Card doctoring...

[murphy8276]

Originally Posted by AGuinness

Does anybody have an estimation of what percentage of cards presently residing in TPG cases have been altered? Or has a sample ever been taken?

If it is every proven it is more than .0001%, we are all in deep **** with our collection value.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by murphy8276

If it is every proven it is more than .0001%, we are all in deep **** with our collection value.

Why? Judging by what I see, a whole heck of a lot of people don't care. They only care about getting the pretty card and flip they paid for, quickly, and well-packaged.

[mechanicalman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Why? Judging by what I see, a whole heck of a lot of people don't care. They only care about getting the pretty card and flip they paid for, quickly, and well-packaged.

Peter, for argument’s sake, let’s say I agree with your premise that many altered cards reside in graded holders, AND I care about it, what’s your conclusion? What would you recommend one do? Avoid graded cards? Avoid high grade? To be clear, this is not intended to be a confrontational question. I’m genuinely interested on the advice you’d give a new collector given the reality of the things you’re mentioning.

[drcy]

Originally Posted by mechanicalman

Peter, for argument’s sake, let’s say I agree with your premise that many altered cards reside in graded holders, AND I care about it, what’s your conclusion? What would you recommend one do? Avoid graded cards? Avoid high grade? To be clear, this is not intended to be a confrontational question. I’m genuinely interested on the advice you’d give a new collector given the reality of the things you’re mentioning.

That's the question. What would you do? How would you approach your collecting? What would you think the hobby and other collectors should do? Would it change the grades you collect, or the pricing of grades? Would you want more history (provenance) on cards? Would you be willing to pay $50,000 for a graded 10 1957 Sandy Koufax, or would you say "I think I'll stick with $20 for the 3 version."?

If you learned that a percentage of TPA LOAs for autographs were incorrect, how would that affect your collecting of autographs? Would you still accept them as 100% accurate and cross your fingers? Or would you educate yourself about autograph authentication, take more care in picking autographs? What would you think of an industry that uses TPA LOAs as the final arbiter?

Duly note it is not the autograph and game used experts who take TPA LOAs as infallible and the final arbiters as what is authentic and not (go to the autograph section or the game used universe form to see this). It is collectors who lack knowledge, auction houses who want "insurance" and resellers who want something to move their product. You will find that expert collectors in these areas are DIY types.

My collecting personal advice on cards would to stick to mid to lower grades. Don't get price enamored by the grade on the label. There are a lot of great looking cards in lower grade, many presentable even good to poor grade. You skip all that Gem Mint, resubmit a card 10 times until you raise the grade by 0.5 crapola. If there's a missed flaw, saw a small wrinkle, on a 'Gem Mint' card that's a travesty; on a low grade card its no big deal. If you want to buy raw cards, that's great, but find reputable and trustworthy dealers to buy them from. Some people look for the cards, then see who is the seller. As a collector, I would find my favorite sellers and see what they were selling. Just my opinion-- everyone will have his own take and advice.

[packs]

Provenance will never matter when it comes to something like baseball cards. They were collected by children and rarely does a 100 plus year old card stay in one collection for the life of the card. So what provenance could there possibly be on a high grade T206? A notarized statement from an 8 year old in 1909? It'll never work.

My advice to anyone would be to avoid high grade pre-war cards entirely. I'd pay the same amount of money for a PSA 9 T206 that I would an Auth because I highly doubt there's any difference between them. But to each their own.

My advice to a new collector on a budget would be to stick to low/mid grade pre-war cards with nice eye appeal. My personal sweet spot is in the VG-VG/EX range. Chances are if you do this you will be able to find nice presentable cards at relative bargain prices and the likelihood of alterations is also presumably decreased.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Sorry, but I disagree with the advice to stick to mid grade cards. That's like putting a Band-Aid on cancer - it only covers up the problem. As the case with the Lou Brock card in this thread, it was a mid-grade card and off center at that, but it was still recolored.

My advice would be to educate yourself - learn what to look for. If you like mid-grade cards, fine then buy them. I'm not saying don't buy mid-grade cards. What I am saying is don't limit yourself to mid-grade cards just because you're afraid of buying something that's been altered.

Education, Knowledge - again, learn what to look for.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by murphy8276

If it is every proven it is more than .0001%, we are all in deep **** with our collection value.

It's almost certainly more than that. They've done 29 million things, so that percentage means only about 3000 bad things getting through.

Considering that it's done by people, that percentage would mean they're doing a pretty good job.

[steve B]

I've said this before, but I think it bears some repeating.

The entire process for authentication and grading is backwards.

Sure, there are a lot of cards that can be done by pretty much anyone. Stuff that's not particularly prone to recoloring, and is in pretty worn condition. I'd say that cards with colored borders are more likely to be recolored even in lower grades - we've seen a great example right here.

