Joseph M Pankiewicz, you are a disgrace to this hobby!

[glchen]

Originally Posted by slidekellyslide

Are there any registry collectors at the top who believe all of their cards are unaltered?

Can't you say this for anyone's collection, however? I mean even for the raw collections of the long time collectors and experts on this board, can they say with 100% confidence that all of the card in their collection that they believe are unaltered are that way? I think that's tough unless you have a very small collection or just have the original cards that you purchased right out of the pack.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by glchen

Can't you say this for anyone's collection, however? I mean even for the raw collections of the long time collectors and experts on this board, can they say with 100% confidence that all of the card in their collection that they believe are unaltered are that way? I think that's tough unless you have a very small collection or just have the original cards that you purchased right out of the pack.

Ok, I'll go out on that limb.

My collection is good sized. I've never really counted, but since I have sports and non-spors, and don't avoid the late 80's-early 90's junk era......probably a bit over 20,000 cards? Oldest 1887, newest this afternoon.

I do have a few altered cards, everything from trimmed/skinned to just written on. And a small number - maybe 5 that I'm not certain of. The rest I'm confident are not altered.

Steve Birmingham

[Pat R]

I don't believe you can say the cards like drysdale and gehrig are the same
cards that have been bumped when the identifying marks are all related
to the printing process.Take a look at these two cards that are not even the
same players, besides the same exact plate scratch marks look at all
the other marks that are the same.

[thehoodedcoder]

you make a good point. i think that its totally possible for 2 cards to have the same markings. i had thought this before.

your cards have different fronts though. there is a smaller percentage of cards with the same front and same markings on the back. what are the percentage of cards that have the same number of marks on them.

then what percentage of them are in higher grade, with a desirable player on the front. what percentage of those cards are owned and sold by the same person in a short period of time?

kevin

[vintagetoppsguy]

The two T206s have printing anomalies within the normal print of the card. The Drysdale, Gehrig, etc all had stray print marks that were the same from card to card. There's a big difference.

Also, there were other factors besides the print marks such as natural flaws within the cardboard that was the same from card to card - something that shouldn't occur. Another factor was also centering that was the same from card to card.

When you look at all the evidence, and the fact that he shilled the cards, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that each card was the same.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

The two T206s have printing anomalies within the normal print of the card. The Drysdale, Gehrig, etc all had stray print marks that were the same from card to card. There's a big difference.

Also, there were other factors besides the print marks such as natural flaws within the cardboard that was the same from card to card - something that shouldn't occur. Another factor was also centering that was the same from card to card.

When you look at all the evidence, and the fact that he shilled the cards, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that each card was the same.

And Joe did not deny they were the same cards unless I missed something, just claimed he did nothing to them.

[D.P.Johnson]

Originally Posted by peter_spaeth

and joe did not deny they were the same cards unless i missed something, just claimed he did nothing to them.

bingo!