Did SCD miss a rebacking?... [Archive] - Net54baseball.com Forums

View Full Version : Did SCD miss a rebacking?...

Archive

08-13-2003, 09:18 AM

Posted By: Elliot  ...and should the seller have mentioned it?? Here's the ebay listing-- <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=31719&item=2746535459" target=_new>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=31719&item=2746535459</a> and here's the description from the seller's website <a href="http://www.members.aol.com/prewarsports/oldjudge" target=_new>http://www.members.aol.com/prewarsports/oldjudge</a> (note: you need to scroll down the page) Similiarly, take a look at the Nash/Radbourne card---the seller even makes a comment on the ebay listing about the "clean" back.

Archive

08-13-2003, 02:15 PM

Posted By: John(z28jd)Maybe Leon can contact scd like he did with BVG as mentioned in the previous thread and see what their policies are regarding something like this.

Archive

08-13-2003, 02:36 PM

Posted By: leonI got no contacts at SCD besides Mr. Lemke, who does occasionally visit the board. Hopefully we will get a response but all of my grading company contacts are used up.....and btw, did ya'll notice the 80 or so cards of mine listed in the SGC type set registry? As soon as I am not lazy ( could be a while) I will scan the rest of the cards and send 'em in.....later

Archive

08-14-2003, 12:02 PM

Posted By: Adam J. BaxterI've talked to the seller before, seems very nice. I've visited his site many, many times to view his N172 gallery and I've found his descriptions of the cards and their condition is very detailed and accurate.Hopefully,he just made a mistake when he listed them on ebay or maybe they weren't rebacked at all and he made the mistake when he originally listed the cards on his site. If they have been rebacked and SCD overlooked that fact, that would be something of an issue.

Archive

08-14-2003, 01:11 PM

Posted By: Bob LemkeI've passed this thread on to the boss at SCD Authentic. I have no official connection with that division but if I did I'd be inclined to back our staff's opinion rather than that of the unknown source who initially labeled the card as re-backed. Why is it that so many people on forums such as this are inclined to presume the worst in such situations?

Archive

08-14-2003, 01:32 PM

Posted By: DanI must agree with Bob here. Why are we assuming it is re-backed? Because this combination should not or doesn't exist? New variations and cards are found even today. I would like to have a known dealer or collector (just about anyone from this board) hold it raw to determine. Unfortunately, that would require busting it out of the slab probably and if I was the purchaser, I would not do it. dan.

Archive

08-14-2003, 01:56 PM

Posted By: runscott...because the owner of the N172 in questioned described it as re-backed, on his web-site?

Archive

08-14-2003, 01:57 PM

Posted By: TBobcan someone give me a quick overview on these "mini" N172s? I remember reading an article somewhere (VCBC?) in which their rarity was described. Since SCD graded it as authentic in their "quick grade," I took a shot on it as a type card. <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2746635932" target=_new>http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2746635932</a>

Archive

08-14-2003, 01:58 PM

Posted By: leonWith all due respect sir....the one that is in an SCD holder might or might not be rebacked, I am not sure. It was listed on the sellers website as rebacked and now it is in an SCD holder. Those are the only facts so far. Can't say one way or the other. AS far as the one Cobb-Drum in a BVG holder I will let ALL of the experts (because I am not one) render their opinions....which is that it IS rebacked.....take care and best regards ps...and Beckett will not stand behind it to boot.....

Archive

08-14-2003, 02:22 PM

Posted By: ElliotDan, It's got nothing to do with the combination. The card in question is an Old Judge, which has a blank back. The seller,who must have sent it in for grading, does contribute occasionally to do this board, and had described it as rebacked on his website, before he sent it in for grading and subsequent selling on ebay. He handles a lot of Old Judges, and I feel reasonably confident in his ability to identify a rebacked Old Judge. Having not seen the card in question, I can't be sure whether he's correct or the graders at SCD are correct, but somebody is sure wrong. Additionally, I was asking the question, whether ethically if you are a seller who thinks the card has been rebacked, but has been subsequently graded, should you mention that fact in the auction listing?

Archive

08-14-2003, 05:54 PM

Posted By: Joe_G.While that may be the real thing, it is unlike the other minis I've seen. Here is an example from Dave Levin's site. Notice how the "GOODWIN & CO. New York" is at the normal position at bottom of an otherwise full size card. I could be wrong, both minis I've looked at are type 1 "0" cards, the card you purchased is a type 2 "0" card. I'm sure Jay Miller could clear this up. <img src="http://www.gfg.com/oldjudge/n172-rare.jpg"> Joe Gonsowski

Archive

08-14-2003, 06:58 PM

Posted By: Brian Weisner Mr Lemke, I disagree with your assertion, I don't think the members of this board expect the worst, but question the curious. I'll put the expertise of Board 54 members up against any grading card company in existence. Personally, I don't collect Oj's, but if I did, I'd listen to my fellow board experts before anyone else. Be well Brian Why does everyone seem to think this board is full of attack dogs? We are the ones who are always being attacked.