But to take the cards, and push them through faster based on value is not what makes any sense. I suspect that actually only means the cards that are expensive get their limited inspection sooner, probably to make the insurance company happy.

Even if you can't accept a system that handles higher value cards more slowly, maybe a system that triaged where effort was spent?
Send in a box of VG anything, and it goes to the new guy. Send in a bunch of cards that might be in higher grades, send them to more experienced people. Possible high grade cards with fairly high value if they are high grade should get much more scrutiny. And I mean actually taking time to be sure everything is "right" with the card.
And if something isn't "right" put the opinion of that in writing so it's clear. No "questionable" authenticity, No "we won't slab it because it's been tampered with" none of that nonsense.
It wouldn't work for less expensive cards, but ultimately all card graded should have the flaws explained, and in writing.

Steve B

[conor912]

Originally Posted by steve B

I've said this before, but I think it bears some repeating.

The entire process for authentication and grading is backwards.

Sure, there are a lot of cards that can be done by pretty much anyone. Stuff that's not particularly prone to recoloring, and is in pretty worn condition. I'd say that cards with colored borders are more likely to be recolored even in lower grades - we've seen a great example right here.

But to take the cards, and push them through faster based on value is not what makes any sense. I suspect that actually only means the cards that are expensive get their limited inspection sooner, probably to make the insurance company happy.

Even if you can't accept a system that handles higher value cards more slowly, maybe a system that triaged where effort was spent?
Send in a box of VG anything, and it goes to the new guy. Send in a bunch of cards that might be in higher grades, send them to more experienced people. Possible high grade cards with fairly high value if they are high grade should get much more scrutiny. And I mean actually taking time to be sure everything is "right" with the card.
And if something isn't "right" put the opinion of that in writing so it's clear. No "questionable" authenticity, No "we won't slab it because it's been tampered with" none of that nonsense.
It wouldn't work for less expensive cards, but ultimately all card graded should have the flaws explained, and in writing.

Steve B

Agreed. It would be like paying an appraiser to assess an antique and having him tell you it's fake but refusing to tell you why he thinks so. If you're happy with that scenario, then grade away.

[drcy]

My advice was just for a single new collector if he asked.

Just one thing that I would do hobby wide is to estimate is the margin of error just in assigning the grade, for example as exemplified as through all those resubmissions to get a different grade, and put that margin of error on the label. In science, identifying and expressing the margin of error is integral and essential when communicating results. If a label said "ExMt 6 with margin of error of 5%" that would change things quite a bit.

If with numbers people, this margin of error is well known and talked about, if indirectly. There are those who resubmit to get a different grade, people who say "Do you this could get a bump?" and people who say one card looks better than another though in the same number grade. All I'm saying this margin of error should be explicitly expressed on the product for everyone to see, and for this margin of error be expressed in all calculations and considerations.

Everything-- in science, life and grading-- has a margin of error. There is nothing wrong with that. The problem is when people, and a system, act as if there is no margin of error.

And would that margin of error have to be reflected in the registry numbers? Of course.

Would it change pricing on many cards and all that? Probably, but so be it. But much of the hobby is based on bad math and statistics.

Do I think this will happen? Of course not. The collectors would fight this more than the graders. PSA registry people would probably have a stroke.

Another practical and specific fix would be there should be formal grades for photographs. And I don't say that as some vague, generalized rule, but for specific reason.

[packs]

Personally I would prefer that TPA's simply authentic cards and let the buyer decide what grade the card is to them. Assigning numbers is foolish to me because every collector should be able to determine what a card is worth to themselves without some phony number getting involved. And we've seen time and time again that a card can be "Good" one day, returned for another look, and come out "Very Good" the next despite nothing changing. In that scenario authentic cards that have been trimmed will sell for the same price as high grade cards and I think that price will be closer to what authentic cards sell for now than it would to the PSA 9 price. And cards that are in lower "collector" grades will likely balloon in value under that system.

[drcy]

If you get an artifact carbon dated or thermoluminesciently tested (another method for dating), the result will include the carefully calculated margin of error with the result. Why do they do this? Because they are scientists (one of the main carbon dating places is at the University of Arizona physics department) and care about accuracy in their results.

What does this margin of error in the result force you to do? It forces for you to not just rely on that result, but look at the items from different aspects. For example, thermoluminescence testing, which is a highly advanced atomic testing of the material, often has a large margin of error. The margin of error means it doesn't pinpoint a year or decade or even century, but tells you that the material is either centuries old or new, which is very important information for identifying an item as authentic or a fake. But the authenticator has to consider other aspects in pinpointing the item and its date, such as the style, history, etc. In fact, what often happens with expensive and rare ancient relics and artifacts, the art historian or whomever looks at all the other stuff-- look, style, research-- to judge the identity and age, then the thermoluminescence test is done as the final check, or piece in the puzzle. The historian says this vase appears to be a 14th century Chines, and the thermoluminescence test says "We can't tell you the century, but it is indeed centuries old and not new."

