardshow" and all of his sales are sports cards - surely he knows of grading and how much more his card would sell for if it was graded, so why doesn't he send it in? Hmmmm...

Here's a thread about detecting fake '33 Ruths, should help you: Read this.

incugator · December 21, 2010 3:47PM

It doesn't look quite right to me.

fkw · December 21, 2010 7:05PM

its 100% Authentic, but its not his "rookie"

stevek · December 21, 2010 9:20PM

Just my opinion that I think is probably correct - I say this card as well as the Bowman Mantle he has for sale were likely submitted to PSA and rejected as fake.

Ahmanfan · December 26, 2010 2:11AM

I'm surprised that, as a community, we can't come to a conclusion on this card. You guys are all so knowledgeable, this should be a piece of cake.

RipublicaninMass · December 26, 2010 2:55AM

I say fake, wear not consistent with age wear on corners. Looks like the reprints that have been rubbed down on the edges, borders look too white for amount of wear

MantleMarisFordBerra · December 26, 2010 2:57AM

<< I'm surprised that, as a community, we can't come to a conclusion on this card. You guys are all so knowledgeable, this should be a piece of cake. >>

I agree, but that's the way the card collecting world is these days. It's sad. Even if this card was in a PSA case, there'd still be questions; is the case fake, is the flip fake, is the case authentic but tampered with, is the scan altered, does the seller really have the card or did he just jack someone else's scan, etc....it's endless. And it certainly takes the fun out of collecting. It's no wonder kids aren't into the hobby anymore, would you be?

If anything is going to spell the end of our hobby it's this kind of stuff. I don't want to come across as all doom & gloom, but at the same time we have to deal with reality.

MantleMarisFordBerra · December 26, 2010 3:08AM

Check out
these
recent
threads
if
you
dare.

This is what collectors are up against these days. IMHO the ability to buy/trade for a real card is the very basic cornerstone of our hobby. Without it....well, who knows?

swartz1 · December 26, 2010 3:24AM

if it was legit, it would be in a holder...

WinPitcher · December 26, 2010 3:45AM

So no one is accepting Franks opinion? He is probably the most reliable
voice when it comes to vintage cards.

Personally I have no idea, but if FKW says it is legit you bank on it.

RipublicaninMass · December 26, 2010 3:59AM

<< So no one is accepting Franks opinion? He is probably the most reliable
voice when it comes to vintage cards.

Personally I have no idea, but if FKW says it is legit you bank on it. >>

If it was a type card

I have to cry foul on this, on a second look the back looks likes consistent wear, but I wouldnt be interested, especially with the burnt Mantle reprint he is running

fkw · December 26, 2010 4:08AM

I do have to say his description says he is listing as "unknown", and thats a big "red flag"......... but there is nothing about the Mantle or Ruth that point to them being doctored reprints.

The colors are too bright (scanner setting?), but that type of wear cant be duplicated easily or well (dirty back on the R319, scuffing on the front of the 51 Bowman)

.

stevek · December 26, 2010 4:14AM

<< whats wrong with the 51 Mantle?? Besides being low grade, please explain... >>

How about from his own "sales pitch" description? If you wanna trust the seller, then that's your prerogative...I don't.

1951 Bowman #253 Mickey Mantle Baseball card. Being listed as unknown per ebay rules because it has not been graded. After reading the Ebay rules and regulations, I feel obligated to say that since the '51 bowman rookie card has been counterfeited so many times over the years that I believe the card to be a 100% authentic card, but without being evaluated by a professional grader, I would encourage you to look for yourself and bid accordingly at this very old and highly coveted trading card. The card probably wouldn't grade any higher than a "1" as it does have considerable wear... a dark stain to the lower right portion; minor creasing and surface wear. The card is completely in tact w/ good color (also legable front & back)... A rare, rare find! It will be shipped in a hard acryllic plastic screwdown case. If you have any questions please feel free to ask. This card is perfect for the average collector who want an affordable "piece of history".

stevek · December 26, 2010 4:20AM

<< I do have to say his desription says he is listing as "unknown", but there is nothing about the Mantle or Ruth that point to them being doctored reprints.

