Either reason: sending to SGC and want an "unbiased" grade, or sending back to PSA but would rather crack out and try again then send back in for review.

So why return the certs, especially in the second case where it just telegraphs that the card already has been graded whatever it was graded?

To keep the population low. They could wait until after the cards are re-graded to return the certs.

I think that a lot of people view it as proper etiquette to return the certs so that the population report remains closer to accurate. And for lower pop cards, as was stated above, it's important to not add unnecessary tallies to the pop report.

Edited to add: I don't think anyone is sending in the flip with the card to get regraded. You can send the flips back at any time and they'll know to adjust the pop report accordingly.

When were the lower grades offered and what was the final hammer price on them? if anyone has that info, thanks.

I can't see the 'send in the flips' crowd out there. Explain how if this Cobb gets a 9 why anyone would want to send in a flip that was a 6 or an 8. I understand the 'keep the Pop report right' scenario, but isn't it to the high grade crowd's favor to have MORE lower graded cards in the Pop report--right or wrong--than to be sure it's 'right'. The more cards at a lower level, the more impact that saying '1 of 1' or '1 of 2' really gets. I can't believe many people send in flips after cracking and resubmitting.....

Stain removal from cards seems like such a gray area. If you showed me a nice 52 Mantle at auction then showed me an earlier picture of the card that showed tape stains, I'd still have the same level of interest in the card. However, if I saw a picture of the card and saw that it was recolored, re-backed, or had corners or edges rebuilt, then I'd have a problem as it would then be someone else's creation.

If it was a chemical process that could lead to long term damage of the card, I'd be worried. But from what I understand, the process isn't harmful to cards. If someone wants to take the Mantle in this PWCC listing and remove the stains then sell me the card a few grades higher, I truly wouldn't mind.

I understand everyone has their own opinions on this and some view it as taboo since there is no disclosure in most cases. I'm a big fan of 80s Fleer basketball cards. If I open a wax box and decide to grade a few stickers, before I sell do I need to let someone know that these cards came with wax stuck on them and I had to take it off with panty hose?

SCD did a very informative interview with stain remover Dick Towle that sheds some light on the process. It's worth a read: http://www.sportscollectorsdigest.co...res/nerattowle

So fading the colors is not harming the card?

Faded colors and a chemical smell that is distinctive

If water took out caramel stains, bleached Cracker Jacks would not be such an issue.

I read that article years ago but it's great to read it again. To me the biggest problem I have is the non disclosure. If it's not seen as an overall negative, then why don't these prominent dealers say upfront why has been done to their cards? Well we all know the answer to that....M-O-N-E-Y! I might still be ok with buying a card that has had something removed. I just want to know upfront and let me decide.

Im surprised we havent had a restored classification in the hobby yet, much like what has happened with comic books

We do -- "Authentic."

I think that eventually the TPG's will go to such a designation, rather than "altered." With cards which are truly rare and significant, I don't believe a restored card, with the matter disclosed and transparent, will be viewed very negatively (I am probably somewhat biased, as I have at least one potential candidate--a '29 Kashin R316 Mel Ott rookie, which is exceptionally well-centered for the card, but with the lower right corner missing and some damage to the lower right side of the card above that. Was consequently graded SGC poor, of course).

Best to all,

Larry

With comics, they grade the books with a numerical grade, the flip is a different color, and it is designated as restored. The restored versions obviously don't command the same prices as their natural counterparts but it adds another dimension to the hobby. I would imagine the card industry would benefit from it as well.

I'm not sure how it would apply to stain removal if it is indeed undetectable but an intriguing topic nonetheless.

And since when is water not a chemical?

As long as card doctors can make tons of money by getting altered cards into holders without disclosure, I don't see much hope for a restored segment.

i think water would be a compound...no?

as well as a molecule apparently.

We had an extensive discussion of this years ago, perhaps someone with better search skills can find it.

If you go to this link it has an extensive discussion on the topic.

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=185334

By this definition, no.

noun

noun: chemical; plural noun: chemicals; noun: chem.



1.


a compound or substance that has been purified or prepared, especially artificially.

According to a chemistry website I looked at:

Chemical Definition: Everything which has mass is a chemical. Anything consisting of matter is a chemical. Any liquid, solid, gas. Any pure substance; any mixture.

Examples: water, pencil, air, carpet, lightbulb, copper, bubbles, baking soda

Reductio absurdum, or something like that.

I really don't want to argue what is or isn't a chemical, I was just having some fun. I think what most people really mean to say when they argue against the use of chemicals, is that they don't want any man-made solvents used on their cards. Some would take it even further, and say they don't want a card they are buying to be soaked in water either.

reductio ad absurdum :D:D:D

Carry on. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Ad damnum you.:D

Cards
 

for 22 years many people are pleased with all the work that was done to cards. There are some people that drive around cars with dents and say the car is great, there are people that get the dent out.this is a choice people have like cards- if a water stain can be removed and the card is a 5 before and now gets 8 well--again gonewiththestain.com says it all. Our family enjoys the work and the great people who i work for. Thank you a god bless

No expert but just taking a hard look at the pictures provided. That Wagner 6 does not have the same top border width as the Wagner 9, to my eye. The top border widths look different. It's also worth noting that multiple cards can have the same print dot.

