Bullshit. Go read my quote again.

I implied that I believed he likely uses a different name off this forum. And I posed it as a question giving him the opportunity to respond, and asked if he had something to hide.

For the record, I still believe that he uses a different name elsewhere. Am I right? Who knows. But that's quite different from what you keep running around claiming I said.

I know you are not actually illiterate. You did not accuse him of using a false name elsewhere, you explicitly say “here.” You also use the quotes to accuse his name here on Net54 as being the false alias. Your question presupposes the use of a false name “here”, asking why somebody doesn’t post their real name is saying they are using a false name. You are so bad at lying - if you are going to be a piece of shit liar do it in ways that are not easy to catch or be asked to show the evidence for your wild claims. You just get mad and then make some wild claims that are blatantly false and then try to deny the transcript that anyone can read and see you are lying yet again.


Originally Posted by Snowman View Post
By the way, "Chase Antley", why don't you post your real name here? Got something to hide

80 posts without a card ?
 

http://imagehost.vendio.com/a/204295...NGLING_NEW.JPG


,..The Hill School , in Pottstown , PA. A moody disgruntled J.D. Salinger changed the name to " Pencey Prep" in "Catcher In The Rye", ;;. Exclusive and expensive so it was the perfect school for the Pottsville PA. Yuengling Brewing Company's owner's sons. Here is "Swede" Yuengling , Pottsville's Pride . One of my favorite finds ; I currently live halfway between Pottstown and Pottsville , a very old part of Penna. , and sometimes you come across some neat stuff at estate sales and antique shops over the last 40 years.

..

Let's cut the bullshit.

I said, "By the way, "Chase Antley", why don't you post your real name here? Got something to hide?"

I continue to believe that he uses a different name elsewhere. I'd even wager money on it. Note that people use different names in different areas of their lives all the time. When I was told I had to put my name in my profile to talk about other people or companies on this forum, I used the name that I go by most. My friends and family all call me "TJ". Then for some reason, Leon later added "Travis" to my profile. Lots of people go by their middle names or nicknames in one setting and their first names in another. The entire point of us all having to post our names when we discuss people and companies is so that we know who, in real life, is behind any statements or accusations being made here. I believe that Lorewalker uses a different name here than the one he uses elsewhere, or in his professional life because he wishes to skirt around the rules so that he doesn't have to be held responsible for what he says here in his real life. Does he have an ID that has the names "Chase" and "Antley" on it? Sure, he very well might. Could I be wrong in my accusation that I think he uses a different name in the "real world"? Sure, I could. But none of that would matter with respect to the bullshit you keep spewing. It's still quite different from what YOU continue to claim over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over throughout this forum that I "lied" about Lorewalker and made an explicit claim that Lorewalker is in fact lying about his identity. I don't think he goes by "Chase Antley" in the "real world". Define those however you want. I may be right or I may be wrong, but I have good reasons for believing it and I'm entitled to my opinions.

Man that’s terrific piece of breweriana ,
And since the weekly unstoppable shit show has run this thread off into a negative path I guess it’s OK to run it off into a positive path -
Have you nailed down a date for that ? , I’m thinking it’s in his earlier school years 1931 or 1932

We'll just assume everything in this post, even what doesn't mesh with the prior posts, is 100% true. Yeah most people have a nickname. Our real name is, you know, still our real name. So the new explanation is that a "real name" is being covered up if a person uses.... their actual real name :eek:

If you cut out your over the top claims you would get so much support. You have an audience that largely is seeking to justify beneficial frauds and non-disclosures and so is dispositioned to your justifications for it. This message people will largely back is so often followed up by absurdly stupid claims and justifications for what are clearly untruths you've made while upset and you can't support, that it derails your agenda. If you just stopped making things up and appealing to your own authority about everything under the sun you would get a lot of backing.

I don't want to offend anyone or break any terms of services, so I changed the username and profile pic.

I said this 5 years ago and was laughed at...:D

"It's ALL a Billion Dollar Fraud". Pretty funny in retrospect, huh?

I agree to some extent. In one of my other hobbies alterations are very discouraged except in certain instances. In one of those part of the item is highly acidic and will destroy it eventually and has probably already done damage. It is expected, and nearly required that it will be altered.

I think some of our cards may already be doomed, specifically most of the strip cards which are printed on very rough stock that tends towards high acidity. many are already fragile, and will never get better. Being conserved by deacidification is the way to go, but that won't happen.

