T206 Resource, I would appreciate an opinion on this one

[tedzan]

Save your breath....T206Resource's Red HINDU checklist has that phony red HINDU / red Cobb listed as confirmed.

Many of us dinosaurs know that this card was professionally altered by taking an authentic red HINDU back and RE-FRONTING
it with a red Cobb image.

In my opinion....this red Cobb listing in their "infallible" checklists blows any integrity they had.

Dan
ole buddy....it's not an absolute game they play, it's as you said back in Post #3....it's POLITICS !


TED Z

[Rob D.]

Irony, sweet irony.

[chaddurbin]

Originally Posted by Rob D.

Irony, sweet irony.

rob--how long have you been in the hobby, again? thought so...

[Rob D.]

Originally Posted by chaddurbin

rob--how long have you been in the hobby, again? thought so...

32 years. And next week or month, I promise the number won't be 34. Or 36. Or 38.

Want to know how many T206s I've seen in that time? I'll be happy to pull a big, big number out of thin air if that will help establish credibility.

[benchod]

Originally Posted by Rob D.

Irony, sweet irony.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend

[glynparson]

you should see in person to say 100% not trimmed. However you don't always need to see it in person though to be 100% sure it is trimmed. I have found Dan to be correct every time he makes one of these posts. In my opinion of course.

[jmk59]

So many issues here ...

First, I think it is possible to give an opinion based on a scan because every such opinion has an implicit qualifier/asterisk that says "I am only looking at the scan. I don't have the card in hand. If I did, my opinion may be different." To the extent that everyone understands that the opinion is about the card as scanned and not as held in hand, then it is ok to me to give opinions (can you tell I'm about to give an opinion? ). We do it all the time in auctions and ebay and everywhere that we see a scan. Even if it's not something we post, we make the mental calculation as we try to decide to buy or not to buy.


In my opinion, this card AS IT APPEARS IN THE SCAN, looks like a classic example of trimming. It is not a diamond cut by any definition of diamond cut that I know of. The top border is clearly not parallel to the bottom border and has a slant that is dumbfounding in it's starkness. If we were assembling a tutorial on spotting altered cards, this one would be Exhibit A in the examples for spotting trimming. Edges that are slanted or not parallel are the Numero Uno sign of trimming, and this one has it in spades.

In fact, this one is so bad that it occurs to me that maybe it could not possibly have escaped the grader - he (or she) MUST have noticed it. Maybe then they looked for other signs of trimming like how the edges break, bats ears, different discoloration to the edges, etc, and didn't find any. If they didn't find physical evidence of trimming, they may have (reluctantly) concluded it was not trimmed despite the really bad slanted top. This gets us full circle in saying that maybe someone with the card in hand can see evidence that does not appear in the scan.

But even if that were the case, I wish someone (TPG, Goodwin, someone) would at least acknowledge what can plainly be seen instead of pretending it must be perfect because it has an 8.

As an aside, I agree with the others that T206 resource should not be called upon to ring in on this any more than anyone else. They have put themselves out as experts in the T206 set in particular, not in general alteration techniques that apply across all card types. I think they are perfectly correct to decline to comment.

But I don't mind giving an opinion on the scan only - that thing looks really, really trimmed!

J

[FrankWakefield]

I don't perceive that T206 Resource has put themselves out as experts. Seems to me they're compiling some of the information available about the white border cards, and they're putting a bunch of that information on one site on the internet. The site is more of a conduit and compilation, rather than a panel of self anointed experts. Still... they could offer an opinion about the cutting (I still don't think trimming is the right word, unless the culprit stopped in mid trim) of the top border of the card. They won't, they think they're being baited. Maybe not opining was the goal of the 'baitor'.

[terjung]

Wow. I must have missed something.

Dan, I've met you and know you are no fan of 3rd party grading, but this comes off as an attack at a couple of guys who have done some work to try to help figure out the monster. I've never met the guys from T206 resource, but have read some of their posts and haven't construed that they hold themselves out to be the end-all be-all on all things trimmed.

I can see a discussion of front vs. back combinations being relevant, but am not sure I understand why their opinion on trimming / altering is more relevant than anybody else here and I certainly don't see them classifying themselves as professionals in the grading industry.

Dan, I like you and will continue to do so, but I've got to ask, why the issue with these guys? Like I said, I guess I missed something.

FWIW, I do agree that if somebody starts a website on the premise of being a "resource", there is bound to be some feedback - both positive and negative. I'm no tobacco card collector and have no idea who is right about printing orders and sheets, but I've always enjoyed when supported hypotheses are shared and discussed. To me, that is what this hobby and this board should be about. Yeah, we gripe about this and that - many times with just cause. I guess I just don't see the "just cause" in this case. If it were a card that were being sold by them, I could see a potential beef, but calling someone out and labelling them as "experts" on card altering and asking their opinion based on only a scan seems a little far fetched... but again... maybe I'm missing something.

Personally, I'd think someone like Kevin Saucier would be more likely to be called out in this way - specifically because he has held himself out to be a guy who can detect and maybe duplicate alterations / trimming, but even then, I'd expect that someone like that would need to see a card in person in order to render a definitive opinion.

So, I guess that is a long winded way of saying, why the "professional opinion" angle on a scan of what may be a graded, allegedly trimmed card?