Confused about grading vs. authenticating

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

My way of thinking tells me that authenticating is just telling a person the product is original and that grading tells you that the product is original and a condition (or grade) is applied.

Some of the threads seems to have the topic that if the cards are authenticated that they are graded. These people seem to feel that just because a third party says a product is original and in a slab that there would be more shadyness in selling within the hobby. This is already going on, so why not set up a system for the people that are looking for third party information on a product. This is where the whole process of third party card grading came about, to me this is just an evolution of a third party confirming what the buyer and seller would like to know. ( That may have sounded akward but those are the best words I could come up with). Applying a grade to a card authenticated would be the same as a non-authenticated card, It's subject tot the buyers description and the buyers belief in the seller.

Am I wrong in this thinking?

Lee

[Archive]

Posted By: Plastic Dog

Lee,

Not to sound harsh, but I really think that everyone advocating an "AUTHENTIC" grade - while their arguments are well-intentioned - are overlooking the obvious advantages that such a system would provide the unscrupulous seller. Here is what I wrote in the other subject thread to Leon:

"Leon, you're a good guy so I think that the obvious problem with your whole position just didn't creep into your brain. And you clearly aren't as jaded as some of us other collectors, for if you were, you would realize the obvious:

YOUR "AUTHENTIC" MATTY WOULD BE ADVERTISED AS NM/MT ON EBAY, AND A COLLECTOR WOULD HAVE A HARD TIME PICKING UP THE FLAW IF IT'S ENTOMBED IN BULLET-PROOF PLASTIC!!!"

That's the problem Lee. Authentic-graded cards make it difficult for a buyer in any transaction to closely examine the card; it takes away all of your senses except sight. (Remember John Wojak talking about using touch, sight and even smell?) The only reason that most collectors accept the current system is that the "scrutiny" of the card was done by a 3rd party (possibly neutral) grader. With "AUTHENTIC" grades, such scrutiny is no longer possible. And that could mean a difference of overpaying by thousands of dollars for a card.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

I feel that the authentication process should only be used for cards that the grading companies will not grade not the ones that are gradeable like the Matty in the other thread. I don't know if this falls under the all or nothing category that has been talked about, but in my opinion if you can not seperate the authentic for ungradables only than it should not be done. This is where I can see all the problems can occur.
I still think your arguement plasticdog lies in the reason I posted the thread, this is authenticating NOT grading. Questions can always be asked about the cards, and the belief in the seller that he is being honest.
Plasticdog would you be for an authenticating service for only cards rejected for grading, but still an original card?

Lee
Any more clarity would be good.

[Archive]

Posted By: Plastic Dog

I think it would be permissible for SGC to grade some types of altered cards as an (SGC 10) POOR. Trimmed cards, skinned, bleached cards, and maybe a couple of other alterations (which don't add to the value - e.g. Snodgrass) seem likely candidates. Essentially examples where nothing has been added to the card (as opposed to rebacked Old Judges, restored Goudeys, retouched 1894-5 Mayos or 1971 Topps, etc.) might be permissible. Maybe even add a qualifier to the grade (e.g. SGC 10 TR for trimmed, BL for bleached, TR/SK for trimmed and skinned). I don't see much difference between these and a card that has been through the wash, had a big chunk ripped off, with writing on the back, and graded a 10.

[Archive]

Posted By: Plastic Dog

Bottom line is that I think such cards should still be "graded" - only give a POOR with or without qualifier. Otherwise, we will spend the rest of our lives arguing about whether an AUTHENTIC card is really EX-MT or VG, which may rest on whether a blemish is a light print mark or an ironed out crease. You will never be certain in many instances. Far too many problems for minimal benefit.

My two cents.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

I would have to agree with the graded 1 - with qualifiers. Not the PSA method of qualifiers with grades.

I think I am cleared up on most of this matter.

Lee

[Archive]

Posted By: David

I think that Plastic Dog's idea of giving a grade of poor (I would prefer with a qualifier, like "Poor altered") has got strong posibilities. If a card is graded 'Poor - altered' it would be difficult for the seller to convince the buyer that it's really an ExMt card. It also says that the grader beleives the card to be authentic, just has problems with it. Plastic Dog's idea seems to cover most bases.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

If I see a beautiful card slabbed as "authentic", I'm going to figure there's a flaw that kept the seller for going for a true grade. I would probably only bid on beat-up "authentic" slabbed cards, or others where the seller gave me a very good reason as to why he had it graded "authentic"

[Archive]

Posted By: Plastic Dog

Anybody on this board is going to be more cautious than the average collector. But what's to keep the novice kid or unsuspecting parent from getting ripped off when they don't understand the nuances. Better yet, what if one of our poor wives actually wanted to get us that special anniversary president of old cardboard (ya right, and a horse just flew by my window) and they ended up getting taken? You'd take that AUTHENTIC piece of crap and shove it down the seller's throat.

