|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Kenny Cole</b><p>Lee, <br /><br />Down here in the sort-of-south (Oklahoma - BTW, as you know, we just kicked Texas' ass for year no.5 in a row- so sweet), we eat catfish. Depending on the kind, they can be pretty dirty, so we damn sure clean them first. I've not ever bleached one though. Does it taste better that way?
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>edited
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Joe P.</b><p>"Are the card doctors getting that good?"<br />*<br />*<br />Yes, and the grading experts, (sic) aren't as good as they claim to be.<br />Somehow I get the feeling that their real first jobs were outsourced<br /> <br />Kenny, back in 1990, I dealt with a card doctor that was damn good, so good he was scarey.<br />It involved some very heavy scratch, and you know I was going to get that scratch back.<br /><br />Then we have the Alan Rosen - SGC - Keith Olbermann episode of Dec. 1999.<br />The painful story follows below.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.t206museum.com/page/periodical_5.html" target=_new>http://www.t206museum.com/page/periodical_5.html</a><br /><br />Now here in 2004, we have the harmonious grading rap trio of GAI - SGC and PSA rapping to the tune of "See No Evil - Speak No Evil"<br />Then we have Greg of the Gregorian Chants doing a monodic fugue with the trio like - "Although I saw it - I was outvoted - the Devil made me do it."<br />Greg is right in saying that there are problems out there.<br />Unfortunately, he's also part of it.<br />Come on, he knew about the before and after of that card.<br />We're suppose to believe that just because three so called experts got it wrong in unison that that was enough justification to not give Wayne the background of that card?<br />Tell it to the Marines, and unfortunately for Greg, I'm an ex Marine, and his tale doesn't cut it.<br /><br />Kenny, why are you always chasing my Cuban and T207 cards? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Stay well,<br />Joe P.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>Kenny and Joe - I have tried several times to get a discussion going on this board regarding the actual grading process that the "big 3" use...to no avail. It seems to be a trade secret.<br /><br />My interest in the e95 card was not because I have dubbed myself some sort of consumer protection guy for card collectors, but because I used to own it and I'm very familiar with it's problems - the card jumped out at me when I spotted it originally on ebay. Honestly, it had a heckuva lot of character at one time - nice caramel residue on the back, scratches, creases,etc., and it still has great color - even a little extra. If I had not owned the card, I doubt I would have been able to see alterations through a plastic slab, and I doubt that Greg or anyone else could have either. <br /><br />...however, I would think that tools exist that the grading companies would routinely use to spot alterations such as glue and re-coloring. So to me, this indicates that either doctoring techniques have rendered such tools (blacklights, for instance) totally ineffective, or the slabbing companies don't use the tools. I really don't know their process - does anyone? This question has never been answered on this board to my satisfaction.<br /><br />Greg would have us believe that SGC took the card out of the holder, and still felt that it was un-altered. Rubbish. I think that the slabbing of this card by 3 companies was simply forgiveable sloppy work, and that if any of the three were handed the raw card today and asked to use all reasonable resources available to determine if it had been altered, all three could give us a list of alterations at least as long as the repaired formerly torn player list on the back of the card.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>dan mckee</b><p>Is it maybe possible that the first company that slabbed it made a mistake and that the next 2 that crossed it over didn't look quite as closely since it was already slabbed? Just a thought. If no color was added and it was just simply soaked in water and rolled out, could you actually tell? Now if paperloss was repaired on back and missed, yes, that is impressive! Dan. Oops! forgot to hide my name under a nickname. I agree with Barry, everyone should show their full name.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>According to Greg, all three got to look at it raw at some point.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Kenny Cole</b><p>I'm familiar with the Olberman fiasco, although I never had the impression that the card doctoring there was real sophisticated. I don't send cards in to be graded because I personally think the whole concept is pretty much a farce. However, I will buy a graded card if is one I want and if the fact that it has been entombed hasn't jacked its price way up. For that reason, the topic now under discussion is of concern to me. In that regard, one purported justification for grading is that it supposedly allows people to who can't personally inspect the card to buy it on-line with a greater degree of comfort than would otherwise exist. In my opinion, situations like the one at hand tend to undermine even that purported justification for grading. I've never been more than luke-warm about card grading, but I'm feeling even less warm and fuzzy about it now. <br /><br />As far as your question about Cuban and T207 cards goes, I make it a habit never to chase yours. I only go after those that should rightfully inhabit my house. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> Best,<br /><br />Kenny Cole<br /><br /> <br /><br /><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>PASJD</b><p>I agree fully that this episdode -- and others I have heard about -- gives one some pause about the competence of grading companies. What concerns me most, frankly, is that the volume of cards they review suggests that they have very little time to spend inspecting any given card, although one hopes that on issues more likely to be vulnerable to alteration for economic gain -- prewar cards and expensive cards generally -- they take more time. However, it is an imperfect world, and it seems to me especially given that most cards today are purchased without visual inspection that reliance on third party grading is far better than the alternative. It also appears from the example given in this thread that a grading company will acknowledge an obvious mistake, which further reduces one's risk. Just one man's thoughts.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Tim Mayer</b><p>wow, its hard to trust anyone anymore,,,,<br /><br />I want forget I even read this thread,,I don't want to know what you guys did to my cards before I bought them,,,if they are graded, I guess my value is secure,,,<br /><br />but this is scary