He was clearly mocking you on IG. This conversation is going around in circles.
Isn’t it time to take the highroad and move on?

If someone wants to challenge my statements, then I felt an obligation to validate them. I have repeatedly taken the high road and continue to do so. I don’t seek him out, send him messages, mock him, or try to insult him. Instead of telling me to move on and take the high road, maybe you should try talking with your friend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1954-Topps-....m43663.l10137

By the way, I believe I have discovered why the Topps '54 Mays card the OP alludes to was originally graded a 7. That "scratch" on his arm isn't a scratch at all, but actually a print variation! I noticed this same condition on my card and another one from a closed listing on eBay (see link above).

This print variant has been posted in the never ending variants thread. It is actually quite common. Was it a DP ?

I'm not sure what the context of "DP" is. If that is in reference to a double-print, I had no idea there were any in the 1954 Topps issue. The only reason I brought up the "scratch" was that is was mentioned in post 26. It does seem to be a common variation. By my count from eBay listings, there appears to be a 5:1 ratio for normal Mays cards vs. the print variations.

I won't vouch for Geoff Wilson as he is equal to nails on a chalkboard, however some interesting discussion on the "PSA Guarantee" by PSA President Ryan Hoge. Seems to go against everything we see when it comes to this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bfuICkhi4s

Feel free to skip to 17:21 where Hoge justifies upcharges to cover the cost of the "guarantee"...hmm.

I need to finish watching the video. The PSA upcharge & high grading fees remind me of car, home, & life insurance where it seldom pays off but when it does, it’s nice to have. Insurers still taken more than they pay
out 🤷.


For me the PSA guarantee does explain their extremely strict consistent grading since Turner & Hoge took over (last couple years). I haven’t heard of too many payouts, but they did in this specific case with Al (major player in the soccer card hobby). Really interesting video

https://youtu.be/MAOe35gNd74?si=P_ROY4ARfbVmooQy

I may be in the minority, but those comparisons aren't really that good. There are some spots that just don't match up between the two grades. As a matter of fact, in the box with the player below the word "Inside Baseball", there is a spot that isn't on the '7' that magically appears on the 8.5. Why would someone add a spot like that?? I'm not convinced that is the same card.

Look below his arm where the glove is.

I recently went through this process and PSA paid me
 

Please see the video that I posted about it on YT...

https://youtu.be/MAOe35gNd74?si=cYGMp-W8Ha6r_AFW

Thanks for sharing. Glad to see that you ended up with a great result. At the same time, it just makes me a bit more irritated that they didn't seem willing to go there with my card.

I suppose there's always the possibility that the BODA investigator got it wrong, although the detail provided by BODA seems awfully convincing, so it's hard to feel real confident that PSA isn't just gaslighting me.

I really do not know or understand your case, but I just thought that I would share my experience. Best of luck on resolution, seems like a tough one.

Not to me it doesn't. There are too many differences.

Much respect for your thought process and integrity!

https://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/3/9/...36213618_o.gif
I'm not sure I'm interpreting your post correctly. Based on this image, the edges are fingerprinted as the same card. The rough cut wear is in exactly the same places.

You get a pass on your name because of what you do. But be careful per the rules too...So far so good. Please keep outing and keeping track of altered cards. Go BODA go...
.

You can remain anonymous UNLESS you keep calling people out. IF you do this again, it's going to be a problem. We want you on this site but you can't get into personal arguments like this and calling people names. If someone called you a liar wouldn't you want to know who they are?

Have you decided on what you are going to do with this card?

I’m mostly a lurker here and have been following this discussion - for whatever it’s worth, I had this exact same reaction.

I'm still weighing my options.

I realize that inquiring minds need to know, and dammit, we need action!

But I'm not seeing the need to move quickly here. I do have the card back from PSA now, and it's resting in its former place of glory in my primary display case with my other mainline Mays base cards, although I continue to glare at it suspiciously every time I pass by it, just for good measure.

Just for clarification, I didn’t call anyone out. I have only responded to conversations that were directed at me. G1911 called out a person for repeated lies. A person that repeated lies is referred to as a liar. Therefore, I responded to G1911 and did not mention that person by name.

I appreciate the warning and will do better to ensure that I am following the rules. Thank you for allowing me to use your platform.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Look at the dot that magically appears under his outstretched arm with the glove on the 8.5. Why is it not there under the 7?

That really could be something on the slab or scanner and not on the card. But definitely worth figuring out as it is a noticeable difference.

What/Who is BODA?