I'll post a new proposal above.

[Archive]

Posted By: Plastic Dog

I meant "anniversary present" and not "... president"

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

'Authentic' would only be allowed for cards that would be rejected for grading due to alteration. The M116 Matty in another thread would NOT be able to be submitted for 'authentic' only. The status is saved soley for cards that have have trimmed, colored or altered in some other fashion. No card going thru the 'authentic' process would get a grade, only notes as to what alterations were found.

Jay- posted becase my brother isn't too bright

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

but there's no way of protecting all buyers from all possible situations. I firmly believe that if you're buying something that is high-dollar, you better know that issue very well, or know the seller and their reputation.

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

In our hobby, though it does not always operate efficiently, I would tend to argue that it ordinarily operates in an efficient and "free market" economic system.

If cards were graded authentic, or authentic-altered, I do believe that some buyers would try to trump up the attributes of their card. But I also believe that seller will (eventually - not right away) figure it out and the sellers will learn how to price the cards appropriately.

Sure, each "authentic" card will have to be handled on a case-by-case basis. But are there really so many idiots out there that would continually purchase these cards with an advertisement like "SGC screwed me on this transaction -- it measures correctly"?! If so, should we really try to protect them? I would imagine anyone that would fall for that would get burned once (on a resubmission) and then not do it anymore.

Our market already figures in "discounts" for every level of the hobby. On graded cards, premiums are paid for well-centered 8's as opposed to o/c 8's. On graded cards, PSA and SGC cards sell for higher than BGS, BVG, CSA and ASA for a reason. On mail order, we know not to trust the grading standards of Kit Young, Steve Verkman and Festerberg. On online auctions, we don't pay Near Mint prices for cards that are described as "Near Mint besides the tack hole in the top of the card".

The people on this board have made incredible strides in policing Ebay and protecting unscrupulous sellers. However, the market tends to work fairly efficiently, for cards of all grades, years and graded v. non-graded. Most of us are (at least relatively) educated and can figure in the appropriate discounts when we bid or buy in instances where we can't personally handle the cards. If graded card companies would grade a card a "Authentic-Trimmed", I think people would figure out how to price them. Maybe not right away, but soon enough.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Marc –

I very strongly disagree with several of your statements.

First, I don't think it would be at all difficult to imagine buyers over-paying for "authentic only" cards. Just look at how many 1923 Spalding Babe Ruths or 1938 Goudey Joe DiMaggio Rookies "libertyforall" has sold in the past year. Like it or not, there will always be willing buyers for this type of stuff. The common denominator is that if it's in a holder, there's a much greater chance it's going to sell. The result? Many first time buyers will be turned off to the hobby and others will lose confidence in encapsulated cards. If you don't think that buying an "authentic only" card from one of perhaps thousands of eBay sellers is analogous to gambling, then I don't think you understand how this hobby functions. Why create such an amorphous, hype-your-card-to-the-moon environment?

"Authentic-trimmed?" Isn't that analogous to "Authentic-not exactly authentic?" My feeling is if one wants to thoroughly confuse new hobbyists and many buyers of vintage, graded cards, all that is necessary is for an established grading service to encapsulate altered cards. And I'm sure it would work wonders for their reputation.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

what he is talking about.

From MW's mythical conversation with Marc:

>MW: "So let me get this straight -- a grading company >at first rejects a group of cards and then decides to >encapsulate and grade them?"

I really have tried to give you the benefit of the doubt as to your intelligence, but this proves that you are not reading what anyone else is saying and continue to insist upon this belief that an altered card, as discussed here, will also be graded.

I will explain this one more time, and if you don't get it by now, then I will assume that you far less intelligent that I gave you credit for:

A CARD THAT IS REJECTED FOR PROPER GRADING WOULD NOT RECIEVE A GRADE. IT WOULD ONLY BE NOTED AS AUTHENTIC (OR WHATEVER TERM YOU WANT TO USE) WITH THE REASON/S IT WAS REJECTED FOR PROPER GRADING.

