Quote:
|
+1 G1911
and +1 Campy |
Quote:
The ironic part to me is that these same people are completely fine with collectors putting their grimy oily fingers with French-fry grease, dirt, snot, and god knows what else all over their cards, as if none of those substances "alter" the card. But the moment you talk about removing any of that or of even just water touching the card, they completely lose their marbles as they chant "ALTERATION!!!" and start calling for heads to roll. I honestly find it hilarious. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Nobody believes 0 cards were altered before PSA. The grading game is quite obviously the driver for the situation being discussed and which presently exists in the hobby. |
Quote:
At the end of the day, as long as you're not adding to or taking away from the card itself, then you can't say it was altered. Not the actual card itself. Someone got gunk or grime on the card and someone else safely removed it. The card behind that gunk and grime was left fully intact and undisturbed. This is an absolute nothing burger. Nobody cares except for some small vocal minority on message boards and a social media. This isn't a battle worth fighting. You can't win it. Just accept it or move on to another hobby (where cleaning of collectibles in that hobby will surely also be widely accepted). |
Quote:
|
Quote:
But even for those who earn money by cleaning cards, who cares? People earn money by cleaning all sorts of things. It's not fraud just because YOU (or whoever) don't like it. The only reason people are capable of making stupid money by improving a card's condition is because there are idiots out there that will pay stupid money for it. Don't be that stupid buyer if you don't like how the game is played. But this is how it's played whether you like it or not. My favorite condition for a card is a 4 or a 5. I don't play the stupid prices game. And I can clean my cards myself if I don't like how they look. I'm not paying someone else to turn a 2 into a 4 for me. |
Quote:
You have clearly expressed your opinion on cleaning cards. What about removing dents and creases? In one video on that guy’s channel, he “fixed” a Jordan rookie, and it went from a PSA 4 to a PSA 7. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro |
Quote:
No way that's a bit of water and poking with a stick. https://www.net54baseball.com/pictur...ictureid=37069 |
Quote:
Not some mystery stuff hawked by someone who seems to have profit as their primary goal. |
Sorry if I struck a nerve. I am neither a "fool" nor an "asinine" thinker. I am also not new to the hobby as I have been going to shows since the mid 80's. I am extremely close with many dealers including hobby legend Uncle Dick DeCourcey who treats me like a nephew. I also interviewed Kit Young and Dr. Beckett and others for the book I wrote about a decade ago.
I realize things went on before grading. It was mainly trimming, pressing corners and adding color. One of Kurt's videos is fascinating as he removed red ink, a true alteration, from a 1953 Mantle (my favorite set). So grading has limited some of those alterations which is the grading companies singular positive contribution to the hobby IMHO. Yet they still grade cards that are trimmed as has been pointed out on this board many times. I do not believe cleaning cards and soaking was as wide spread as it is now. With social media and videos like Kurt's and forums like this people are learning about it and seeing examples of how it works. I for one have not ever used one of Kurts "products" and I have yet to get up the nerve to soak a single card (though I may try a base card soon for fun). What I find truly striking about your post is that you recognize the Wagner was trimmed and assert it "should not have been graded but it was and that was wrong." Then you make an incredible statement and say "but at the same time from a business perspective it wasn’t and would have been slabbed at that time by any company that existed. Right or wrong". So even though a card had been clearly altered and at least one of the graders has admitted (in the book and the 30 for 30) that he knew it, that was ok from a business perspective? So it is horrible to use substances to clean cards or improve creases but its fine to grade a card that should have been labeled "Altered" for business purposes? Yikes! He knew that it would kill PSA if they rejected that card. So for money they essentially lied. Not to mention the hundreds of millions made since for the company and the trimmed card itself. If you don't think grading and the registry is the main driving force in why this has become so wide spread then I don't know what to say. It is not "asanine thinking" it is instead basic logic and supply and demand. Quote:
|
Quote:
What about all your talk about paying 5x comps for perfectly centered cards? Doesn’t that count as playing the stupid prices game? Or are the prices you pay somehow less stupid because 5x comps for a 5 grade is still relatively inexpensive? |
Quote:
I did his corner trick using only the spray and a cotton applicator on a 1984 Donruss card, and even with references to the pics you attached - let's just say you would be surprised. I'd be glad to hand you as stack of '84 Donruss cards and invite you to point out the one I worked on. You wouldn't be able to. People can think that cleaning or "corner improvement" is alteration all they want, but at the end of the day it's all a moot point if no residue or trace is left behind; if nothing is added or removed. A TPG is not going to call a card like that altered, nor should they. |
Quote:
|
AS far as paper and the use of water goes.