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>Greg: "Bottom feeder": Is that in reference to my job? Not very creative... I don't buy your story. Bottom line: it is one thing to say you aren't sure about the card so you want a third party's opinion, but you knew the history of the card and sold it without disclosing it. That's fraudulent and you don't need to debate the meaning of "is" to come to that conclusion. I also don't believe for a moment that SGC offered to buy out the card only because we criticized SGC here. We don't have that kind of juice. We bag on PSA, SGC and GAI all the time and nothing comes of it. The more I hear the less sense you make, so I'm done with you and with this thread. <br /><br />Grading: I've been saying for a long time that a grader cannot be expected to pick up on a removal and that the services make mistakes. We all do. That's not the point. The real issues are whether the services add a value to the business and whether they stand behind their service. As to the former, I believe they do add value and are here to stay, and people who complain about the concept of grading per se need to face reality. As far as standing behind their services, I for one am glad to hear that SGC allegedly offered to stand behind its service. If that is true, it is heartening.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>PASJD</b><p>If you really want to see something scary check out the article on card restoration in the July 1996 issue of the Vintage & Classic Baseball Card Collector, if you can find one. I have the article in pdf format but don't know how to post a link to it, or even if that can be done technologically, but some of the discussion and before and after photos are quite disturbing. And one can only assume that the technology and capability to alter cards has advanced from 1996.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Tim Mayer</b><p>thanks for the comment on my addition to the post,,,heres my email, I'd love to see the article if you can forward it..my eyes are open, why not see the whole picture...<img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />tim<br /><br />timjmayer@yahoo.com
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>was not a reference to your occupation since I have never retained your services and know nothing of your reputation, aside from beating CU. Believe what you want to believe about me, or this situation. Your mind was made up about me long before the Cobb incident and losing you as a customer will have absolutely no material impact on my life. If you had an issue with me you could have addressed it privately instead of reprimanding me here. Now get in line and join the ranks of the other BOTN haters. Scott has a cold beer waiting for you. <br /><br />Aside from it now being the infamous Cobb and now being identifiable, this card will grade each time it is submitted. It is not the art project that some of the alarmists make it out to be.<br /><br />None of you were part of the conversations with SGC about this card it is pure speculation on your part as to why they removed the card. The same speculation you employ in concluding the card went through massive restoration. Your arm chair analysis is most impressive.<br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Joe P.</b><p>Kenny Cole:<br />"I'm familiar with the Olberman fiasco, although I never had the impression that the card doctoring there was real sophisticated."<br />*<br />*<br />Kenny, it was so unsophisticated it fell into the ranks and subclass of amateurism. .... and SGC passed it.<br />Bad enough that there are people practicing questionable medicine out there, but to have the so called experts blow it, and blow it LOUD -- that's scary. <br /><br />Kenny, in 1990 between Memorial Day and Labor Day, I went through one of the more learning experience of my life. ... it was a crash course.<br />Thankfully with the help of Lew Lipset, Larry Fritsch, Herman Kaufman, (my counselor and friend) Bob Lemke (mediator) and my West coast sidekick Mark Macrae - we got to the medicine man and my scratch. <br /> <br />I had obtained two (2) Slow Joe Doyle error cards.<br />My bad - my greed - and a typical too good to be true episode. - a very heavy learning experience.<br />After going through hundreds of T206 Nat'l's and comparing them to the two wannabees, and a real Doyle error, I finally got to see the constants of the true T206, and the tell tale signs of the medically treated T206. - and folks, that was worth the trip.<br /><br />The cards were not slabbed, so it has nothing to do with slabbing.<br />My point is that in 1990 those two Doyle's were more sophisticate and passable by far than the Rosen - SGC Doyle in 1999.<br /><br />Adam is absolutely right.<br />The grading experts (sic) are here to stay.<br />They are fantastic when it comes to Size - Corners and Sides.<br />However, there should be an addendum on their slabs, and that is: "BUYER BEWARE".<br />Somehow I feel that the buyers are slowly becoming aware.<br />It will not be a 1929 style crash, but the stocks will go down.<br /><br />Kenny, always good to see you on the bidding boards.<br />From one collector to another, may you always find the cards that are looking for a warm home, but please give me a break and let some of them fall through a crack to my home. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Joe P.<br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>and I have reacquired the card. Wayne is sending the card back out to me tomorrow morning. Wayne did say had he known the stigma associated with this card he would not have bought it. This was my error in judgment and I should have know given the reputation that Wayne, Bill and Shoebox have earned from their years in the business.<br /><br />For those who have never visited Shoebox's website or done business with Wayne and Bill, it is a great place to shop for raw and graded cards. Here is a link. <a href="http://www.wvshoeboxcards.com/catalog.cfm" target=_new>http://www.wvshoeboxcards.com/catalog.cfm</a><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p><a href="http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=153652&messageid=1082828425&lp=108 2940745" target=_new>http://www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=153652&messageid=1082828425&lp=108 2940745</a><br /><br />This is a perfect example of a point I made yesterday where collectors are posting about the restoration they do to thier own collections. At some point when Adam croaks, unless he is being buried with his collection or God forbid he live forever, these cards will hit the marketplace. Unsuspecting collectors will end up purchasing these altered cards without proper disclosure. <br /><br />I am assuming that based on Adam's reprimanding of me as well as his obligation as an attorney, that all of these cards, he has doctored, are cleary identifed as such. There is no chance that Adam the Ethicist is imposing a double standard. <br /><br />I would like to thank a good friend of mine who provided me with the above link. <br /><br /><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>I have never sold a card that was altered by me. Period. And I never would do so absent a disclosure. As far as cards altered by others go, I've sold two that I know of, both with full disclosure and I've eaten hundreds of dollars by reselling them with an honest disclosure after I'd purchased them as supposedly unaltered: a PRO-graded [I know, I know...it was a while ago] N28 Dempsey and a CSA-graded 1953 Bowman Spahn. Want to see the Dempsey? Check out VCBC issue #30, page 20. I ate hundreds on this card by selling it with an accurate disclosure. I still have the 1959 PSA 9 Drysdale mentioned in the article; maybe you want to buy it and pass it on to another dealer as a PSA 9 card? Seems to have worked so well for you here. The two cards mentioned in the article in VCBC have already been unencapsulated, BTW. <br /><br />See, that's the difference between you and me, Greg; I don't have to dance through a 100 post string of stinging questions before doing the right thing because it would not cross my mind to do the wrong thing in the first place. Your argument also is what's known as a straw man argument (it's certainly GWB's main mode of reasoning; that circumspect enough Bill <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> }. You try to avoid discussing your own blunders by bringing up someone else's actions as a smokescreen. It wasn't a defense to say the others were doing it too if you get caught smoking in the boys room, it isn't a defense in court if you're the one caught speeding out of all the maniacs on the freeway, and it isn't gonna fly here, either. Cast all the aspersions you want, Greggy, because I ain't the one who cheated a customer, and no matter what theoretical arguments I've made in past strings here, I never will be. <br /><br />As far as what happens to my cards when I die, hopefully that won't even be an issue for another 40-50 years. I'll leave it to my heirs to deal with that situation. I don't think I'd like to live forever, either; too expensive <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> <br /><br />who's the anonymous good friend??
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>PASJD</b><p>Adam, just so I understand your position and I seek only to understand not to judge, is removal of a crease (which is discussed in the posting to which Greg provided a link) "alteration" or is it not in your judgment; have you sold cards which you "improved" (to use a neutral term) by the methods described in that posting; and if so, did you disclose that you had done so? Thank you in advance. Also, I suppose it would be interesting to know in light of the subject matter of the thread whether any cards "improved" by this method were slabbed by the grading services. Again, thank you for whatever light you can shed.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>Well I am certainly glad to hear that you find absolutely nothing wrong with doctoring cards. Funny that it is you who is concerned about buying from me. You still have not addressed the fact that were you to be run over by a bus tomorrow crossing Magnolia Blvd, would your heirs know which 3 cards in your collection have not undergone restoration? I assume you are saying that were I to view your collection this evening I would see labels on the holders of these cards that clearly identify these as cards that you restored. <br /><br />As for your history of disclosing on two sales--congrats! How are we to know that constitutes all of the sales you have made of cards that you have restored? I can make similar claims ask Steve Rochhi, Mike Baker and Joe Orlando. In my situation the losses were measured in 5 figures.<br /><br />Once again, three grading companies giving their approval on a card is more than good enough for me, especially after I handled the card and was able to observe it ungraded. How many cards do you know of that were submitted three times to three different grading services all having the same results? Most cards do not go through that level of scrutiny. <br /><br />I am not dancing at all. After I noticed Scott go against his word again, and dredged up this card, I contacted Wayne. I never made excuses for what I did.<br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>edited
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Elliot</b><p>My understanding is that SGC only viewed this card when it was in the GAI slab, not raw. Is this correct?
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Kenny Cole</b><p>If you go up about 30 posts, Scott has one indicating that according to Greg, all three companies had an opportunity to view the card raw. That's one of the things that really concerns me about this whole deal.<br /><br />Kenny
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>As I stated yesterday it is abundantly clear that you do not have my best interest and are not to be trusted; therefore I see no value in making the card available to you. Besides I am afraid the card might get mixed up with your next shipment to Dick Towle or Graphic Conservation Company and end up coming back to me in a VG-EX holder.<br /><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>Elliot,<br /><br />I submitted the card in the GAI holder to SGC. At some point SGC had to break the card out to place it in their holder. If at that time SGC saw something wrong with the card they never would have placed it in their holder. Appeasing me is not their obligation. If there was a true liability associated with the card why take that on for $10? The card could have been returned to me in an ungraded state. I have a close enough relationship with them that this would not have been an issue.<br /><br />Greg
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Elliot</b><p>I'm not trying to defend SGC here, but if they viewed it in the GAI slab, they might not have seen the alteration. In fact they might have been influenced by the fact that it was already graded. That's not to absolve them of culpability as they still should have closely examined the card, however it is an explanation as to why they would not have picked up the alteration. I would also assume that once a grader gives an Ok to the grade, it is left to somebody else to break the card out of the GAI slab and then entomb it in an SGC slab. Thus, an SGC grader would never have seen this card raw.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>edited
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>edited
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Julie Vognar</b><p>Does the preferred second grader make his decision while the card is in its old holder and have the new holder waiting for it, or does he break it out, examine it raw, and then pick a new holder?<br /><br />The second alternative is DEVOUTLY to be hoped for...
