Month: February 2019

Last week’s article was about a T206 Walter Johnson Portrait with a Broad Leaf 350 back.  That card is an example of “re-backed” T206.  The term “re-backed” refers to a card that has had it’s back removed and replaced with a more desirable back.  In almost all cases these cards were created with nefarious intent.  The scammers who create these cards are commonly referred to as “card doctors”.  They are essentially paper conservators who are using their skills in an attempt to defraud collectors.

There are two type of re-backed T206s:

• “Frankenstein Cards”

This is an example of a re-backed card where the front of an authentic T206 was separated from its back and attached to a back from another authentic T206 which was separated from its front.  The Walter Johnson Broad Leaf 350 is an example of a Frankenstein card in that the front and back came from two different authentic T206s.

Over ten years ago, a number of Frankenstein re-backs with rare backs appeared on the market.  Some of them were very convincing forgeries.  Some even got passed the graders, as you can see with the Mathewson Portrait at the top of the article.

• Fake Backs

The process used to create these is similar to Frankenstein cards, with one big difference:  The back is fake.

Thankfully, the fake backs tend to be a lot easier to spot than the Frankenstein re-backs.  It’s hard to create a fake T206 back that looks believable.  With that being said, I have seen quite a few of these fake re-backs where the front and fake back were lined up very well.  If it weren’t for the back being fake, it would be very hard to detect the alteration.

The Lenox back above is an example of fake back.  I bought this card from a fellow collector who didn’t suspect anything was wrong with it.  When it arrived in the mail I immediately knew the back was fake.  The texture of the back was all wrong, and the way the ink sat on the paper was unlike any T206 I had ever seen.  As you can see, the edges line up really well.  Honestly, if the back had been real, I wouldn’t have noticed that they front and back were two different pieces of paper.

 

A couple years ago, there were a lot of these coming up for sale in raw form on eBay.  It’s very difficult to re-create the paper that T206 cards are printed on, and it was obvious in all cases that the backs were not consistent with an authentic T206.  The seller was doing a few different things to try and disguise the fact that the paper was not a very close match.  Some of the cards were rubbed down with olive oil, while others had various different kinds of paper added to the back to partially cover up the back (but not enough to obscure the Carolina Brights or Lenox advertisement completely of course).  I haven’t seen any new fakes on the market in the last six months or so, but you never know when they might pop up again.

If you are in the market for T206s with rare backs, please be careful and do your due diligence before making any purchases.  Buying rare backs in raw form is not something I would recommend until you are very comfortable spotting fakes and alterations.  If you stick to buying cards that have been graded by PSA or SGC you will greatly limit your chances of buying a fake or re-backed card.

I recently added this card to my collection.  At first glance, this may look like a rare and highly desirable T206 front/back combo.  There’s one big problem though.  The combination doesn’t exist.

Walter Johnson (Portrait) was printed with the following backs:

• El Principe de Gales
• Hindu
• Old Mill
• Piedmont 150
• Piedmont 350
• Sovereign 150
• Sovereign 350
• Sweet Caporal 150 Factory 25
• Sweet Caporal 150 Factory 30
• Sweet Caporal 150 Factory 649 Overprint
• Sweet Caporal 350 Factory 25
• Sweet Caporal 350 Factory 30

This combo shouldn’t exist, but there it is at the top of the article.  So what’s going on?

If you took a quick look at the scan and thought it looked real, you were partially correct.  The front is real, and so is the back, but they are each parts of a different card.  Sadly, two very nice looking cards were ruined in the making of this Frankenstein card.  If you take a close look at the top edge you’ll see that the front scan shows a bit of the back of the card protruding above the edge of the front.  Likewise, if you look at the right edge of the back. you’ll see a bit of the front half extending out beyond where the back ends.

I bought this card from a friend who had it for over 20 years, with full disclosure as to what it is.  Back then there was less information available to people about which front/back combos are possible for a given pose.  This was not the only impossible front/back combo that was created by card doctor(s) back then, but I haven’t seen any of the other cards in a long time.  I’ll tell that story in a future article.