I believe both groups are partly correct. One of the things that makes paper work, especially in wood pulp based paper is that the original maceration to produce the fibers also dissolves or partly dissolves the lignin that holds the cellulose fibers together. During drying, that lignin solidifies. This is the same as the process for steaming and bending wood. It's more complicated than that, since there's some bonding between sugars that are part of the cellulose, and other things besides just lignin. So soaking to remove a crease as this guy does is basically re dissolving the lignins and probably breaking the sugar bonds between the fibers. The fiber length which affects the density and strength of the paper was probably changed within the crease. That softening allows what is essentially remaking the paper in the crease. The chemistry - that there is cellulose fibers bonding and lignin as a sort of "glue" as well, does not change. The fibers in the repaired area do get rearranged. Enough soaking might change how much lignin is present. Less will tend to make the paper weaker. In modern papers, there may be additives or a higher cotton fiber content to slow the Lignin degrading which helps form acid that will eventually ruin the paper. Soaking something like and 86 fleer basketball card might remove some of these additives. The chemistry in most cases probably doesn't change enough to make a difference, but since some lignin or other binders will always be lost it does change. I don't disagree with a light surface cleaning with water, a few decades of gunk accumulated from just ordinary air exposure is probably best removed.* Trying to flatten a dinged corner so it doesn't get worse? Yeah, we've probably all done that. Using water and tools so that dinged corner gets overlooked by graders? Probably not as many. *I've done this to a couple cards, less than 5 and I'm entirely open about which ones. One literally had soot deposits that were into the cracks in the surface coating. another had soot on the reverse. Neither cleaned up all that well.One was fine, the other ended up with back damage. Another soaked card was used to show how water and pressure can't cause an offset transfer, wood grain from the pressing got pressed into the card, and last I checked was still present. (Relax, it's a T206 common in F-G condition. It's not much worse than before.) |
The thread isn't about snowman but he has already addressed that. He has OCD.
I also have been diagnosed with OCD and will pay more for a card that is centered because it bothers me so much to see it off-centered. Quote:
|
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Attachment 606106 |
Quote:
|
Ben, yes. I have struggled with this along with a few other medical issues most of my life. Even seeing a picture hanging on the wall that is not straight will bug me to the point of getting up and straightening it.
I am not familiar with this "pump and dump" you are referring to but it peaks my interest. Any link or info in a DM would be appreciated Quote:
|
Quote:
Clearly this isn't the case. Ironic to think - professional grading ostensibly came about because of the problems with card doctoring and the "wild west" scene in collecting 30+ years ago. Today however, due to the profit motive and ability to get such cards into high grade slabs anyway - the main driver that keeps alteration prevalent turns out to also be grading. |
If as is commonly believed the Wagner was sheet cut and not pack issued, why does it matter if it was then trimmed? It was never anything but an AUTH.
|
Quote:
In the sports card context, the fraud doesn't suddenly spring into existence when the card is sprayed with Kurt's and manipulated with a tortillon. The fraud comes into play when that card is marketed and sold to an unwitting third-party. You've made it clear that you don't think any of this is an issue... Caveat emptor, sucker born every minute, etc. etc. But let's at least be honest about the distinction between (1) paying people to clean stuff; and (2) selling an item without disclosing that it's been cleaned, presumably because you're afraid of shrinking the market for it and depressing its value. There's a reason card doctors don't announce, "Hey, I trimmed this card for you so it's aesthetically pleasing and doesn't trigger your OCD. PSA really shouldn't have given it a numeric grade, but I managed to sneak it through, so win-win!" Likewise, you won't see too many eBay listings like this: "This Fleer Jordan used to have a big dent. I sprayed it with Kurt's Card Care, a proprietary product with ingredients that are probably all natural, but I'm not really sure. Anyway, it worked just like Bondo... as you can see, no more dent! I can't tell you how it works exactly, because I'm not a chemist. But let's just say that the water-like mystery substance probably saturated the cardboard fibers and made them rise like yeast, restoring the surface to its original state. It's safe to assume the dent won't return, because why would it? Also, I don't think Kurt's will affect the color or texture, because we probably would've seen it by now, right?" You and I both know why they don't say all that. Purists and skeptics spend money too, and they generally want to know what they're buying. The only way to keep them in the market for your goods is to keep them in the dark about what you to do them. To circle back to your original point about people paying for cleaning, I think a closer analogy would be this: I've got a lightly-used recliner with a stain on it. I pay someone to remove the stain for me. It looks so good afterward, it could pass for brand-new. A friend comes over to help me set up for a garage sale, and he compliments me on my brand-new recliner. I don't correct him. He slaps a "For Sale: Brand New Recliner" sign on it for me. It sells. Did I commit fraud? I say yes. But something tells me you'd shrug and say no one cares. |
Quote:
But yes, to say that David Hall and others in that room didn't know it was at least sheet cut is absurd. That guy once owned the most complete T206 master set in the world? On the 30 for 30 he says "It didn't look trimmed to me." Really? Jeez do better. That's what an 11 year old kid at a card show would say. They were paying PSA, as supposedly the world's foremost experts on that type of cards - and that's the explanation PSA came up with? No wonder there will never be any "grading reports" out of that outfit. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
If what you say is right, then maybe Bill's was a more "traditional" trim job, if the card resembled something like the Jumbo Wagner just with oversized borders when they got it. |
He admitted to trimming it with a paper cutter to make the borders better and corners sharper. This after denying it multiple times of course.