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>There are other alterations and flaws that may not be detected by viewing the card inside a holder, hence the reason cards are graded outside of protectos and lucite holders. All of the grading companies are aware their competitors make mistakes. I am sure they do not always rely solely on a viewing of the card inside of the holder in deciding to cross the card. <br /><br />I take cards graded by PSA and SGC to GAI all of the time for cross over. Baker does not look at the card and say, "OK, PSA says this is a 7, I have no issue with it. Now it is a GAI 7." On many instances he says he needs to see the card out of the holder before issuing an opinion. I then assume the risk by giving the "ok" to break a card out that he might conclude is not worthy of the cross over.<br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Kenny Cole</b><p>That is perhaps not an unusual state of affairs. Maybe Scott and I are drinking the same piss-poor beer. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> Nonetheless, to my way of thinking, the posts about this issue really raise some issues that as of yet remain unanswered, and they also seem to the posterchild for inconsistent statements. I don't know how to reconcile it all. <br /><br />For example, I presume Adam was talking about one of my previous posts when he wrote:<br /><br />Grading: I've been saying for a long time that a grader cannot be expected to pick up on a removal and that the services make mistakes. We all do. That's not the point. The real issues are whether the services add a value to the business and whether they stand behind their service. As to the former, I believe they do add value and are here to stay, and people who complain about the concept of grading per se need to face reality. As far as standing behind their services, I for one am glad to hear that SGC allegedly offered to stand behind its service. If that is true, it is heartening.<br /><br />Wow. I agree that grading is probably here to stay, much as that entire concept makes me want to vomit. However, at least insofar as this thread is concerned, mistakes ARE the point. People send cards to be graded so that a mistake is not made. You just sued PSA's ass off for making a mistake, albeit one that was worse and more expensive. I was all in favor of that and was happy for both you and Dan that y'all won. And, as you are very well aware, that happened because PSA was negligent. Now you appear to have become a graded card apologist when it comes to a "mistake" made not by one, but by three, separate grading companies. <br /><br />You and I are both plaintiff lawyers. If you had a client who thought they had cancer and therefore saw the top 3 oncologists in California, all of whom said that cancer wasn't present, I have to think that you'd look pretty hard at the failure to diagnose case if in fact your client had cancer (OK, maybe with that horrific MICRA law you wouldn't, but you get my drift). To some degree, that's analogous to what's going on here.<br /><br />I understand that mistakes can be made. However, I don't understand how each of the "big 3" graders can look at a card which EVERYONE here assumes to be altered and miss them. What are the odds of that occurring? And, as I've mentioned before, isn't it the self-professed job of all those god-like card graders to tell you what you have? Isn't it somewhat telling about the people who the cards are being sent to that it wasn't caught on 3 seperate occasions?<br /><br />When all is said and done, I'm not sure where everything stands. The one thing I do know is that the "everyone makes mistakes" position is a complete crock of sh** when it comes to card grading. If people are going to pay them for the service, they should damn sure do it right. <br /><br />Off my soapbox now. Gotta get beer.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>the issue is that everyone here has ASSUMED this card is altered. Define altered? How can 3 grading companies be wrong if it is so obvious to those here? Maybe because of the people who post here I am the only one who has held the card in it's so called "altered" state. Maybe as I said, this card has not undergone anything nearly as extreme as what Warshaw JD, MD does to his cards. As I stated the card still has missing lettering on the reverse, noticeable creases and missing stock on the front. The back is still discolored and there are still caramel stains. The back even has the area that Scott described as a lift. <br /><br />I am not an apologist for the grading companies but I also contend that nothing drastic had been done to the card. When I got the card back from SGC ungraded I sold it as altered because the issue was still fresh in my mind. The person I sold it to also thought the card was ok and therefore sent the card in for grading only to have it grade a 3rd time.<br /><br /><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Elliot</b><p>I didn't save a back scan from the 1st go round on this card. Greg, could you please post a back scan of this card in one of the slabs?