The purpose of this article is to make collectors aware that this type of card doctoring exists, and has for a long time.  Though the front and back of this “card” do not line up perfectly, it’s still pretty scary how good a forgery this is.  It’s hard to believe that the front of a card can be removed from it’s back without creating a single crease.

This particular forgery is easy to spot because the combo shouldn’t exist.  The card doctors have gotten smarter since this one was created however.  For the most part, the fake “rebacked” T206s I have seen in the last few years have all been of confirmed front/back combos.  This makes it tougher to spot the forgeries.  Now you have to physically spot the alteration, or rely on a grading company to do it for you.

When buying expensive T206s (like this one would be if it were actually a legit card) it is always smart to stick with graded cards unless you are an expert at spotting alterations.  For one thing, it’s just smart to get a second opinion.  Second and perhaps most important, if you see a raw card for sale that should be worth four figures, your first thought should be, “Why isn’t this in a holder?”  The reason for that line of thought is simple:  A seller is typically looking to maximize the sale price of their item, and getting it graded is an easy way to do that.  If they don’t haven’t done that, you have to wonder why not.  Perhaps they tried and the item was rejected by the TPG, or perhaps they already know it won’t pass authentication.

Next week, I’ll dive a little deeper into “rebacked” T206s and talk about ways to spot them.

Back in December of 2012, an Ed Walsh T206 with a Blue Old Mill back was first offered for sale to the public via Huggins and Scott Auctions, where it sold for $15,000.  Because no one had ever seen an Old Mill back printed with blue ink before, people were understandably skeptical.  The card exchanged hands again in November 2013 (via Heritage Auctions) and has not been offered publicly since.

After the Walsh was found and authenticated by SGC, collectors everywhere went to check their Old Mill backs in the hopes they might find a blue one.  I know I did at least (with no luck sadly).  In the five years since the Walsh surfaced, no other Blue Old Mill backs have been found.  Until now.

A couple weeks ago my friend Ron Kornacki posted this video on YouTube.  I saw it linked on FaceBook and checked it out.

At the time I didn’t realize that Ron was the owner of the card.  The video goes a long way towards proving that the back is indeed blue.  However, knowing that the video was made by a fellow back collector, and not a random YouTube account makes me feel a lot better about the authenticity of the card.  Ron and I have done a number of deals over the years and his collection is extremely impressive.  He started a thread on net54 which can be read by clicking on this link.

This side-by-side scan of Powell and Kleinow (another 150-350 Series Subject) clearly shows that the ink on the two backs is different.

Here is a close-up scan of the Blue Old Mill along with a Polar Bear and a Piedmont 350 back.  Once you see these high resolution images, it’s pretty hard to argue that the back of the Powell is indeed printed with blue ink.

There was some debate on the net54 thread as to whether the blue ink used to print the Old Mill back was the same shade as a Polar Bear back, a Piedmont 150 back, or a Piedmont 350 back.  In general I think it’s unwise to state opinions and theories as fact when looking back at a set that was printed over 100 years ago.  With that being said, I feel pretty strongly that we can rule out Piedmont 150 and Polar Bear as possibilities.  Old Mill backs were not printed until 1910, at the very tail end of the 150-350 Series print run.  It is very unlikely that Piedmont 150 backs were still being printed when the Old Mill print run started.  There are a number of facts that lead me to this conclusion but the simplest is that Dahlen appears with Brooklyn on the front of his Old Mill card, and Elberfeld appears with Washington.  Piedmont 150 examples feature them with Boston (Dahlen) and New York (Elberfeld) respectively.  In a similar vein, Polar Bear backs were not printed until the 350 Only Series.  Most T206 historians agree that production was completed on the 150-350 Series before production of the 350 Only Series began.

With that said, it probably doesn’t matter much which shade of blue was mistakenly used on the Old Mill sheet that featured Powell.  As Pat Romolo posted in the net54 thread, the shade of blue used on Piedmont backs varied a decent amount.  The same can be said for Polar Bear backs.