Re: Cracker Jack reprints

by sabrjay on Tue Jul 17, 2012 2:18 pm

I might move 100% in the direction of legit for our poster, but your scan is of a PSA graded card and we know how good a job they do *sarcasm off*

by BigGuy219 on Tue Jul 17, 2012 2:41 pm

For $7 you could send the Miller into SGC to be slabbed.

If it passes you could assume the Wagner would pass and then step up and pay the $40 to have that graded.

by bowlingshoeguy on Tue Jul 17, 2012 3:24 pm

reprint here:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Honus-Wagner-1915-Cracker-Jack-Reprint-Card-/290745261476?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item43b1c49da4

by fisherboy7 on Tue Jul 17, 2012 4:38 pm

I have handled plenty of CJ's....and I know Jay has too....but I am 100% certain those two cards are legit. Just sayin'...

by cccc on Tue Jul 17, 2012 6:58 pm

looks real to me, especially if the poster states the cardboard is quite thin. it's not a mass produced reprint for sure. if it's fake it's done with a very high res scan of an original and printed on very thin paper? reprints don't have colors that pop like that.

by sabrjay on Wed Jul 18, 2012 1:18 am

Thin stock is always a good sign with CJs.

by jinks_1706 on Wed Jul 18, 2012 10:45 am

Could the difference in the PSA scans be due to one is 1915 and the other 1914?

Are thier documented differences between the years? Just a question.

Thanks

by sabrjay on Wed Jul 18, 2012 10:50 am

The major differences are the back being oriented different, more cards in the 1915 set and a few pose changes like Mathewson. Other than that, no changes in printing style.

by fisherboy7 on Wed Jul 18, 2012 10:58 am

Yup, adding to what Jay said, 1915 CJ's have upside down backs. 1914, right side up.