I thought SGC didn't grade restored card?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rhys</b><p>I was under the impression that restored cards were not gradeable unless given the qualifier "authentic". Unless SGC recently changed their policy they have lost a lot of respect in my eyes with the grading of the following card.<br /><br /><a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/1909-D380-1-CLEMENT-BROS-PATTEE-SGC-10-RARE_W0QQitemZ5241922047QQcategoryZ57993QQrdZ1QQcm dZViewItem" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://cgi.ebay.com/1909-D380-1-CLEMENT-BROS-PATTEE-SGC-10-RARE_W0QQitemZ5241922047QQcategoryZ57993QQrdZ1QQcm dZViewItem</a><br /><br />The reson being, it is absolutely restored and an amatuer hack job at that. I bought this card for $40 at the Chicago Sun Times show in November of 2002. Took the card home and immediatley realized that the entire top portion of the card and area over the players right shoulder had been filled in with pencil because some of the background had been erased or cleaned off. Even some of the border oval was eproduced with pencil. I listed it on ebay with full disclosure that this card had the background colored in with pencil and got like $200. Now it is graded with no mention of major amatuer restoration. I am not saying anything about the buyer or seller, but this is either a major mistake by the holiest of holy grading companies, or they have changed their policies about grading restored cards as POOR with no mentions of restoration.<br /><br />Interesting and disappointing either way.<br /><br />Rhys Yeakley

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>BlackSoxFan</b><p>Hi Rhys - <br />As i am totally in the dark about this card and issue...how rare is it? Did david actually buy it from you or is it possible that this is another card? Would seem highly unlikely, but in my quest for knowledge, questions never hurt.<br><br>Regards,<br />Black Sox Fan<br /><br />- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br /><a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a><br /><a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a><br /><br />* I'm smart enough to know that there are a lot of people who know more than I do.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>sagard</b><p>From what your describing it doesn't sounds more like a card that has been colored on than a card that has been professionally restored. Or are you saying the card has been restored since the last time you owned it?<br /><br />If the card still has the pencil marks coloring in the background, it seems a little shady of the seller to not mention them.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>Is it possible that the pencil markings were erased or was there paper loss which would have made the background WHITE (which would now be pencil filling)?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>identify7</b><p>This is not a shady seller.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>Concur - seller is very good and reputable.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Al Crisafulli</b><p>Could it be that they graded it that way BECAUSE it had been colored on in pencil? I don't know anything about the issue, either, but I would imagine that if I submitted a T206 that someone had written on, it would grade, but it would grade very low. My experience has been that there's a fine line between a card with a mark or an erasure, and a card with detectable alterations. If the "alteration" is so blatant that it doesn't appear deceptive, the card grades very low. If the "alteration" is more subtle, it doesn't grade.<br /><br />In other words, perhaps PSA would have given it a 2 (MK) grade, but since SGC doesn't have qualifiers, it dropped the grade to a 10. <br /><br />I'm not making a statement here, just wondering and speculating.<br /><br />I have also purchased from the seller, and find him very reputable. One of my favorites, actually.<br /><br />-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Josh K.</b><p>I concur that the card was probably graded b/c the pencil writing was considered a marking rather than an alteration - from the sound of it, the pencil writing was obvious and not intended to decieve and that distinguishes it from an altered card in my mind.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Wesley</b><p>"....the entire top portion of the card and area over the players right shoulder had been filled in with pencil because some of the background had been erased or cleaned off."<br /><br /><br />If someone tried to color the grey area with pencil, this is more than just pencil writing. I think it is a alteration that simply got past the graders at SGC. It happens.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rhys</b><p>Seller is reputable and I did not sell the card to him so it has changed hands in the last 3 years. Wesley is right, I am not claiming there are a few pencil marks, I am estimating that 70% of the dark background is ONLY dark because pencil is making it that way. It is very obvious when holding it in person that this card was erased, or attempted to be cleaned and the ink vanished and someone tried to cosmetically repair the card by shading the background in with pencil. If you look at the scan you can see the very top tip of the oval is dark black, and the area to the players left is dark black. The ENTIRE rest of the background is shaded with vertical pencil lines. When tilting the card to the light you can see that this entire portion is silver looking when it refelects light (modern pencil effect). The oval frame to the players right was also appearantly missing because much of the oval border is also modern pencil which was used to recreat the border because it was missing. This is not just major restoration, but a hack job at that. It is a very, very obvious restoration job and in my opinion is MUCH more obvious than the Doyle card SGC graded for Alan Rosen. I also know this card has not had the pencil erased, because when holding it in person you can see through some of the pencil to the white stock of the card which is why it is so obvious even from the scan in the SGC holder.<br /><br />Rhys<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>zach</b><p>Cards from the D380 set are very very hard to find even in beater condition. This one would have gone for more if it didn't have the back damage, the D308s have a fairly significant backing advertising for Clement's bread which is desirable to lots of collectors.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>david bryan</b><p>fellow board members and collectors<br />i was somewhat surprised when i went to the network and read this tread. it completely caught me by surprise. i have no doubt that what rhys is saying is correct, as it is such a rare card and probably not much of a chance at all that there is another one which looks like this one. this card was a consignment and not mine, but i did have it in my hands, as i would never sale something unless i have it. i did not notice the defects that rhys pointed out at all. there is absolutely no question that if i would of noticed it that i would of specifically mentioned it. all i saw was a poor card and did not give it much attention otherwise. this was my mistake as i should of paid more attention to it since even in poor condition, it is a high dollar card. not trying to make excuses but i think it is too easy to look over possible defects on a poor condition card. anyway i take full responsibility for any mistakes i may make. i do not currently have the card as it has already been shipped. i have already contacted the purchaser and explained this to him. i told him if he was not completely satisfied to please return for a full refund. i always strive to make all transactions 100% satisfactory. be assured i will do the same for this and all cards purchased from me. <br />david bryan<br />"davidbvintage"

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>dan mckee</b><p>Dave, we appreciate you writing this but you didn't need to. We all know you are the class of the class! The problem here, once again, is the experts, the grading companies, missing something that shouldn't be missed. As Wes said, it happens and I agree that it just slipped through as it slipped by Dave and as it would have slipped by me. When a card is a beater, no matter how rare, you tend not to look as closely as you would a high grade card. The grading is here to stay. SGC is absolutely by far the best IMO, but mistakes are always going to happen as long as you have human intervention. Dan.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>tbob</b><p>Another example of why David Bryan is and always will be a class act and great guy.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>David Bryan is the best person I know to deal with. Period.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rhys</b><p>I agree that David is a class act and I was in no way trying to infer he did anything. Once the card has been encapsulated it probably is not very noticeable because the plastic blurs the card a touch. However, these types of things should not slip through the cracks which is why I posted this. If SGC really goes through their processes with black lights and magnification etc for every card than there is NO WAY this card passes. So what does the "G" stand for in SGC if not for "Guarantee". They should refund David's money and compensate him for his time and troubles in this for doing such a crappy job in passing this card. Like I said, it is not like they missed a crafty restoration job, this was VERY obvious to anyone who could have held this card in their hands.<br /><br />Grading companies are fine, but this is why people who spend big amounts of money on their services are just asking for it in the long run. Others can feel how they want but SGC is held to very high standard and beloved by the members of this board. Are they the best for vintage cards? Probably. But do they deserve a free pass on this one just because everyone on here loves their company so much more than PSA or GAI? No way. Just makes you wonder two things. First of all WHY did this card not get examined thoroughly and second, HOW MANY other cards has this type of thing happened to.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>BlackSoxFan</b><p>David - <br />haven't had the pleasure of meeting you, but i'm well aware of your reputation. In my humble opinion, your words are much appreciated, but not needed. You have clearly demonstrated that you are class act. I hope that nothing i said was taken in any negative light whatsoever as I was just asking questions. Best regards, and i look forward to tracking your auctions daily <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>.<br /><br />Regards,<br />Black Sox Fan<br /><br />- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -<br /><a href="http://www.blacksoxfan.com" target="new" border="0"><img src="http://www.blacksoxfan.com/images/art/sig.jpg"></a><br /><a href=mailto:shoelessjoe@blacksoxfan.com?subject=Ne t54>email me</a><br /><br />* I'm smart enough to know that there are a lot of people who know more than I do.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I just spoke to an executive at SGC. Their stance is that if they missed something on this they will do anything the buyer of the card wants in so far as writing a check for a refund etc.....if they determine it was an error. I have no reason to doubt Rhys. That being said if the card was marked on and the marking was not meant for deception then it could feasibly grade a 1 (or 10). There is some gray area here (no pun intended) and I really don't want to get into the "they should" or "they shouldn't" grade this or that. The bottom line is that all grading is done by humans and humans will make mistakes. The part that seperates winners from losers is how those mistakes are dealt with. The buyer of this card, which I am told has been apprised of the situation, will still most likely keep it. It's his call and SGC will gladly, promptly refund his money if, it was an SGC mistake, and he wants to return it..David has also publicly said he will stand behind it....nuff said.....