PSA Guarantee on a doctored card
 

Exactly. It’s very difficult to compare scans of cards. Even the same company can use different scanners with different settings (contrast, brightness, etc…) . Then you transfer those raw images (usually .Tiff) onto the Internet (as compressed .jpg) and the pictures further change. Then factor popular features like animated GIF & ability to pinch and zoom on mobile devices, the images get further distorted (certain areas of the card look stretched out even when overlayed). All this before you factoring things like dust.

My only advice is to never trust online images unless there are 100% identification marks. The latter suggestion is something the card altering hobby watchdogs need to realize soon before posting on social media and tagging all the grading companies (to get certs inactivated). Identifying altering cards isn’t as easy as it used to be with new technology

If you need help, reach out to me. I’m a 25 year IT programming veteran who used to work with Adobe on PDFs (the same type of coding logic used for pictures).

Here’s a quick example of the same card that I crossed-over from SGC to PSA. Both are PSA scans. Look at the huge differences.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...1aeb11d92a.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...d491535efa.jpg

*double post

It's a group on Blowout dedicated to researching and identifying doctored and regraded cards. They do good work for the hobby in my perspective.

BODA - "Blowout Detective Agency"

Tiffany Cards posting on this thread (I assume this is the same person as the site) maintains a database of all identified doctored cards for purchasers.

https://www.tiffanycards.com/altered...abase/baseball

Again, an asset to buyers like myself who care...likely hated by doctors.

Some they are good on...they missed some as well.......what happens then??? After they have slandered a card.

Then that evidence it’s wrong should be aired. Expecting 100% perfection when dealing with sample sizes of many thousands is just a roundabout way of trying not to do the thing. They have done a great job, much better than the purported experts selling their authority.

Even with the “huge differences” in the Chico Fernandez card shown in post 114, one can easily (and immediately) determine that it’s the same exact card.

The number of mistakes BODA has made can probably be counted on one hand. And they’ve called out hundreds (if not thousands) of alterations residing in numbered slabs.

Aside from all the matching white wear on the edges, that small, white angled slash 'pointing' to the bottom right corner really serves as a telltale sign with this particular card. That is a unique feature here, as I looked at a crapload of these cards to see if it was a recurring print anomaly (which would at least open up the possibility of the 'before' and 'after' cards being different), but found no other examples.

The mistakes will get more frequent because of relying on scans. However, we just got to hope that cards have key identification marks that do not get distorted w/ each new scan & online upload.

Regarding my Chico card and “Huge differences”, it was supposed to be identified as the same card . The point of sharing those two images is to show the differences of a scanned card(even by the same grader).

As BODA has outed thousands of cards now, can we use an actual example of incorrect scan matching?

Would you feel better if you were to learn that in fact every card in your display case had actually been cleaned, altered, or restored in some way?

My favorites are the ones where BODA says, "I couldn't find what they did to this card specifically, but it used to be an 8 and now it's a 9, and the serial number is only 57 certs away from this other card over here, and that one was a 5 and now it's a 7, so they must have done something to it."

Or, "We know this card was purchased by Gary Moser because the eBay buyer's masked ID is "w***1" LOL. Nevermind the fact that there are 134 million active users on eBay and only 1296 unique masked IDs, which means there are on average 103,395 different users for each masked ID. That is until eBay started completely jumbling ALL user IDs into completely random characters (don't believe me, just go look at your own masked ID from cards you know you won after logging out). You'll have a different masked ID every time and the characters won't even correspond to your username. Someone said that VCP doesn't have random IDs for buyers, but even then, we're still talking about many thousands of people with the same VCP IDs. I proved this all on Blowhard years ago, but of course, nobody cared.

If a card was sold by PWCC, and it's the same card that someone purchased in a lower grade and altered, and Moser is one name associated with the masked ID, and this happens over and over and over again and the same masked ID keeps coming up, I would say as a matter of common sense the chances that it was some other random ebay user or users buying the cards and not Moser are pretty low -- even assuming you're right on this information. I don't think you're looking at this the right way and it feels like a red herring. These are not independent events, although maybe that's not the technically right way to put it. How many of these other users associated with the same masked ID are likely to be card doctors? Zero I bet.

I’m guessing that this is hyperbole, unless you’re casting a very wide net for your definition. For example, I will hazard a guess that my 2010 Upper Deck Buster Posey probably hasn’t had much work done. And it is in one of my display cases.