Why you continue to insist that authentic-altered is a grade is beyond me. No one else here seems to have made that mistake.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

I guess my biggest beef with this whole thing revolves around trimmed cards. Over the past 15 years, a significant number of important (and common) cards have entered into our hobby as trimmed.

Trimmed cards always sell for a significant discount -- and that won't change. Nonetheless, there are some collectors who would prefer a trimmed T-205 Ty Cobb that "looks" Excellent over an authentic one that has four creases and numerous border chips.

I've seen a few Old Judge card with pinholes in them. What does this mean in terms of grading? In my mind, it is the same thing as trimming. Part of the card is gone. The intent may be different (pinholes were put there by people who weren't actively collecting them, whereas a card trim is usually done intentionally to improve the appearance and potentially deceive someone). Nonetheless, it is an alteration.

If someone is new to this hobby and asks you questions, you will tell them a lot of things. You will tell them the risks of buying graded cards from PRO, BVG and ASA. You will tell them the risks of buying ungraded cards and how to look for/spot altered examples. It is only through information that they will make informed choices. And, I would imagine, they would at some point evaluate their budget and preferences and determine whether or not they would accept any trimmed cards in their collection -- whether purchased raw or in a graded card holder.

Back to my free market topic: Four or five months ago, there was a small furor when we all learned that both PSA and SGC were grading the T206 Honus Wagner reprint cards. To this very day, people still purchase them. Yet the market seems to have reacted fairly efficiently in that process, and it hasn't affected the hobby much.

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

The more information available to the potential buyer, the better. If this can be enhanced through slabbing altered authentic cards, I'm for it.

It's amazing how many different view-points there are on this subject, and also that we are so adamant about our own viewpoints that we keep repeating them! Several low-key contributors have gotten a bit fiery in their responses and MW even wrote a short play!...and I'm disagreeing with people who have much more knowledge and experience than me - kind of fun.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

I have given long thought to the authenticity question ever since I saw the "authentic" T206 Wagner. I don't believe that there is a place for such a grade. It is both superfluous and too confusing.

The problem that leads to the desire for the authentic grade is that the grading services preach "zero tolerance" for alterations but do in fact grade "altered" cards. The pinhole example is a great one; I know for a fact that PSA and SGC both will grade a card that has a pinhole. I've seen a PSA-graded card with a pinhole (it got a 2 grade but looked near mint to mint until I held it up to the light at the urging of the dealer). I've also handled graded cards with portions of the reverses missing from album or tape removal (my N28 Dempsey got a "3" from SGC in that condition), or with writing on them. Heck, I just had SGC grade a really nice T205 with a small "divot" on the front because I didn't quite know how to list it (they gave it a vg grade). These cards are undoubtedly "altered" but they have always been readily graded.

I think where we all get hung up, properly, is on the issue of restoration. I don't think anyone objects to a damaged card being graded, but nearly everyone objects to grading a card that has been restored. It is all alteration of the card, but I call the first situation damage or mutilation, the second restoration. Ee don't need a separate category for damaged or mutilated cards because we already have categories: vg-good-fair-poor. My view is that a card that is authentic but badly damaged or mutilated should be graded "poor", period. No "authentic" or "original" grade is needed. The buyer knows it is filler and will price it accordingly. The innocent buyer who can read English knows it is crap also; I've never heard of poor being a good thing, and we are all familiar with the 1 to 10 scale. If the card has been retouched, trimmed, bleached, etc., however, it is the lowest possible form of card "life" and should not be graded, period.

There is another major problem with "original" which my legal mind would absolutely jump at if a client presented it: by trying to reject all alterations but grade damage, the services set a goal that is hard to quibble over. However, we all know that the services can be beaten and are regularly (look for my article on the subject in the upcoming VCBC). If they were to try to label admittedly dodgy cards as "original", it is much more likely that many altered cards would slip through as original cards. The services would be exposing themselves to major liability for the inevitable "altered" cards that slip through, unless they printed a disclaimer so boldly and efficiently that the service would be rendered worthless.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Marc --

Let's say you are an experienced hobby veteran who sells both graded and ungraded cards and I'm a novice who's interested in buying graded material. Imagine the following dialogue:

MW: "Hi Marc! I really like the idea of buying graded cards. What can you tell me about them?"