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>I have an E103 Lajoie with a bit of very obvious red crayon on the background. It was rejected as altered even though no one in his right mind would have considered the alteration to be anything other than a kid scribble. I am interested to see what SGC does with this card.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Pete Z.</b><p>There's something stuck on the "S" on his shirt - a piece of tobacco maybe - that happens to be the same color (brown) so as to blend in nicely. I sent the photo to SGC and they said the card would likely not holder since it looked to them that it was placed there intentionally to hide something (paper loss perhaps), which is really unfortunate (from a resale standpoint) because in all other respects it's a really nice card.<br /><img src="http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a47/zouraspm/waddell.jpg">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I've handled numerous T206 that had a little brown spot stuck on it like your card; it's most likely just some old hardened tobacco. I think SGC is wrong to say it was put there to hide something.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anson</b><p>Rhys, it sounds like SGC just missed one. Overall, they have pretty good quality control. But, all the grading companies (SGC is no exception) grade countless numbers of cards and there will always be a very small margin of mistakes. <br /><br />However, SGC has always been top-notch in resolving issues with their mistakes, as was pointed out.<br /><br />BTW, my middle name is Rhys <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>but I'm just wondering... If the card were removed from the holder, the pencil marks erased, the card re-submited to SGC, and it comes back again SGC10 Poor, what's the difference?<br /><br />Guy wants an authentic card-he got it. It's in poor condition. Was its appearance altered--I guess so, now its not. Now it's worth less because it looks poorer than poor? Ok, what's the diminution in value here? <br /><br />I guess I can understand, barely, that the guy was rest assured the card was authentic and unaltered because SGC slabbed it and they only slab authentic and unaltered, but I'm just curious how much you all think was added as value to this particular card by having it slabbed. Sold raw as is by David Bryan, what do you think it would fetch?<br /><br />My thoughts are, yeah, it's embarrassing, and yeah, someone should have caught it, but at the end of the day what's the real difference, again with this one card. Personally, I think the rhetorical question about how many others slip through the cracks is pretty much nonsense if this is the so-called prime example of a card grading tragedy.<br /><br />Just my two cents.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Wesley</b><p>If the pencil marks are erased in the future, the card should still be considered altered and should still be ungradeable. At most it would receive an authentic designation rather than a numeric grade. (Isn't that what happened to a T206 Wagner that had some work done to it? The improvements were later removed but when it came time to slab, it went into a holder that said AUTH.)<br /><br />As far as value of the card, that is a personal decision. To me it makes a world of difference to have a card authenticated and graded, but I know there are some collectors who do not mind trimmed cards or recolored cards or otherwise altered cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Nick</b><p>PSA uses a qualifier for markings. If this card had a 1 (MK) grade from PSA, would we call it a mistake by them? I certainly wouldn't. <br /><br />Since SGC doesn't use a qualifier and gave this card the lowest grade possible, how do we know they did not see the markings and decide that they were not to be deemed unacceptable alterations, but instead just downgrading writing? And why shouldn't cards with patently obvious pencil markings still be gradeable (in low grade)?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>In the oh so subjective world of grading by SGC and PSA I've found one consistency - that being <b>inconsistency</b>.<br /><br />I have an UGLY T205 Cobb that is absolutely original and authentic. It's very beat with a paper scrape on the front. Someone obviously colored it in (not even coming close to matching the color) and SGC rejected it as altered "color added". I thought it was a bit amusing that this card would be rejected. All I wanted was an SGC10 holder for it. Oh well, I guess it was the wrong day to have it submitted. I've had PSA reject cards for being trimmed but upon a second submission they graded them. I honestly didn't believe they were trimmed so that is why I tried it again. Go figure...