The colors are too bright (scanner setting), but that type of wear cant be duplicated easily or well (dirty back on the R319, scuffing on the front of the 51 Bowman)

. >>

Well made counterfeits have been around for a long time now, and likely they weren't taken very good care of because...well, because the owner knew they were worthless reprints, and probably let the kids play with the cards, etc...and so these reprints over a period of years can take on the look of genuine wear of a genuine vintage card that was likely placed in a holder and stored properly back in the 70's or 80's.

fkw · December 26, 2010 4:32AM

Sorry I edited my original reply a couple above this after seeing the description saying "unknown" I know that is a big "red flag" on eBay, when I first posted on the R319 I just looked at the card and the wear.

The R319 Ruth is not a reprint, the R319 reprints will have 1 or more characteristics that are slightly different than the authentic R319s. cropping of top of hat and elbow, cropping of the ends of the red strip, scuffing on back between the GOUDEY GUM CO and BOSTON, wrong shade of green ink, letters too bold easily seen when looking at the small letters with holes ie. "a" "b" "d", etc. and the copyright symbol on both front and back. This card has no obvious problems.

The only other types of fakes are home made one made from scans of authentic cards, and if this is one of those you would see usually quality differences in the clarity and sharpness of the photo and print on the back.

The Mantle has no obvious signed it is a reprint either. that I can see, beside the scans being to bright.

stevek · December 26, 2010 4:42AM

<< Sorry I edited my original reply a couple above this after seeing the description saying "unknown" I know that is a big "red flag" on eBay, when I first posted on the R319 I just looked at the card and the wear.

The R319 Ruth is not a reprint, the R319 reprints will have 1 or more characteristics that are slightly different than the authentic R319s. cropping of top of hat and elbow, cropping of the ends of the red strip, scuffing on back between the GOUDEY GUM CO and BOSTON, wrong shade of green ink, letters too bold easily seen when looking at the small letters with holes ie. "a" "b" "d", etc. and the copyright symbol on both front and back. This card has no obvious problems.

The only other types of fakes are home made one made from scans of authentic cards, and if this is one of those you would see usually quality differences in the clarity and sharpness of the photo and print on the back.

The Mantle has no obvious signed it is a reprint either. that I can see, beside the scans being to bright. >>

I respect your opinion and the praise from WinPitcher means a lot. Be careful though...scammers are getting better and better all the time, and frankly, a scammers favorite trick is to get the mark to focus only on the item and not the overall picture. The "overall picture" is that the seller is offering for sale a number of graded cards, and from the sales pitch seems very familiar with baseball cards and grading companies...so why would the seller leave money on the table, perhaps a lot of money, by not getting these cards PSA graded?

Good luck if you buy the cards, get them PSA graded, and it becomes a nice score. I'm gonna take a pass...and without hesitation.

NickM · December 26, 2010 5:12AM

Don't overlook the possibility that the card is real but altered.

Nick

swartz1 · December 26, 2010 5:37AM

if msassin says it is legit...then it is legit...

dont know if he will stop by or not...

Ahmanfan · December 26, 2010 6:33AM

I don't think that wear is duplicate-able. I could be wrong, though. I wasn't the winning bidder.

yankeeno7 · December 26, 2010 6:33AM

I think sometimes we can look at things too closely and not use our gut instinct. First moment I saw that card I said "nope" to myself. It just doesnt look right and I would be very surprised if it was authentic. The aging does look artificial to me as does the 51 Bowman Mantle. That Bowman Mantle spent a bit too much time in the oven. It may be a really good reprint to fool even the most experienced because they look for those signs of fake that they know about and maybe those signs are not there.

If you buy it John, I really do hope it comes back in an "authentic" holder. Im leery of a guy who seems to know cards and doesnt already have that caliber of card in a holder.

swartz1 · December 26, 2010 7:00AM

or who spells goudie...

Ladder7 · January 1, 2011 9:37AM

Frank's correct...

To bad it was erased in spots. I enjoy kids notations on my prewar beaters. Same with mailed postcards.

is this 33 Ruth authentic?

Comments