Marc: "Well, there are many different grading companies, but for vintage cards, I would highly recommend SGC."

MW: "Sounds great! How does this grading thing work?"

Marc: "Well...a company such as SGC receives a group of cards from collectors or dealers and evaluates them based on condition. If the card is unaltered, then they encapsulate it and assign a grade to it."

MW: "So cards that are trimmed or bleached or repapered don't get graded."

Marc: "Well...SGC actually grades those too. They're just labeled differently."

MW: "So let me get this straight -- a grading company at first rejects a group of cards and then decides to encapsulate and grade them?"

Marc: "Yes."

MW: "Do other companies grade altered cards?"

Marc: "Well, yes. PRO, ASA and NASA among others."

MW: "So these are good companies too?"

Marc: "No. Companies that grade altered cards are not popular with serious collectors."

MW: "Then why should I trust a company that puts altered cards in holders? How do I know that some of the altered cards aren't getting in the unaltered holders? This makes me nervous."

Marc: "But encapsulating altered cards is a good thing. Otherwise they'd never be graded."

MW: "Isn't that the point?"

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

Is not to the educated folks on THIS board but to the tens of thousands of folks on ebay that DO buy the crap from 'Libertyforall'. I don't know what the answer is, but if there were slabbed authentic cards noting what the reason was it didn't get graded, to me that's far better than an unscrupulous seller on ebay selling the card for NRMT. At least it's entombed with what's keeping it from truly grading. Otherwise all these trimmed caramel cards would be floating around as NRMT or EXMT out there. Does that happen now? Yes. Will the unscrupulous seller be the one to get them graded--probably not. Who knows.

From Leon's description of what SGC is intending, I don't think Tom and MW have much to worry about--at least with altered cards. But.....I don't see the positive at all on getting a card that could be graded a SGC20 or 30 as 'authentic' or 'original' with no grade. Anyway.......this'll go on forever. In the end......little, if anything, will change.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Jay –

<< ...then I will assume that you far less intelligent than I gave you credit for: >>

You said it Jay, not me.

Next, you insist that a card that is rejected for proper grading would not receive a grade. You are not following the line of argumentation here, Jay. Please refer to the posts above by Lee, David and Plastic Dog where they discuss the assignment of a grade (of say "1" or "10" or "Poor") to an altered card. The idea that an altered card should be encapsulated with the notation of "authentic" (but nothing else) has already been discussed and for the most part, rejected. You are a couple of posts behind everyone else on this topic.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Jay --

Again, no offense but the topic of altered cards being encapsulated with no grade and with an indication of "authentic" has already been discussed, and for the most part, discounted. Please refer to the current topic and the posts by Lee, David, and Plastic Dog above. Please get up to speed with the rest of us.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

<< Back to my free market topic: Four or five months ago, there was a small furor when we all learned that both PSA and SGC were grading the T206 Honus Wagner reprint cards. To this very day, people still purchase them. Yet the market seems to have reacted fairly efficiently in that process, and it hasn't affected the hobby much. >>

Marc --

That's because the Wagner cards are labeled as reprints, not originals. There is a clear and evident distinction between them and an authentic and original T206 Wagner.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

It is not the sgc20 or 30 I am as concerned about. It is cards like my Matty that I posted. It was a 40 because of a very minor surface wrinkle. I feel it would be an 80 otherwise. Four grades for that wrinkle is unconscionable (sp?) ... For that card I would prefer "Original" and no number. But you are correct I don't believe anything will change. From seeing the monetarily swayed opinions I will either crack cards or explain why my Matty is better than a 40 I will give Derek a call tomorrow and see what he thinks but my recommendation would be to NOT do the service which I feel is needed. (so I can have a good 3rd party try to spot something that, according to Jay B anb Jay M. and several others, are so obvious I feel stupid not seeing).... thanks again sir....and as always ...bestest regards

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

<< I don't know what the answer is, but if there were slabbed authentic cards noting what the reason was it didn't get graded, to me that's far better than an unscrupulous seller on ebay selling the card for NRMT. At least it's entombed with what's keeping it from truly grading. Otherwise all these trimmed caramel cards would be floating around as NRMT or EXMT out there. >>

Tom --

You are assuming that everyone who sells altered cards as NRMT is going to submit their cards to a grading service for "authentic-only" material. They won't. Instead you'll have these same sellers ALONG WITH sellers of "authetic" but altered cards. What a recipe for disaster.