Archive

08-14-2003, 08:20 PM

Posted By: fkwHi, My fuzzy memory seems to remember that the "Mini" N172 Old Judge cards are all Brooklyn "outdoor pose" cards. And its the photo thats mini, not the actual card itself. The style of N172 you won with the "Old Judge Cigarettes" box in upper corner always seem to be quite a bit smaller than some of the other types of Old Judge cards. But Im far from an expert on OJs, so Im not 100% sure. Not a bad price though. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> Frank

Archive

08-14-2003, 10:11 PM

Posted By: DanHoly Tomatoes! I was off base, my entire statement was about the T206 Cobb Drum back, I am old judge ignorant so my apologies guys. I will make a statement about the mini old judges, i have a hoss radbourne, they were sold in 1975 at a show in MD as FAKES! I paid $1 for my Hoss from the late and great Jim hastings. These mini Old Judges surfaced in 1975 and were considered fakes back then though they do look damn good except for the size. Sorry about my previous screw up. Bob, you are still my hero! Dan.

Archive

08-15-2003, 06:40 AM

Posted By: runscottI'm sure the grading companies would prefer that when we see something like this we just ignore it, assuming they are the experts. But in fact, most of the experts are on this board and are not working as slabbers at grading companies.

Archive

08-15-2003, 08:58 AM

Posted By: Jay MillerBob--The Old Judge "mini" is a reprint that was done many years ago. As mentioned by others, minis are only of Brooklyn outdoor poses and are 1887 issues. As to advertising sheets, such sheets used full size Old Judge cards or Brooklyn minis. There were no other reduced size cards used on them.

Archive

08-15-2003, 09:06 AM

Posted By: Jay MillerBTW looking at the Mutrie ebay listing I would bet that the card is in fact rebacked and that SCD missed it. Bob Lemke-you express confidence in the SCD graders. Please tell me what experience they have with Old Judge or other pre-1900 cards? Also, how can a company guarantee a grade after a person walks away from their table. What if the card is somehow mishandled and its condition changes? Even if it hasn't been mishandled how do they know without regrading it?

Archive

08-15-2003, 01:03 PM

Posted By: Bob LemkeHere's my point: Only the person who had the card "quick-graded" and the SCDA grader(s) have held this card in their hand(s) and are entitled to render an opinion at this juncture. Yet, all too many people are willing to presume the grading company is in the wrong. It's not just this card and this grading company and this forum; this type of "anti-establishment" mentality is pervasive and, at least to my mind, a manisfestation of widespread disillusionment in the face of continuing depression in nearly all niches of this hobby/industry.

Archive

08-15-2003, 01:18 PM

Posted By: Jay MillerBob--That is just so much happy horsesh-t. The card looks timmed at the right and at the bottom. One of the two people you site who held the card thought it was rebacked--he says so in his original description of the card. Again I ask what expertise your graders have in pre-1900 cards. The only depression I feel in the hobby is opening up SCD and seeing what seems to be 20% of the pages devoted to auctions by Coaches Corner. Bob--why do those auctions have Babe Ruth and Jimmy Foxx baseballs with no certificates of authenticity and modern baseballs with certificates? What happens to SCD if Coaches Corner pulls their ads?

Archive

08-15-2003, 01:40 PM

Posted By: DanI must agree with Jay on this one. There are many vintage smart people in the hobby yet none that I have heard of have ever been approached by any grading company to be hired on for their knowlege. It seems the grading companies allow hands on training for grading vintage cards. A grading company should be the expert, so they should hire someone that knows something about what they are grading. I was at a national, submitted a card, it came back trimmed, I asked the head grader what he had been smoking? The card wasn't trimmed, he just didn't have a clue about the issue. Mastronet wanted the card for auction. They walked it over and had it graded by the same grader. I love grading. Dan.

Archive

08-15-2003, 02:04 PM

Posted By: TBobYou both know more about OJs than I do, that isn't my field, but apparently both SCD and SGC indicated it was authentic and not a reprint. SCD quickgraded it as a VG 3 and stated it was authentic. SGC authenticated it but wouldn't grade it because there was a question of trimming, or so the seller states. Apparently this card sold on ebay last year (I missed it)and I was advised that it had been authenticated twice although it may be an ad card because no one had ever seen one before.

Archive

08-15-2003, 02:16 PM

Posted By: DanHi Bob, I haven't even looked at it. I was just making a grading company general statement. Jay far out weighs me with OJ's so I like alot of people on this board, will gladly accept his opinion on OJ being original and unaltered or fake and/or trimmed. Take care Bob, let's split another lot sometime! Dan.

Archive

08-15-2003, 02:54 PM

Posted By: runscottI don't think Mr. Lemke is making the connection that the person who described the card on the web-site, and the person who handed the card over for grading, and the person who now has the card listed...are all one and the same. It isn't an anti-establishment attitude - it's anti-sloppiness. Once a card is in a slab, it implies that an "expert" has evaluated it. No one holds these companies accountable for maintaining a work force of actual "experts", and if we don't bring up these examples on the board, there is no incentive for the grading companies to improve.

