2001 Bowman Chrome Pujols Auto 005/500

http://forums.collectors.com/messagevie ... did=761144

Should be an interesting thread to follow for the next couple of days across the street. If nothing else, I'm looking forward to seeing scans of the redemption card, which I've never seen.

Why does that post have the look and feel of our old friend - cardcop?

Should have done better resurch.

Scans are up - not shure if it's cardcop or not. Either way it's cool to see the redemption. Can you imagine pulling that today? I would guess the redemption itself might even sell for 500 or so to a Pujols completist.

Wasn't there a thread about this Pujols card a few years back on Beckett? Something about 2 cards with the 005/500 numbering?

Roger

One thing I thought of just now is that if the redemption was mailed 8/1/02, I doubt he would have been fifth in line to receive the card. But that's assuming that Topps used FIFO for these, which would just be too easy.

If this was Cardcop (James) there would be a long rant about how he know the industry back doored
stuff and even sold off the fake cards as well. And then his post would have turned into rambling about
how there is multiple cards out there that are dual numbered (ie the card he has numbered) to the one someone else
has. Seems maybe those were just numbered the same since they did not keep good records back then. So there may just
be 2 numbered 5's out there since mistakes can be made.

Bornagaincollector said:

Wasn't there a thread about this Pujols card a few years back on Beckett? Something about 2 cards with the 005/500 numbering?

Roger

Click to expand...

There have been at least two different numbered 5/500 and three 005/500

This guy is saying he has owned the 'real one' since he got it from Topps, to be fair if someone was going to fake a number you could do a better job than what his card looks like, you can see why BGS kicked it back to him.

I think he is trying to get PSA to holder it via their message board. PSA is the furthest place to get the
best info on that card. I would think BGS or here would be?

Why won't Beckett grade it?

Is it would be too embarrassing to get it wrong? Because it would be too embarrassing to admit they graded the other one wrong? Because they really can't tell?

And if any of those apply, what good is the grading company?

maxpower said:

Why won't Beckett grade it?

Is it would be too embarrassing to get it wrong? Because it would be too embarrassing to admit they graded the other one wrong? Because they really can't tell?

And if any of those apply, what good is the grading company?

Click to expand...

PSA and BGS have both graded multiple #5 copies, yes a mistake by both, and I would say better late than never for BGS questioning this. What good is a grading company? Well, to be honest it takes 'a pair' to alter the number on a $2K+ card, these cards slipped by before some of the card doctoring of modern cards that we are now aware of became so prevalent. The cards are real, the signatures (on this one anyways) is real, the serial number is not. Next time I have $10K to spend on a card, I'll buy a 'off number' skipping any serial number premium and maybe spend the leftover $6K on a few other nice cards!

Isnt the numbers used on that sticker a means of tracking the authenticity of the card. The 3640497 on the sticker I always assumed was a means of tracking the sticker hence tracking the card. Can't they look at the sticker at Topps and figure this out?

elemin8 said:

Isnt the numbers used on that sticker a means of tracking the authenticity of the card. The 3640497 on the sticker I always assumed was a means of tracking the sticker hence tracking the card. Can't they look at the sticker at Topps and figure this out?

Click to expand...

No, those numbers are relatively meaningless. Topps doesn't have a database for those numbers.

Topps doesn't have a database for them, correct, but the stickers helped me immensely in figuring out the print runs for the Topps '52 rookie auto set. One thing I've noticed for each run of autos that I collect is that while the serial numbers themselves are meaningless when looked at "as a whole" (ie all 7 numbers mean nothing), when you look at a specific card, the serial numbers generally run in sequence. I have found this to be true from sets from various years (specifically, 2002 Bowman's Best, as well as 2006 and 2007 Topps '52.) The red autos /52 provide the best argument.

For example, let's say we have a group of 4 different cards.

Card A is a Topps '52 blue ink rookie of Sassafras Jones that is ridiculously overproduced - hologram number 1231000

Card B is a Topps '52 red ink rookie of Sassafras Jones, which is hand numbered 10/52 - hologram number 4561010

Card C is another Topps '52 blue ink rookie of Sassafras Jones - different copy of the same card - hologram number 1232500

Card D is another Topps '52 red ink rookie of Sassafras Jones that is hand numbered 20/52 - hologram number 4561020


As you can see, the hologram number itself is completely meaningless. However, when taken into context with other cards from that particular set, they do actually correlate somehow. Since the blue ink autos are 1500 numbers apart, we can infer that there are at least 1500 copies of this card (that is assuming that we have the two serial numbers as far apart as possible.) For EVERY red auto I have seen from the '52 set, the holograms always match up with the handwritten serial number on the front.

If you have multiple copies of an autograph with a Topps certification hologram, take a look and you'll notice that they're pretty close together. This will also give you some idea of the print run of the card - the more copies you accumulate, the better range of hologram numbers you will get. In other words, if you have 10 copies of a card, and all the hologram numbers are within 100 of each other, you know that it is a pretty short printed card (or you just lucked out and happened to get a bunch of them within the same range.) Same thing if the holos are pretty far apart - I would say that if the first few digits match, then all the autos were affixed with hologram numbers from the same sheet.





Sooooooooooo in other words, since I know for a fact that Topps did this with the 2002 Bowman's Best serial numbers, there is a good chance they may have done this with the 2001 BC autos. I know someone was tracking both the handwritten serial number and the hologram number on Pujols autos. If there is any rhyme or reason to it, with that data we can tell what serial number the 2001 Pujols 005/500 should have.













nerd

John (Colorado Rockies Fan) had a huge list of them on the old BMB. He seems to have vanished though....

I know of at least 7 copies that are from 5/500 to 00005/500

I don't think this is legitimate. The extra zeros throw it off.

I have printed out the various Pujols 5/500's, I believe that two of them were in PSA holders and one was in
a BGS holder. one was 5/500 and the other was 005/500. Anyone with a sharpie and some alcohol can
number it whatever they want. This goes for any chrome card. I remember one of the sellers was from
Florida, but that several years ago.

Kevin

I've seen another 5/500 before. It was PSA graded and had a grade of a "9". It was numbered "5/500" and not "005/500".

Not only are there a few 5, 05, and 005 cards out there.

There are also a few 36's. That's the number he's wearing in the card.