Similarly, if the graded card label includes a margin of error with the grade, that will force the collector to consider other things-- usually how the item looks. This, of course, is what many people on this board already do. But I would like this margin of error to be explicitly be expressed and calculated throughout the entire hobby.

Would this approach blow up, or at least significantly alter, the baseball card hobby calculations that don't express and incorporate the margin of error? Yes, but this just says those numbers are bad. That physics professor at the University of Arizona would say you have to include the margin of error in the carbon dating result, and subsequent consideration of that result. He would say you can't not do it, and not doing it would be scientific malpractice.

So, as I said, if it were up to me, a grading margin of error would be estimated and placed right on the front of the label with the grade, and the margin or error be integrated into all hobby number calculations. Would this significantly alter present calculations such as the registry and some price guides, and alter much hobby perception/consideration of grades? Yes, but that's because those current calculations are perceptions/considerations of grades are currently off.

An example of a change in consideration would be a collector saying "The label says NmtMt 8 +/- 18%. I guess I'd better look at the card itself and see what I think." Oh, the horror, the horror. How would the baseball card industrial complex survive such thinking?

[rainier2004]

A major difference between "collecting" today and before the TPGs was the old right of passage. We use to go to shows, hold cards, smell cards and talk to people about said card. This was the education you got, the more people you conversed with = the more you learned. Even with TPGs this is still possible even with far less shows to do this.

Some people want specifics on what to look for and that is a great first question. But every issue is different, judging a 1956T is far different than a Cracker Jack. I have collected CJs, PCs, e107s, t205s, t206s, e120s, e121, 33G, 34G, 40PB, n172s, n28s, Topps, Bowman, n300s etc...they all differ. On every single issue I have talked to more experienced people on what to look for, tips, giveaways and anything I could learn...and to me, that is all part of the hobby. This networking is all part of the foundation on what we did and some continue to do.

TPGs have allowed people to skip educating yourself and relying on the flip...the flip has become the commodity in many instances instead of the card. I don't care if its raw or graded, I will analyze it myself and make an informed decision based on many different factors including seller, past experiences and if I do not know or feel comfortable I will contact someone. Take the time to reach out, 99% of the time you will get an answer with details that you could have never known w/o reaching out.

It becomes about being self-sufficient and realizing when someone is trying to get one over on you whether they know it or not. Pick a grade, who cares, just EDUCATE YOURSELF! Take that time, make those connections, REACH OUT! If anyone wants to know what to look for in CJs, write me, any time, I will respond. Just b/c its slabbed doesn't mean its any good or perfect, don't make the flip the commodity...collect the cards.

Sorry if any of this comes off as condescending or arrogant, its not intended and this is how it was done pre-1991. EDUCATE YOURSELF BROTHERS!

[DeanH3]

Originally Posted by packs

Personally I would prefer that TPA's simply authentic cards and let the buyer decide what grade the card is to them. Assigning numbers is foolish to me because every collector should be able to determine what a card is worth to themselves without some phony number getting involved. And we've seen time and time again that a card can be "Good" one day, returned for another look, and come out "Very Good" the next despite nothing changing. In that scenario authentic cards that have been trimmed will sell for the same price as high grade cards and I think that price will be closer to what authentic cards sell for now than it would to the PSA 9 price. And cards that are in lower "collector" grades will likely balloon in value under that system.

I understand your sentiment, but if cards were only to be graded as "A", then we are right back to the same old story of cards that look high end but have a hiden flaw that is not disclosed. I got really tired of dealers telling me my cards were junk when I was selling. Only to turn around and then resell them as high end.

I believe grading is extremely valuable for exposing those hard to see flaws. When you see a sharp lower graded card, you know there is something lurking. Now if the flaws of the card were also included on the flip, then maybe just an "A" grade would work. However those flips would need to be pretty big to accommodate that and slabs would increase in size as a result.

[egbeachley]

Originally Posted by steve B

It's almost certainly more than that. They've done 29 million things, so that percentage means only about 3000 bad things getting through.

Considering that it's done by people, that percentage would mean they're doing a pretty good job.

Steve, over .0001% of 29 million things is not 3,000, it's 30.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by egbeachley

Steve, over .0001% of 29 million things is not 3,000, it's 30.

DOH! I took it as 1/10000, and forgot the percentage.

My math is bad, but the right math makes the margin of error a lot smaller.

I'm really sure more then 30 items have made it through PSA that really shouldn't have.

[egbeachley]

I know you did. But as they say, technically correct is the best kind of correct.

I'm not sure what he meant by we would be in deep **** valuewise if it was proven that 30 cards got through undetected. I'm pretty sure that NM/Mint collectors would have over 10% altered cards in their collections.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I have no idea about percentage, but with the number of people I know to be card doctors, and the number of years they have been doing it, and some sense of how many cards they work on, it adds up.