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>I deleted all of the scans about 2 weeks ago. Figured I did not need them. I am sure that one of the many BOTN haters has that and more and can share the images with the board. It is interesting that nobody has posted the image of the card when it was in the SGC 40 holder.<br /><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>Greg's back to dancing, and he's not going to stop until we all tell him what a good boy we think he is. Are you ready to buy botnian logic? <br /><br />Today he says this:<br /><br />"...When I got the card back from SGC ungraded I sold it as altered because the issue was still fresh in my mind. The person I sold it to also thought the card was ok and therefore sent the card in for grading only to have it grade a 3rd time."<br /><br />but on May 18, he said this:<br /><br />From: "greg" <grays@botn.com><br />> > >To: <Runscott@bellsouth.net><br />> > >Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 12:39 AM<br />> > >Subject: E95 Cobb...<br />> > ><br />> > > > I had sold the raw altered Cobb card for $200 to a guy who wanted a<br />>low grade Cobb. Told him it was altered. He decided to send the card to<br />>PSA and they graded it a 3. <br /><br />So on May 18 he thought it was altered, but now he doesn't remember thinking that at all. That works well with his new logic: if three grading companies slabbed it, then the alterations simply never occured, therefore his own memory can be wiped clean as well. Botnian logic is tough to follow...I would recommend integrity as a simpler alternative.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>hmmm...don't tell me - your memory is coming back<br /><br /><br /><br /><a href="http://www.network54.com/Realm/V_B_C/E95BANDA.JPG" target="_blank">SGC and raw Cobb</a><br /><br /><br />[edited to fix thread formatting]
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>Had no idea that I was obligated to send you the full dialogue about the Cobb card when I sold it. The conversation went slightly longer than, "Here is an altered Cobb that I need $200 for."<br /><br />Nice job touching up the SGC scan. Amazing that the GAI graded card the first card to grade) as provided by MW (has the chipping on the top surface). This can also be seen on the tiny scan of the card taken from Wayne's listing on ebay, the third time the card graded. Oddly Scott produces an enormous scan of the SGC version that does not have that. This card was graded after GAI and before PSA. Also his scan does not have some of the missing lettering on the reverse.<br /><br /><br />Editted to add:<br />Why did you change the scan Scott? <br /><br />Editted again to remove an insult.<br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>runscott</b><p>I took the scan you posted on ebay and super-imposed the front and back of my original scans. <br /><br />But you might want to go back and edit your post Greg, because I'm sure someone other than me saved the SGC scans from your ebay listing. Didn't think of that, did you Greg?
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>runscott</b><p>you've been nailed.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>Scott <br /><br />The initial scan you posted was completely recolored and in one of your edits you changed the photo. The scan that is up there now does appear the be the one I posted of the card in the SGC holder. And does represent the condition of the card as I last remember it.<br /><br />Editted to remove an insult.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>runscott</b><p>You are right - I originally uploaded the wrong scan, of a totally different holdered SGC card. I edited that post as quickly as I could to add the correct scan. You, too are also still a pile.<br /><br />See, we do agree on something?
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>Progress. <br /><br />I see sublte differences in your scan and that of the card in the SGC holder. Your scans are larger and lighter than mine, which might account for some of the differences in appearance. I still see missing letters, chipping on the surface, creases, etc on the card in the SGC holder. If someone were going to recolor and add lettering wouldn't they go all of the way and not leave out certain obvious areas?
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>runscott</b><p>No, anyone could see this would never be a NM card, but I think it's not unlikely that someone sent this to a restorer just to see what work they were capable of producing - this was a perfect test case, given all it's problems. What that person then did with the card is anyone's guess. Is it likely that they just dropped it back in the market after seeing the results? Or instead that they then decided to give the work the final litmus test by sending it directly to a grading company? <br /><br />I couldn't say, but the second scenario would be incredibly stupid.<br /><br />So what is the future of this well-traveled card? Anyone's guess - when I thought it was buried in Greg's collection never to see daylight again, I promised not to bring up more controversy concerning it...but then it re-surfaces, PSA-slabbed, on ebay, for sell by a reputable dealer...I don't have that kind of self-control! <br /><br />Worst-case scenario is it ends up dumped on the market and someone else gets one of the big 3 to re-slab it. That is a very likely scenario, but someone else can pursue that if it happens.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>Greg, now that the card is on its way back to you, can/will you share with us what you plan on doing with it?
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>you think it might be getting better so you stick your tongue in there again to probe and you find out otherwise. <br /><br />Kenny Cole: Actually, I'm primarily a real estate and construction guy so the med mal reference goes right over my head. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> In real estate, the rule is that the seller must disclose any material fact which might adversely impact on the value of the property. In my mind, the rather checkered history of the card is a material fact worthy of disclosure because it would tend to adversely impact the decision of a buyer to purchase the card, as it did with Wayne. It is not equivalent to a failure to diagnose because it is a non-disclosure of a known fact rather than a non-detection error. <br /><br />PSA: Their error in Dan's case was not grading, it was losing the card. I made it clear that I have no comments as to their grading practices as a result of the case; it was not part of the issue. Now, considering their history of grading fakes (Ruth rookie) and altered cards (my card; an OJ with the ad trimmed off was in the November 2002 Lipset auction and offered as an example of a PSA error), I don't happen to like their service itself, but that has nothing to do with Dan's case. <br /><br />Greg: after reading your post yesterday, I went home and consigned the two altered cards to the trash bin where they sleep today with the fishes. I hope you do the same with the Cobb. <br /><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>It was a nice card before, and it looks even better now. I would make a display for it, creating a back-drop using high quality prints of it in each of its three holders.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>Scott your e-mail reply to me was this:<br /><br /><grays@botn.com>; Tue, 18 May 2004 08:28:20 -0400<br />Message-ID: <000701c43cd3$9bf42010$6501a8c0@Forresthome> <br />From: "Scott Forrest" <Runscott@bellsouth.net><br />To: "greg" <grays@botn.com><br />References: <5.1.0.14.0.20040517213727.02a16c30@mail67.pair .com><br />Subject: Re: E95 Cobb...<br />Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 08:28:22 -0400<br />MIME-Version: 1.0<br />Content-Type: text/plain;<br />charset="iso-8859-1"<br />Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<br />X-Priority: 3<br />X-MSMail-Priority: Normal<br />X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000<br />X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2739.300<br /><br />Greg,<br /><br />Thanks for sharing this - yes, please send a picture. I am taking a LONG<br />break from the board, so I won't stir up any more controversy about it.<br /><br />Scott<br /><br />----- Original Message -----<br />From: "greg" <grays@botn.com><br />To: <Runscott@bellsouth.net><br />Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 12:39 AM<br />Subject: E95 Cobb...<br /><br /><br />> I had sold the raw altered Cobb card for $200 to a guy who wanted a low<br />> grade Cobb. Told him it was altered. He decided to send the card to PSA<br />> and they graded it a 3. He is sending me a picture of it. Want me to<br />> forward it on to you?<br /><br />So your promise not to fuel the fire was made well after you knew the card was not buried in my collection.<br /><br />Adam,<br />I am wondering why you have not addressed those questions posed to you by PASJD. Your basis for disclosure does not seem to hold here since it is only this board who claims the card was altered. How many of you have passed the grading test that PSA, GAI and SGC impose on their graders? If anything I have a claim against all of you for damaging the value of my property and undoing my sale. <br /><br />I am not sure what the future holds for this card.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>I thought you were lying.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>runscott</b><p>it really sounds like you were relying on everyone else keeping mum while you did whatever it took to pawn off that Cobb...on someone who doesn't normally read this board.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Joe P.</b><p>Greg's e-mail to Scott:<br /><br />----- Original Message -----<br />From: "greg" <grays@botn.com><br />To: <Runscott@bellsouth.net><br />Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 12:39 AM<br />Subject: E95 Cobb...<br /><br />> "I had sold the raw altered Cobb card for $200 to a guy who wanted a low<br />> grade Cobb. Told him it was altered. He decided to send the card to PSA<br />> and they graded it a 3."<br />*<br />*<br />*<br />Greg, that's your e-mail to Scott.<br />Your words.<br />And on May 18 2004 you knew the card was ALTERED.<br /><br />Your feeble and lame attempt to try to smoke screen the readers of this board, borders on the supernatural.<br />It's almost insulting to anyone that reads this board, and that includes the 1980's & 1970's newbies.<br /><br />Greg, you held back on the known facts when you sold the card to Wayne.<br />The fact that you're desperately feebly trying to use the combined errors of your 3 fallen hero's, makes your plea even more embarrassing.<br /><br />In my eyes, your misdeeds are not what I want in my hobby.<br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Julie Vognar</b><p>that there are no FRONTS which have NECESSARILY been altered.(It seems to me that when I looked at this thread much earlier, alteration to the front was apparent...oh well.)If the back presented a few posts back is the same card as the fronts, it has obviously been altered, based on the back next to it. It is obviously the same back, because of the odd-shaped stain and some nearly identical partially destroyed letters.<br /><br />Why make such obviuous changes to the back, while making only very subtle (to say the least) changes to the front?<br /><br />Is a puzzlement...
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p>Are these the questions from PASJD you were referring to:<br />"have you sold cards which you "improved" (to use a neutral term) by the methods described in that posting; and if so, did you disclose that you had done so?"<br />"Also, I suppose it would be interesting to know in light of the subject matter of the thread whether any cards "improved" by this method were slabbed by the grading services."<br /><br />As stated above, I've never sold the cards I'd played with. There were only 2. I have sold 2 cards that I suspected had been played with by others, but I did so with a disclosure of my suspicions, and took a bath financially as a result. <br /><br />As stated above and as referenced in VCBC #30, SGC and PSA both slabbed cards which had removals performed (1 by each service).
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>Please take more information out of context. As stated a few posts above I used the word "altered" in a one sentence summary in my e-mail to Scott about a conversation that took place between me and my buyer. Had I know that I was going on trial I certainly would have videotaped the entire transaction.<br /><br />You are almost too unreasonable to even address so I will not comment on some of your other inanities. <br /><br />Scott,<br /><br />"only one problem your logic Greg October 12 2004, 3:00 PM <br />I thought you were lying."<br />Well, again you thought wrong and drew yet another conclusion without any foundation.<br /><br />"but by constantly bringing that up October 12 2004, 4:23 PM <br />it really sounds like you were relying on everyone else keeping mum while you did whatever it took to pawn off that Cobb...on someone who doesn't normally read this board."<br />Again you draw a conclusion without having any first hand knowledge of what took place with my customer. Even after being notified by me that a sale took place.<br /><br />Whether or not the card was altered, I sold it as such and based on the price paid it was bought with full knowledge of the accompanying story. I understand that $200 or even $750 is a great deal of money to you so I can understand from your POV why you might think that I would attempt to deceive someone for such incredible wealth. You got the wrong guy though.<br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>PASJD</b><p>OK I just wanted to make sure we weren't getting into a Clintonesque semantic quibble (depends on what the meaning of "is" is) about the meaning of "altered"; the juxtaposition of your statement that you had not sold an "altered" card and the link to your previous posting suggesting (my interpretation anyhow) that you viewed crease removal as different from other forms of restoration is what led me to ask the questions. As you pointed out in your earlier comment about "right to life," the words one uses to frame an issue often dictate the result. (On that particular one I would suggest to you that a "woman's right to choose" is equally misleading, but that is not for this forum I guess.) Personally I would view crease removal in the same category as trimming and corner restoration, particularly because as a practical matter the crease might come back (I have seen it happen to a PSA 8 card); I am not quite sure how I feel about some other "improvements."
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Rob L</b><p>Man, am I glad I don't collect cards. Seems like a lot less controversy with other baseball memorablia.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>edited
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>There also appears to be some border discoloration and distinctive staining that has been removed from the card. This does not appear to be a difference that can be accounted for due to individual image quality.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Jason</b><p>Rob-<br /><br />Well then what in the hell are you doing here?
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Rob L</b><p>Lurking. I love reading this stuff.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Aaron</b><p>Hey, MW, can you teach me how to do that with my computer? (With the circles and stuff.) I'm not very techno-savvy and am pretty much just able to get e-mail and surf the net.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p>edited
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>MW</b><p><edited
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Julie Vognar</b><p>Borders are considerably whitened....
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>PASJD</b><p>MW is right in my opinion, the corruption and uncertainty surrounding autographs and game-used jerseys and game-used bats and the like makes baseball cards look tame by comparison. I mean think about it, how does anyone KNOW if Babe Ruth signed a baseball being presented for sale 70 years later?
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>Contrast is lightened but you are working with images of the graded examples that are significantly smaller than the ungraded version.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Julie Vognar</b><p>gouges to the left of the bigger gouge that has been about half removed; and the borders are considerably whitened. I think we're takng size into account...
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Joe P.</b><p>Greg speaks: <br /><br />"Joe P, <br />Please take more information out of context. As stated a few posts above I used the word "altered" in a one sentence summary in my e-mail to Scott about a conversation that took place between me and my buyer."<br />*<br />*<br />*<br />What out of context?<br />Your words.<br /><br />Who sent the e-mail to Scott?<br /><br />Wayne?<br />Me?<br />Scott to Scott?<br /><br />Who was talking about an ALTERED card in May 2004?<br /><br />Wayne?<br />Me?<br /><br />It was you Greg you.<br />You knowingly dumped the card on Wayne in July 2004.<br />In that particular department, the road map points to you.<br />You weren't just wrong, you were wrong LOUD.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /> <br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Scott Forrest</b><p>You dropped the "Scott drinks beer" thing from your defense for a few posts and started going after the "Scott doesn't have money" angle.<br /><br />I guess if you kept working those two things, you could possibly build a case for me drinking more beer than you, or for you being wealthy compared to me - but neither would make you right about the Cobb...or make you any taller.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>Scott<br />No need to be so bitter. You have already taken this too personally. Dude you are one angry MFer. Well you might be taller than me for the few minutes a day you are not hunched over drunk or lying in your own mess.<br /><br />Joe P<br />You exemplify the oxymoron of military intelligence. I never made excuses for selling the card to Wayne. I gave you my reason and it is one that I still stand behind.<br /><br />Julie,<br />Stop flip-flopping. You are still looking at a scan that is significantly smaller and a card that was not scanned with the surface directly on the scanner bed. Also who said those lines are gouges? Scott?--a guy who has been gunning for me at every chance. I do not recall off hand if those white marks are still on the card or have been reduced but in my conversation with Wayne yesterday he said the card looked very similar to Scott's scan. I did not ask for an analysis on a point-by point flaw, as the card will be in my hands in a few days.<br /><br />It seems that you are all in agreement that you are more qualified to grade a card by a scan than all of the graders at the top 3 grading services can do with the actual card in hand. Well I commend you and apologize for second guessing your abilities. It would then reason that none of you directly or indirectly pay for grading of your cards and would likely not pay premiums for cards that have been graded.<br /><br /><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>runscott</b><p>blah blah blah
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>John,<br /><br />You have been a former customer for a while now (2+ years?) but it is ok with me if you want to attribute it to this episode. Maybe you knew in advance that I was a bad seed in the hobby.<br /><br />I was going to be sending out Christmas cards this year. The card layout was going to feature the E95 Cobb wearing a Santa hat (with Scott in the background sucking down spiked eggnog). So that I know exactly how many to print can I get a head count of those who want to remain on my mailing list?<br /><br />Editted to add:<br />John,<br /><br />I went back to look at when we last did business and it seems we never did business. Since I cannot lose something I never had I have to place you in a new category, "Former Customers With No Prior Transactions." I hope you understand. And believe me it is just as prestigious to be in this category.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>runscott</b><p>Perhaps you could use yourself in a cameo role as an elf.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Joe P.</b><p>Greg's dribble:<br /><br />"I never made excuses for selling the card to Wayne. I gave you my reason and it is one that I still stand behind."<br />*<br />*<br />*<br />Who the hell is saying that you made excuses to Wayne?<br /><br />Can't you get anything right?<br /><br />Simply stated, you omitted to tell Wayne the TRUTH about the card. <br /><br />Keep repeating your attempt at a smoke screen.<br />You're beginning to sound like Bush.<br />Everything is Honky Dory in Iraq.<br />Why, Baghdad is just like Mayberry.<br /><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>Scott<br /><br />I love it! Just for that you get a card whether you want one or not. <br /><br />Joe,<br /><br />First of all say anything you want but please do not compare me to Bush. You are right, though. I failed to inform Wayne that there are some collectors who post on a vintage card forum who have deemed themselves more qualified than any of the professional graders. They felt that based on a scan this card is altered. <br /><br />For that I am going to drop down and give you 100 push ups. <br /><br /><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bill Cornell</b><p>Will this puny thread ever be worthy of the Old Judge Proof one? I am unimpressed.<br /><br />Unless someone has something new to add (I'm assuming that the 3 grading companies aren't going to pipe up), can we wind this down?<br /><br />See you all again next April for the biannual E95 Cobb battle.<br /><br />Bill
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Jethro Hatfield</b><p>By cracki, dis har tread is mo fun dan da sadurday nite cockfites over at Joe’s barn. Mo fun dan wachin da wraslin shows on da TB set. Ain’t dat TB set sumtin else? We dun jurst git one dis yar and we luvs it. Piktur is still a wee bit fuzy cus we ain’t gots one a dem der fancy antennis like Jed has who hars dat butiful howse on da botum land. I jest bin a usin a coat-rak wire fur da antenni. Culd sumbuddy har xplane how dis har TB set gits dem pkturs frum da wraslin show? Dat TB set is mo amazin dan dat two-heded tortle I dun seed dat time over at McCoys pond. Gots ta run owtside now to da baffroom cus I dun et way too much possum las nite. But to all ya polks a fuzzin on dis har tread - yar always welcum at my howse.<br><br>Sincarly,<br><br>Jethro Hatfield<br><br>
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Jason</b><p>Joe P-<br /><br />Why do you have to bring politics into this? If Kerry gets in we all should be praying for this country. I wonder how many times he would change his mind on this controversial Cobb?
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>runscott</b><p>So Greg, you mean you provided the "before" scan to each of the grading companies prior to their slabbings of the card? If not, then you probably should drop this - we had an advantage. <br /><br />Bill, you are right - nothing new here. I officially promise not to open this thread again; however, you are probably right - when Greg attempts to slip the card back into the market in a few months, and it shows up again on ebay, yes, I'll post.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Joe P.</b><p>My apologies.<br />That was nasty of me.<br /><br />I can understand the preference of being looked at as slightly tainted better than a comparison to Alfred E. Neumann.<br /><br />Tell us.<br /><br />Are you going to give us four more years of the Cobb?<br /><br />Will it be more of the same with a few more added Graders of Evil?<br /><br />Who will be the next dealer or collector/stock marketeer liberated by the Cobb?<br /><br />Is Ty the WMD that we've been looking for?<br /><br />Is There Anyone Out There That's Accountable?<br /><br />
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>Bottom of the Ninth</b><p>"So Greg, you mean you provided the "before" scan to each of the grading companies prior to their slabbings of the card? If not, then you probably should drop this - we had an advantage." <br /><br />Don't think in this instance that the results would have been any different were the grading companies to have a scan. Graders reject cards based on their experience, knowledge and education. Unless there is yet ANOTHER thing you know that I am not aware of, submissions generally are not accompanied by photos or scans of the cards submitted. Unlike you, the graders actually have the ability to look at a card confirm the authenticity of a card and attribute a grade. Thankfully they do not do as you (plural) do and make the assessment based on a personal vendetta.<br /><br />And yes Bill I do believe that this thread has reached the end. I am hurt that you were truly unimpressed. I cannot wait until Scott create yet another controversial issue about me that he can post about.
|
Simply amazing - the doctored Cobb is back
Posted By: <b>honus3415</b><p>Would everyone be happy if the card were encapsulated into a PRO holder?<br /><br />At least then, everyone should realize that the Cobb was questionable. And I'd even be willing to bet that if you stamped "ALTERED" on the back it would receive a higher grade than it has gotten so far.<br /><br />
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:21 AM. |