Quote:
Originally Posted by Gorditadogg
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
|
I read it and I stand by what I said. Just because Lorewalker lists the cert numbers for 80 cards and claims the submission was for 80 cards doesn't mean that the submission was in fact 80 cards. We simply don't know. We can make assumptions like two of the same card having back to back certs are likely from the same submission or a run of cards within the same set are likely from one submission, but we don't ultimately know. And with this run of cert numbers, there are definitely some cards that could be from different submissions. In fact, I'd argue that the likelihood those 4 Jackie Robinson RCs and 3 Mickey Mantle RCs being in the same submission as the 1952 Topps commons is actually extremely low (near-zero). Those are almost certainly from at least two different submissions. Also, the submission could have ended with the baseball cards and the football, hockey, and basketball cards may have been from a different submission. Again, we don't know. They ran in different auctions. And just because many of the cards were sold on PWCC doesn't mean they were from the same submission either. PWCC was the largest consignment company in the hobby at the time.
And just because Lorewalker claimed that the other 20 certs were "Altered, Min Size or Miscut" does not mean that those certs were in fact deemed to have been altered, min size, or miscut. This is a prime example of what I'm constantly preaching about in this hobby. The telephone game of misinformation and malinformation is ridiculous around here. Lorewalker looks up the cert numbers on PSA website and can't find the cards listed, so he assumes they were rejected by PSA and then posts that as if it were a known fact. Then the lemmings read his post, and assume it must be true and they perpetuate it. But we know that PSA allowed submitters to put minimum grades on their submissions, which resulted in the same "We're sorry. The certification number provided was not found in the database." error listed on their website. Furthermore, we all know this to be the case. This shouldn't be news to anyone who reads these threads. Yet you guys just want to pretend like that's not an option, let alone the most likely explanation.
I think the most likely explanation of that run of certs is that they were from at least two submissions and that the invalid certs didn't meet the minimum grades listed on the submission forms.