Warsawlaw is very much correct when he writes that "[i]f the card has been retouched, trimmed, bleached, etc., however, it is the lowest possible form of card "life" and should not be graded, period."

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Me thinks you doth listen to Rush Limbaugh too much.

Let's look at this thread then, it is an offshoot of the original 'authentic' thread and is no streach to consider this a part of it. My borhter asked, what is the difference between authentic and graded. Platicdog spoke up an mentioned grading in his idea. I then posted and said that authentic should not be graded. Then Marc S steps up and asks about market situations and is pretty clear in his post that authentic cards are not graded. Then you post your little play involving Marc, where Marc supposedly supports grading altered cards. My post was in response to that becuase it proves that you only see what you want to see (the reason for my Limbaugh comparison).

Now explain to me how I wasn't following this thread.

Jay-

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

these could be used for quicker searches when looking for old discussion topics

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Jay –-

You had better take another look at the title of the first message on this post. It reads, "Confused about grading vs. authenticating" which is something that you very clearly are.

Second, the Shakespearean quote you "borrow" is from the third act of "Hamlet." In this act, Gertrude utters this phrase, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks" in a classic dialogue of self-denial. She thinks she is being clever by pointing out the perceived misdeeds of others when in actuality it is SHE who is guilty of wrong and is self-deluded. Ironically, this passage applies quite well to you. Perhaps it is also significant to note that "Hamlet" is largely a tragedy of a man who could not make up his mind. Again, very applicable to you. Are you sure that you are not the one who listens to Rush Limbaugh? In the context of Shakespeare's play and this quotation, it would certainly make sense.

The following posts in this thread discuss the GRADING of altered cards:

Plastic Dog (Feb. 3, 2:27 pm) – "Not to sound harsh, but I really think that everyone advocating an "AUTHENTIC" grade - while their arguments are well-intentioned - are overlooking the obvious advantages that such a system would provide the unscrupulous seller."

Lee then rehashes material that was discussed previously in two different threads – authentication only without a grade.

Plastic Dog responds with the following: "I actually addressed this once before."

Lee states that he would be OK with a grade of "1" for altered cards.

David concurs with assigning a grade to altered cards.

Next, you write: "'Authentic' would only be allowed for cards that would be rejected for grading due to alteration."

Oddly, you must have been sleeping during three previous threads, since your argument only serves to rehash what was previously considered and for the most part rejected. For example, please refer to Tom Boblitt's thread titled, "Regardless of IF we get any authentic..." In this post, the topic of authentic only or authentic with a grade is discussed AT LENGTH for altered cards. Furthermore, the thread culminates in the following statement by me (addressed to you):

<< Jay --

You have missed my point altogether. Altered cards DO NOT belong in holders from a grading company. Qualified, unqualified, graded a "1", graded a "-1", ungraded -- it doesn't matter. If you put them there, there are going to so many problems that you'll long for the old days when you only had to watch out for PRO & NASA. >>

For further reference, please reread Leon's post on January 31, titled, "here is the deal with SGC authentic."

I really don't want to label you as a "dunderhead", Jay, but you leave me no choice. There were at least three previous and extensive threads discussing the "authentic only" option WITHOUT an assigned grade. It was only AFTER this topic was nearly dead that you again posted the idea. It was as if you were totally unaware of everything that had been written. Come on Jay, get with it!

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

<<I really don't want to label you as a "dunderhead", Jay, but you leave me no choice. >>

That was the FUNNIEST thing I've read on this board in a long time. Thanks, MW!

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Gee, I thought the discussion in this thread, according your rules set forth in your previous post, is supposed to exist within the vaccuum of this thread, yet you post this:

>Oddly, you must have been sleeping during three previous threads...

You change the rules so often that I should call you Calvin, but then that is resorting to name calling and that springs up when you have nothing valid to say anymore.

more stuff you wrote:
>You had better take another look at the title of the first message on this post. It reads, "Confused about grading vs. authenticating" which is something that you very clearly are.

Let's look at the subject; "Confused about grading v. authenticating". My brother wanted to know what the difference was between the two. My first post answered that question directly and too the point. What is the problem there?

There is one thing that we agree on, that an altered card with a grade would serious nightmares and for very obvious reasons. What you have not done is explain how an ungraded and slabbed altered card is going to cause more problems than already exists with dealers misrepresenting what they have in the loose state. All you have written is an ambigious "there will be serious problems no matter what".

By the way, I never knew that using Old English in a sentence automatically made it a paraphrase of a Shakespearian quote. But then you seem to do a lot od assuming.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

Hey Mike,

I have exclusive rights to name calling of my brother. I have never called him a "dunderhead", probably cause I have never heard of it (does this qualify me as a Dunderhead)? You also give him credit for knowing Shakespeare, Do "Dunderheads" know Shakespeare, because I don't think he knows musch about it.

i do have to agree the part where he mentioned that you claimed that it would cause so many problems but you did not seem to give any examples. This seems to have been clarified by your follow.

Just one other thing Mike, have you ever been persuaded to change your mind from your original thought?

Lee

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Lee --

Yes, even those who are dunderheaded can paraphrase Shakespeare: "Altered cards, to grade, or not to grade..."

Have I ever been persuaded to change my mind from my original thought? On some topics, yes. When it comes to encapsulating altered cards, no.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

Time for a chat Mike?

Lee

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

By the way Lee, there are a lot of bowling cards on ebay right now.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Jay --

First, the word "methinks" was commonly used in plays during Shakespeare's time (1564-1616), which would be Middle English. "Old English" refers to the time period from the middle of the 5th to the beginning of the 12th century. If you were truly using the "Old English" form of this expression, you would have written "me thyncth" (or "me thinketh" in today's nomenclature).

Next, you claim that I have yet to explain why altered cards that are slabbed (but ungraded) are problematic. Here are 7 different posts that prove you wrong:

(1) (February 3 2002, 11:47 PM) << First, I don't think it would be at all difficult to imagine buyers over-paying for "authentic only" cards. Just look at how many 1923 Spalding Babe Ruths or 1938 Goudey Joe DiMaggio Rookies "libertyforall" has sold in the past year. Like it or not, there will always be willing buyers for this type of stuff. The common denominator is that if it's in a holder, there's a much greater chance it's going to sell. The result? Many first time buyers will be turned off to the hobby and others will lose confidence in encapsulated cards. If you don't think that buying an "authentic only" card from one of perhaps thousands of eBay sellers is analogous to gambling, then I don't think you understand how this hobby functions. Why create such an amorphous, hype-your-card-to-the-moon environment? >>

(2) (February 3 2002, 11:47 PM) << "Authentic-trimmed?" Isn't that analogous to "Authentic-not exactly authentic?" My feeling is if one wants to thoroughly confuse new hobbyists and many buyers of vintage, graded cards, all that is necessary is for an established grading service to encapsulate altered cards. And I'm sure it would work wonders for their reputation. >>

(3) (February 1 2002, 5:13 PM ) << I agree and I also think David is right on this subject. "Authentication only" would lead to a great many difficulties. Even authentication with some further identifying tag (say, of an alteration) would fly right in the face of reason, common sense and sound judgment. So too, with all the problems that Internet auctions experience with reprints and non-authentic material, I just don't see any real advantage to an SGC "authentic only" service. PSA has already begun to dig themselves a hole on this matter. There's no reason for SGC to start a new one. >>

(4) (February 2 2002, 2:01 AM) << To me, there's no way a grading company can properly assess the authenticity of an altered card. Sure, there will always be some examples where a card is lightly trimmed or the collector just wants verification that something is original and not reprinted. But for each of these cases, there are cards that are repapered, significantly altered, or altered to appear as another card. As far as I'm concerned, it's impossible for one to draw the line. Grading cards as "authentic only" demands a judgment as to the percent authentic. Not only do I view that as unwise, but tedious and troublesome. Like I said before, it's like assigning a grade to an altered card. I can only imagine the headaches a grading company would get if it started a large-scale authentication only service. Think of the number of people who would be trading in "authentic only" cards or the number of submitters who would argue that their card was "just authentic enough" to be encapsulated. EBay would be a mess as bidders tried to guess what was in the holder before they bid. Talk about giving dishonesty and greed a new set of legs.... >>

(5) (February 2 2002, 1:49 PM ) << What you are not taking into consideration is how much an "authentication only" service would legitimize cards that have been significantly altered. Cards that had numerous creases removed, were recolored, or even significantly repapered would now be legitimate candidates for being encapsulated. If I owned a grading company there is absolutely NO WAY I would want to put ANY stamp of approval (of authenticity) on altered material. That's just bad business. >>

(6) (February 2 2002, 4:41 PM ) << Now, imagine that there are hundreds or even thousands of these "authentic" cards on the market. Sure, they'll be some sellers who will describe the cards properly, but what happens in those situations where creases (or other defects) are missed or there is deception on the part of the seller? And then who's to blame? The seller of the card? The company that authenticated the card (without a grade)? Both? The only alternative is to grade "authentic only" material on a card by card basis. Buy then you're just right back where PSA is with their authentication service. That is, you create the perception that a great deal of bias exists -– some submitters can get the "authentication only" grade, others can't. Either way, it's a losing proposition. >>

(7) (February 2 2002, 4:56 PM) << Next, I will absolutely guarantee you that if SGC starts an "authentication only" service that an entirely new market will develop. One that encourages deception, greed, greater numbers of altered cards, and dozens of eBay sellers who claim their "authentic only" cards will grade as high as the moon. Finally, yes; only certain cards should be graded. Cards that are original and unaltered. If you think that trimmed or altered cards that have an "authentic" label aren't going to be passed off as something else, then I think you are mistaken. Think about it -– even if there's a qualifier (my favorite word) indicating the type of alteration, the seller might still claim the card is full-sized (or unaltered) and that SGC probably just made a mistake ("Duh! I don't see anything wrong with it!") >>


Even you, Jay, seem to refute your own argument when YOU write the following:

<< I have no illusion that the unscrupulous dealers out there will submit there cards for 'authentic'. It's counterproductive to the scam they are trying to pull and I gaurentee you that they would free plenty of 'authentic cards so that they could resell them as 'short' or whatever. >>

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

He called me a vintage card neophyte (a word with Middle English origins). The best I could muster was "brother of a dunderhead." On an entymological level, I was soundly beaten.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

Chaucer is Middle English.

Julie

P.S. I just got an A35 Kelly from Terry Knause. It is obviously authentic. I have a mild interest in knowing if it's slightly trimmed. I have more than a mild interest in knowing if a lot of my T206s are trimmed. Do you all own such rare cards that you can't tell whether they're authentic or not? As for saving novice collectors from buying reprints, fake cards, etc., I don't think encapsulating a few cards as "authentic" is going to do much.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lee Behrens

It was very intense verbal sparring, Elliott was there to refree, so when we got out of hand he sent us to our corners. We had to get the dictionary out a few times, I still don't think I understood all the words, what you don't know doesn't hurt you.

We did decide that we now have a "Leon", this happens when every your computer locks up, or causes you problems, He seems to have many of those, so in your honor Leon, there is now "Leonisms". That us all bow to Leon.

I will proudly carry the monicker of "Brother of a Dunder Head". Two words, Mike.

Lee

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Julie –-

That’s not correct.

"Middle English" is a term that refers to language. "Elizabethan" is a word that is applied to an entire time period marked by the reign of Elizabeth I in England. To characterize words as "Elizabethan" would be nonsensical since "Elizabethan" is merely a chronological reference and does not describe any special characteristic of the writing during its age.

The term "Middle English" is a direct reference to language and specifically, word origins or etymologies. Obviously, Shakespeare included a great deal of Middle English words and usages in his plays. The time period he wrote in was "Elizabethan" but the words he used were largely that of "Middle English."

After Middle English comes Modern English and to apply this term (Modern English) to Shakespeare would not be very accurate. Also, Chaucer’s work was characterized by "Central Middle English" usages, not "Early Middle English" and not "Late Middle English." To use his name to frame the entire Middle English language would again not be accurate.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

AQ lot of people call it Elizabethan, though.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Julie --

Just as you are the only one I have spoken to who insists that many N172s are not graded do to their variation in size, you are also the only one I've spoken to who thinks that "Elizabethan" is a reference to language and that Shakespeare wrote his plays in Modern English. I guess that Jay just proved that the other day with his usage of "methinks." He thought it was "Old English", you think it is "Modern English". I wonder how many hands would be raised in a fourth grade English class if the following question was asked, "Boys and girls -- how many here think that William Shakespeare wrote his plays in Modern English?"

What an absolutely fascinating theory!

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

I don't know of too many 4th-graders who read Shakespeare, or have any idea what type of English he used; however, when I was in 4th grade my Grandmother (a school-teacher) bought me a collection of Shakespeare that was translated into Modern English.

But I think a normal 4th-grader's response would be "Please Mrs. Landers - make the strange man go away!"

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

Because one can read a Sghakespeare play without a dictionary, and listern to it without an interpretor, it is considered modern Ebglish. ctually, most people probablty call it "Shakesperarian English," but NEVER Middle English. My complete Chaucer in the original has at least 30 footnotes a page--and these are not minor quibbles over meaning, or to inform you that a word has changed its meaning, but are absolutely necessary glosses to tell you what an unknown word means. Not to mention the difference in pronounciation ("tache" is the way you pronounce "teache.") This is of course not so with Shakespeare.

I checked with my son, who graduated from Berkeley in English in '94, just in case there has been a great change in termionology. He says you're nuts.

Now, there are some problems with "Shakespeare" and "modern." For instance, in several of the plays, Shakespeare refers to the "two hours' traffic of our stage." But when you try to produce a Shakespeare play without cutting it, it comes out more like 4 hours. Did Elizabethans speak more quickly than we do? Did they have lousy watches? Who knows?

Incidentally, Gertrude has no soliloquies in Hamlet. Not one.

Julie

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

I recently bought (won) a small 1887 Kelly N172, PSA 4. It's floating around in a bag! Inside the hard plastic case, of course, but still--not very protective.

What size does a N172 have to be to get a FITTED holder from PSA?

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

the size of a '72 Topps seriously, I am sure the guys will know more but I have not seen a fitted one yet....my 5 in psa holders don't fit.....regards

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Julie –

Anyone can "read" Shakespeare without a dictionary, but to understand him is something completely different. I don't need to confer with a Berkeley graduate to know that! Besides, if he (your son) has an argument on this matter, I'd really like to hear it. Sure, I could tell you that I just checked with a friend who teaches at Harvard or my former Shakespearean Literature professor and they both think you're nuts, but without a valid reason or line of argumentation, that rationale wears a bit thin

Your attempt to advance the argument that the language used by Shakespeare is "modern" and different than that used by Chaucer is misleading. First, Chaucer wrote in a completely different time period. Second, they had completely different styles. Also, I'd like to refer you to the following written by Harvard Professor and noted Shakespearean authority, Harry Levin (The Riverside Shakespeare 1974):

"But, though it is our great good fortune to have inherited the tongue of Shakespeare, we cannot claim that this is the dialect we speak and hear.... In any case, the primary source of confusion for the modern reader is not the rare or archaic term, which can be looked up as readily as the learned allusion, but terms which look familiar and sound strange because their meanings have shifted. Thus, when Shakespeare speaks of 'conceit,' he does not mean vanity, as we might; adhering to etymology more closely than we do, he means a conception or notion, or possibly the imagination itself."

"To understand the difference between Shakespeare's English and ours, we must allow for the process of semantic change, which has been continually eroding or encrusting his original meaning. For example, he uses the old word anon for 'right away,' whereas in our minds it has slowed down to mean 'by and by.'"

"On the other hand, fellow, which has friendly overtones for us, was insulting in Shakespeare's day. Phrases that were metaphors to him have often lost their coloring with us: since we seldom play the game of bowls, we overlook the concrete implications of 'There’s the rub' (an impediment on the green) or 'assays of bias' (a weight on the ball)."

Julie –- to deny the fact that Shakespeare used or borrowed much from the Middle English Language is to completely ignore some of his most famous works. Sure, because of Shakespeare's uniqueness, one could also argue that Shakespeare belonged in an "English class" of his own, but to say that Shakespeare is "Modern English" just isn't correct. Again, I repeat my original contention: "methinks" is a Middle English word and was used by Gertrude in "Hamlet."

Finally, let's not mislead everyone about Gertrude. Gertrude is indeed a character in "Hamlet" (Queen of Denmark and mother to Hamlet). Whether or not she has a "soliloquy" in the play is irrelevant, for she has 73 different speaking opportunities and she DOES utter the following, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." (Act III, Scene ii)

[Archive]

Posted By: benge610

Sorry, I must be on the wrong talk board.

Ben.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Why can't you just BE QUIET!!! All you do is prove what others have told me about you, that you are pompus and arrogant that has to always be right and get in the last word.

Jay- doesn't care about distinctions between old, middle and modern English and often omits the word 'not' when typing.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Jay --

Believe it or not, the etymology of "not" is Middle English.

On the other hand, the first use of "baseball" was in 1815. That would make it "Modern English."