I'm not saying Moser wasn't tied to any of these cards. I'm sure he was. And yes, having a trail of other pieces of evidence that are often tied together certainly increases the likelihood of particular people being the culprit being much higher. I'm more speaking in general about their overall approach to tying people together and using Moser as an example because everyone seems to know his name. But many of the cards they call out do not have multiple roads of evidence all leading to Rome.

And again, for the record in case anyone forgot, I'm not a fan of Moser or card trimming in general. I think there's a world of difference between cleaning a card and trimming a card.

I just meant it as a hypothetical. Like if you had 100 cards that you love and found out one of them was altered, it'd be easy to see how you might feel some type of way about that card every time you look at it. But what if you could magically know the true history of all 100 cards and you learned that they'd all in fact been improved in some way. What then? Would you just walk away from the hobby and sell your collection or would you just throw your hands up and say, "well, it is what it is" and just learn to accept them as they are?

It's a fair question, and certainly in some ways proves the adage that ignorance is bliss.

Sort of like if I had to personally wear a sign that listed out all of the mistakes and stupid things I've done in my life (including during my misspent youth), then most people would probably shun me, or perhaps start throwing stones. My kids would certainly be a lot less willing to consider my counsel, although that already mostly happens due to their being teenagers (or in their early 20s) who are natural experts in all things.

But getting back to cards, I will admit that my (perhaps impossible) hope is that the cards in my collection have not been seriously doctored. A little cleaning, I'm not going to get too excited about. Re-coloring or trimming would be aggravating for sure.

Based on your comments here and elsewhere, I'm inferring that you will posit that the majority of high grade vintage is full of trim jobs and recoloration. And you may be right. Perhaps I'm just holding on to the impossible dream that undoctored high grade vintage should be a possibility, particularly if we're talking about mass-produced items from the 50s-70s, and not stuff from 100-150 years ago.

I guess I am now a member of the double-posting club. Not sure this has ever happened to me before.

Update!
 

There has been a new development.

On the advice of a friend and fellow collector, I contacted PSA to inquire about whether they could give me some more detail regarding their original quality assurance investigation. Based on the head grader's report, the focus of that investigation had been on scrutinizing the piece for trimming. Based on the original check, no evidence of trimming had been found.

Based on that feedback, I asked PSA to take another look, this time to specifically evaluate whether there had been color added to Mays' arm, and PSA graciously agreed to take another look.

So I sent it in last week, arriving last Thursday, and they expedited the turnaround. I received a call just this morning, with a report that the card is indeed Authentic Altered due to recoloring. Apparently my options are to get it reslabbed as AA, or for them to send it back as raw. Not sure that I have a strong preference either way, although I'm inclined to go with AA, just so there's a record of the new grade, should some enterprising future collector decide to crack it out and attempt to recirculate it as a high grade raw piece.

This is obviously just the first step. I will be working with the PSA team to figure out the correct amount of compensation. While values have come down in the last year or so, it's still a very valuable card. So I'm sure that we'll have good fun in working through those details together.

If they had graded it right the first time, you never would have bought it. Why should you take a hit if the value dropped since then?

Nicolo, glad that this is progressing. I must say that I am floored that they changed their opinion. Please keep us posted on what you and they agree to.

Great News !!! Good Job PSA Head Grader Reza!

Values are way up since I bought it back in like 2017/2018. Just wish I had gotten this pushed through earlier so that I could have taken advantage of peak values from 12-24 months ago.

Would be very interesting if they try to offer you 2017/2018 compensation values since that's when you bought it. I really hope they don't try to pull that.

I suspect that this thread likely has something to do with why they changed their mind about this card. It's difficult for me to imagine someone as experienced as Reza looking at this card and not catching the recoloring job last time, but we're all human. You'd think if someone sent a card like that in for review of alterations that they would be thorough.

Either way, congrats on what sounds like it will be a satisfactory resolution!

Sounds like part of the issue was just miscommunication, at least as they explained it to me. In their quest to keep the graders from knowing details about who submitted the card, they withheld a lot of information, and so apparently through the ensuing game of telephone, the only request was to focus on the edges.

I'm inclined to trust their reporting here.

At the same time, for those with a conspiracy bent, it's not difficult to let your mind wander into more nefarious explanations. But often my experience is that the simplest explanation is far more likely than something with a lot more moving parts.

Too bad they couldn't just do the only job they are tasked with the first time around. You should not be the one to take a financial hit for their "mistakes" (at best negligence; at worst dishonesty).

And thank goodness for BODA. Purely for the good of the collecting community (and despite "some people" continually whining about them), they've conducted thousands of hours of painstaking research at zero profit and NO compensation.