Also, there is a small black dot to the left of the 9 Cobb's head that is not present on the 6 pictured.

Doubtless stain removal happens and gives cards a telltale washed-out look, but it doesn't look to my eyes at least like the cards pictured here are the same, given the Wagner border width and the PD in the Cobb being only on the 9.

I would be pleased too, if altering a card with solvents and whatever else you do enabled me to get it past a grading service and make a nice profit when I sell it without disclosure. Do you think by chance any of your clients are doing that, Dick?

Ah yes I just remembered Dick has acknowledged that one of his "services" is wrinkle removal. Lovely.

#13 Report Post Old 03-24-2014, 05:17 PM
DICKTOWLE DICKTOWLE is offline
member Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 94

Default Gone with the stain

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would like to make it clear that I don't remove autographs on baseballs, however I now remove wrinkles on cards and faces, if I can help someone, and you know who you are, please contact us

I don't have a problem with Dick's service as long as there are no long term effects and that it can't be detected in any way by myself or any other card expert (i.e. TPGs).

I disagree that stain removal is 'altering' a card. If I spill wine on my carpet and hire a professional cleaning service to remove the stain, is that altering the carpet, or is it removing something that shouldn't have been there in the first place?

I know my opinion may be in the minority, but so be it.

So if you're REALLY good at card doctoring and it can't be detected, at least in the cursory review TPGs give, that isn't card doctoring. Oh that's great David. Very cogent. Whatever.

And your carpet example is completely irrelevant and you know it.

I disagree that soaking a card to remove a stain is 'doctoring'. There is another thread on the main page about scrap book soaking. Do you consider that 'doctoring' too?

Soaking something out of a scrapbook with water is fine with me. Getting out stains with solvents or taking out wrinkles is not.

In the scrapbook thread, he soaked the cards in more than water. He used Bestine (a solvent). Unfortunately, it didn't work for him as you can see by the results. But, if it had worked for him, would you be as vocal in that thread?

It depends on what he did with the cards. If he sold them without disclosure, perhaps. If he kept them for his collection, no.

Isn't water a solvent?

Not as I think of the term, no. Not a chemical solvent, anyhow. I believe it is generally accepted that water does not affect the integrity of the surface. I don't believe that is the case for chemical solvents. And I am virtually certain that if you told a TPG that you had used a chemical solvent, that would be considered an unacceptable alteration.

I guess I just don't see the difference. If I have a card with a stain and I soak it to remove the stain, what difference does it make what I used (water or chemical solvent), as long as no one can tell and there are no long term effects? Whether it was water or a chemical solvent, isn't the result still the same? So, what does it matter what was used?

So why do the TPGs say you can't do it? Probably because it is not established that the solvents don't do damage. Indeed look at the faded colors on the E93s.

By your logic it's OK to take out a major crease if you can't tell. I guess I just don't feel the same way. And neither do the TPGs. It's deception, and someone who does it for clients who then submit the cards without disclosure is enabling fraud.

PS I bet if you used sophisticated enough equipment you could tell that solvents had been used.

Which TPG's say you can't do it? That is a common misconception. They don't say you can't do it, they say there can be no evidence of it. Quite a difference.

I completely disagree with the conclusion you draw from that wording. Do you REALLY think a TPG's position is that it blesses really good card doctoring? IMO there is no way Dave Forman or Joe Orlando would say that.

Quite different. Removing a crease is altering the paper stock of the card. If removing a stain doesn't effect the card in any way, then the paper stock has not been altered.

And your evidence that solvents don't is.......

I don't read this as saying it's inappropriate only if PSA can detect it and otherwise it is OK. I don't think anybody could, reasonably.

N-7 Evidence of Cleaning - When a whitener is used to whiten borders or a solution is used to remove wax, candy, gum or tobacco stains.

cards
 

To All, All of my work comes with an invoice and full disclosure on every card that is done- All detail is there to see what was done on the card. When the cards leave my home back to clients, what they do is there business, not mine.

I hope this answer's any question about my work and the integrity behind our family business.

:D

I completely disagree that that lets you off the hook, Dick. You know exactly what your clients are doing (or some of them), and that makes you an enabler, in my opinion. Unless you are going to tell us that dealers don't use your services and it's only collectors. By the TPGs' standards you are making unacceptable alterations to cards, and you well know your services are sought in order to profit from deception.

PS those invoices would certainly make interesting reading.

so
 

as a solution would you suggest suppressing DT's right to perform such an activity and an individuals right to have something like a stain removed from a card or do you have another idea? Where does the actual responsibility lie and where is the line drawn?

Cards
 

PETER, SEND ME A CARD TO WORK AND I WILL SEND YOU A INVOICE OF MY WORK--- :confused: