[x2drich2000]

Nearly everyone here is saying PSA needs to do a better job detecting the alterations, so what would be an acceptable failure rate (as in, what percent of altered cards get past them and given a grade). 1%? .5%?

Are any other hobbies using an AI to certify items? I know in high end art they've used CAT and xray to detect forgeries, but in those situations you are talking one off items that are already suspect and the value of the item justifies the expense. How much more would folks be willing to pay to have their VG T206 commons graded? The cards discovered so far show it is not just high $ cards being manipulated. Likewise, searching for past instances of cards being sold to compare takes a lot of time and of course time is money. So how much are folks who are complaining willing to pay to have a more comprehensive review done?

I also think we would be in a much worse situation if the TPG didn't exist. A good number of cards are purchased online today. I know I have and I'm sure most people have gotten raw cards that were not even close to the advertised grade (including altered cards). This includes cards coming from major auction houses. I don't know how many of these cards would have been caught if they weren't graded by a TPG. I guess the way I view it is that if these are getting past people who look at cards all day every day, what chance would the average collector have in spotting these if they got them raw?

So where does this leave us. In my view, the top 3 TPGs have done a great service to the hobby so far. Yes, the current situation sucks. However, when I really look at the alternative, the costs of doing a more thorough review of each card doesn't seem justified and I think you need to take the bad with the good. As a result, I hope this doesn't ultimately cripple PSA.