Bravo.

PSA explanation seems weak to me, but a good outcome is the most important thing.

I'll second the notion that a good outcome is paramount.

The adventure to get here was more exciting than it needed to be, but it's hard to kvetch excessively when you finally get to the positive end of the journey. Not that we won't try!

This outcome certainly beats my other available options debated earlier in this thread, none of which really seemed palatable to me.

Listening to a recent Podcast with Ryan Hodge and I assume you will get the new stronger case to make it harder to crack (which is good in your case). I

I believe they are already starting to track notes to why a grade is a grade. I don’t recall if they will be made public (on website when you check for certification) or for situations like this.

I believe they have been beta testing for that concept for a little while.

It's not a conspiracy theory though. We have plenty of data to go on at this point. The simplest explanation is that they don't want to admit they are wrong and don't want to pay out on their guarantee.

Cool cool. I guess I can count myself lucky then.

Agreed.

Just another example of the excellent work done by BODA. It amazes me how some people will continue to dismiss their findings, tell people to never trust online image comparison, suggest they are slandering cards or attempt to silence or discredit their work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Apologies for my ignorance here. Are you part of the BODA team? Or do you just maintain the database of doctored cards? I’m guessing that maybe the database is somehow separate from the BODA team?

Yes, of course. To put it in perspective, there were 80 cards submitted to PSA in the batch that included the 54T Mays. PSA rejected 20 of those as altered, trimmed or undersized, but they graded the other 60. So there are 59 other cards left from that batch that were probably worked on, and could also be subject to PSA's guarantee.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

You would think with that high a percentage clearly altered, and probably from a suspect submitter, they would just reject the whole sub on principle.

Yes, wouldn't you? And not only on principle but from a business sense, too. They will probably pay Nicolo more for his altered Mays card than the total fees they received from the 60 cards they graded.

And they have 59 more potential settlements down the road. They are going to need to dig in even deeper going forward.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Very few people, I think, have the resources and staying power to actually litigate these claims. I think PSA just selectively pays out but the economics of letting card doctors submit outweigh the guarantee expense probably by a ton.

That's bone-chilling to think about. If the volume of submissions from card doctors was so significant that PSA catered to their business, there would be a ridiculous amount of exposure out there they need to cover up. And I said "if".

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

I have my opinions. I think BODA's work is the tip of the iceberg. Just my opinion. It is further my opinion that at least a certain segment of this hobby has been dominated by card doctors and their facilitators for many years.

I maintain the database and call out cards that, IMO, are altered, mislabeled, or fake.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cool. I guess you can update the database entry for this one when they send it back in the AA slab.

As a professional cynic, I'd hold the happiness until the money is in hand.

Peter, you are so right on that point. CA does not allow for the recovery of attorneys' fees in civil cases unless there is a contract or a law that provides for it. That makes any lawsuit a self-funded war of attrition with PSA and its wealthy owners. Which is probably why PSA is not concerned with being sued over most altered cards it missed.

If it was my card, I would do one of three things:

1. Sue representing myself and put PSA through a financial meat grinder to force a settlement. Doesn't matter how rich they are if my costs are just my time and some filing fees.

2. Crack the card and resubmit it in person at a National or other show. I would video every step of the process--chain of custody--to prove where the card went every second from in the holder to PSA's custody. if PSA rejects it as altered, it would put PSA in a very uncomfortable position defending the original grade and that might get the case settled quietly and quickly.

3. Sell it as-is with a disclosure to the AH of what happened. Let's be honest here: there is a significant percentage of collectors who do not give a damn what anyone except PSA says and who will simply buy the card for the number on the holder. To them, the rest is just internet trolls stating opinions.

There may have been 80 cards in that order. There also may have been 3, or 20, or 55, or 170, or just the 1. You don't know. The best we could do is guess based on the types of cards submitted, but that's still a guess.

As far as 20 cards being rejected for alterations, you forgot to include that they also very likely could have been rejected for minimum grades. That used to be a thing. I think it's much more likely that those cards simply didn't meet the submitters minimum grade than it is that they were rejected for alterations. But that's just my guess.

They definitely did. The majority of submitters in the early days were from card doctors. PSA built their entire business off of it.

The irony is so rich.

Read the blowout link at the top of this thread, post #8112 by Capt. Spaulding, and then let's talk some more.

Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

Looks like all the rejections on the presumed sub were for altered, min size or miscut. Not minimum grade.