Archive

08-16-2003, 04:54 AM

Posted By: Dan mckeeI just saw Frank's post. My mini I was referring to is a smaller card entirely. I will try to post a pic when I return from vacation. I have showed the card to Terry Knouse JR and he has a few similar ones. Dan.

Archive

08-16-2003, 02:50 PM

Posted By: TBobI agree that the "mini" is a smaller picture on a regular sized card, but Jay are you sure that the fact this card is smaller automatically makes it one of the reprints? Don't know, just asking. The seller hasn't answered my email inquiry yet (after payment was sent of course, just my luck). I think Rhys is a stand up guy and should do the right thing if the card ISN'T legit, we'll see...

Archive

08-16-2003, 04:16 PM

Posted By: MWIt's not just this card and this grading company and this forum; this type of "anti-establishment" mentality is pervasive and, at least to my mind, a manisfestation of widespread disillusionment in the face of continuing depression in nearly all niches of this hobby/industry. Mr. Lemke, While your statement may certainly be true among some segments of our hobby, I don't think it applies very well to the members of this forum. Instead, I would suggest to you that 19th and early 20th century issues have continued to GAIN in popularity and value over the past year. Certainly, even your very own price guide would be a testament to that fact. The only "disillusionment" that is present is targeted toward those individuals who fraudulently sell reprints, those business that otherwise defraud collectors, and those grading companies that frequently manifest their inexperience/ignorance on vintage issues. In my opinion, the collectors of this forum support the best interests of the hobby.

Archive

08-16-2003, 04:28 PM

Posted By: MWOnce a card is in a slab, it implies that an "expert" has evaluated it. No one holds these companies accountable for maintaining a work force of actual "experts", and if we don't bring up these examples on the board, there is no incentive for the grading companies to improve. Runscott, Well put! Like you, I see no reason to give carte blanche to the sloppiness and inconsistency of some grading companies. Third party "professional" opinions on grading are almost completely unregulated. This forum provides an extremely useful service in expressing its extensive knowledge -- knowledge that helps other collectors AND holds many grading companies to a higher standard.

Archive

08-16-2003, 04:38 PM

Posted By: MWThe first N172 (Jim Mutrie) appears to be trimmed on the bottom edge and possibly elsewhere. The second N172 "mini" (Jocko Fields) does not appear to be an "ad card." It looks more like a reprint.

Archive

08-18-2003, 09:03 PM

Posted By: prewarsports.comHi, I have been away or I would have posted sooner. I am not a business and only sell cards that I buy in order to buy more cards. My website is not a business either, and I just learned HTML last year. I made HUNDREDS of errors on my site and most of the pictures arent even loaded yet, but these 2 cards were not errors in my web listings. I bought the Mutrie and Nash/Radbourn from a collector as being "possibly rebacked". So what do you do when you are faced with this situation? You disclose it, as I did on my website. I submitted it to see what SCD thought and it came back real, not rebacked. In my opinion, when there is any confusion and an authenticator, appraisor etc tells you that what you have is real, then this warrants removal of the disclaimer on the site, in my auction title. If this does not sound ethical to anyone else, please feel free to e mail me. As for the mini card, I clearly stated I did not know what it was, and am 100% willing to fefund TBOB's money if indeed it is a reprint. I hope those of you on this forum all know by now that EVERY card I sell is backed with a 100% money back guarantee and I even refund the shipping costs. If there is any question as to authenticity, rebacking, alterations etc, I will give the money back no questions asked. Hopefully a policy like that will make people realize that I am not in it for the money and just love Old Cards. Anyone who wants to know more, or ask any questions about any of my cards can feel free to e mail me. If you want to e mail me TBOB about the small Old Judge card I would be happy to refund your money if the card is not genuine. Thanks, and I hope this clears up any confusion. Prewarsports.com

Archive

08-18-2003, 09:17 PM

Posted By: John(z28jd)I like his answer,and i knew he read the board and was waiting for it too.I can also back him up as the one deal i had with him went very smoothly...So does that mean the one i bought from you might not be rebacked also? If it is (like you said before i bought it) they did a great job

Archive

08-18-2003, 09:29 PM

Posted By: prewarsportsI have rebacked a few myself and although they looked pretty good, they were nothing to be especially proud of. Almost all of my old judge cards were bought from a single large collection where the individual sent a few in to a noted conservator and had some rebacked, and then also relayed to me that he "thought" others might have been rebacked but he wasn't positive. Among those that he "thought" I had 2 pass inspection at SGC as being real, and 1 rejected at the same time for evidence of trimming. That is whay I listed ALL the suspect cards as being rebacked initially on my site, even if it was just speculation and that is why I removed the designation after they passed. I do not remember the card you bought from me, and if you e mail me and remind me I can tell you if it was one that was sent to the conservator or one that was "perhaps" rebacked. Thanks for the vote of confidence!

Archive

08-18-2003, 11:07 PM

Posted By: quanI have done a couple deals with Rhys and he was always a stand-up person...just like I told tbob a few days back.