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The Wagner had wavy edges and a red printer's line at the top. Mastro apparently commented about the Wagner, "It's not cut right, but I'll take it off your hands." After Mastro obtained the jumbo Wagner, he proceeded to trim it so that it had straight edges. Alan Ray has never definitively said where he got the cards from, but at one point claimed it was a relative. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I think some very interesting and well written points have been made, I wanted to chime in and comment on a few things.
I am not going to pretend like I am an expert at identifying alteration, far from it. Concerning grading, I also live by the adage "Buy the card, not the grade." I would also say, I've purchased cards that have been labeled by the grading companies as "altered" as I have found that I can get a nice looking card, that presents well, for a fraction of the price. Altering has been going on in our hobby, for a long time. The unfortunate part is that so many cards slip through the cracks, that are altered and then assigned number grades all the same. If you want to soak or trim your cards, for your own personal collection, I am not going to judge you. I do have a problem with the people that do it, strictly for some sort of financial gain. It's dishonest, and I know there's a lot of dishonesty in the world, but I think it's a damn shame that it occurs. You can call my viewpoint naïve, but that's what I maintain. It doesn't surprise me that it occurs, but I don't like it. It was also referenced before, I can't recall which post off the top of my head. It aggravates me to no end, that certain parties or individuals can get away with submitting clearly altered cards, or altered cards with a long history, and yet still receive number grades. I'm not calling out specific parties due to the nature of the rules, and myself wanting my name to be private, if there's an issue with this paragraph, Leon, I will gladly delete it. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
As for the Wagner, it seems deductively very very unlikely it was cut from a 'sheet' as in a full sheet or anything close to a full sheet.
If it was, where are the others? |
Quote:
Not saying it can't happen. i just haven't seen how it has happened yet with this particular stuff and the cards the products have been used on. |
Quote:
The history here is obvious and we all know it. |
Let’s please keep it civil so we can keep this thread alive :)
I have t seen anyone advocating for fraud and on this thread except for the post about what PSA did being good for business re: Wagner. Do you believe if only using water and no other chemicals but pushing down on a corner is altering and is fraud? We all have pushed down a finger corner with our fingers or a book or to try to make it look better. I did that at 8 years old. Honest question. Is using panty hose to get wax off the back of a card an alteration? Quote:
|
Quote:
Spray distilled water on my card - maybe I don't care. Alcohol - eh, maybe I'm not so sure. Acetone or bleach - OK, please drop the bottle and step away from the card. Focusing on whether the card appears doctored when Kurt is done with working his magic is beside the point. Undetected alterations are still alterations, so the eyeball test isn't dispositive. All you'd really prove is that he's good at doctoring -- not that he didn't do it. |
Quote:
This whole thing seems to be much more a slippery slope about people being po'd at the INTENT of messing with cards than it is what was actually done in the final analysis to the physical card. Just based on the "act" of someone doing something which may or may not be illicit - then what is the point of all of this empty discussion? Alteration has to be provable on a card later, or it isn't alteration, by any practical or realistic judgment. Period. If Kurt's alteration cannot be detected later, anymore than 9 year-old Billy immediately wiping a booger off of a card in 1957 can be detected in 2024, then neither should be realistically considered "altering" cards. The cards as ephemera / artifacts are not logged upon some blockchain of history where you can go back and see what was or was not done to them over the course of their existence. They are not conscious beings who can say "Hey, a dealer pressed my left corner back down for a little bit too long at a show in 1982, maybe you should tell PSA I'm altered!" :confused: To me this starts to cross a strange boundary where realism / sanity in the judgment of "what is" is no longer a factor. And that is where I cannot continue to follow the script. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
According to Mastro there was a whole pile of others. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The things are you asking have nothing to do what what I have actually said? I am not defining 'alter' in any strange, unusual, or unique way. When did I object to pushing a corner flat with your finger? When did I object to water or imply as such? Does not my first post suggest the exact opposite? Kurt's openly engages in practices almost everyone here, until convenient for it to change, has long held to be altering. Go check out their own advertising. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:09 PM. |