Magie cards

[ullmandds]

Totally agree with u Fred!

They are both bad...IMO turning a card into a highly desired card is worse...greater of 2 evils...as both are crookery.

Originally Posted by Fred

Thread morph..... what's worse, shill bidding or altering a card to turn it into a highly desired card ....

We can compile a list of things that a-holes do to ruin this hobby. Those two issues are just items on that list.

If the article is accurate and the person named in the article is guilty of the allegation then I'd call him out and call him what he is - a phucing dirt bag piece of $hit that has no place in this hobby. I hope he goes to jail. I hope his cell mate is named Bubba and that Bubba doesn't like to be lonely. I hope he learns a lesson, though I doubt it. And if you're his friend please don't try to come up with a defense or excuse for what he did. Again, this is only if the allegations are true and can be substantiated.

In this case, it should be a wake up call to everyone that TPG's are not the final line of defense for authenticating cards. If PSA passes two fakes (of the magnitude of these cards) as graded authentic examples, then what good is PSA? Is it time to pull the Wagner "card" (excuse the pun). It still makes me sick to think about the PSA graded collection of "Hall" T206 cards that had many overgraded examples and in the opinion of many, numerically graded trimmed cards.

This crap really begins to push me to the point where I just want to say screw this hobby, unfortunately this hobby is a part of me and I keep holding on to hope that people won't trash it to the point where it's just not fun anymore.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Peter and Glyn,

I respectfully disagree with your stance. To me, shilling is a bigger issue than card doctoring, but to you card doctoring is a bigger issue than shilling. That doesn't mean that one of us is right and the other wrong. There are other factors you're not considering.

I can honestly say, I don't think I've ever been a victim of card doctoring and nor will I ever be. I don't mean to toot my own horn, but I'm better at detecting alterations than they are at creating them. I'll put my card doctoring detecting skills against the best card doctors out there.

In other words, the issue doesn't affect me because I can spot the doctoring. Shilling on the other hand, I have no way to control (other than trying to be careful about who I choose to do business with) and that does concern me.

Likewise, somebody with an unlimited budget may not care about shilling because if they pay an extra few hundred for a card, they don't care as long as they got what they wanted. As long as they didn't pay more than their max bid, they don't care if they were shilled or not. That's evident from some of the shilling discussions that I've seen on the board.

My whole point is, what's important to some may not be important to others. What affects you, might not affect me and vice versa.

[ullmandds]

Not sure if you were referring to me...or the other Peter...BUT...a board member has opened my eyes to how easy it is to remove colors/print from topps cards from the 50's-modern to the point I don't think I would ever touch a "rare" variation...graded or not.

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Peter and Glyn,

I respectfully disagree with your stance. To me, shilling is a bigger issue than card doctoring, but to you card doctoring is a bigger issue than shilling. That doesn't mean that one of us is right and the other wrong. There are other factors you're not considering.

I can honestly say, I don't think I've ever been a victim of card doctoring and nor will I ever be. I don't mean to toot my own horn, but I'm better at detecting alterations than they are at creating them. I'll put my card doctoring detecting skills against the best card doctors out there.

In other words, the issue doesn't affect me because I can spot the doctoring. Shilling on the other hand, I have no way to control (other than trying to be careful about who I choose to do business with) and that does concern me.

Likewise, somebody with an unlimited budget may not care about shilling because if they pay an extra few hundred for a card, they don't care as long as they got what they wanted. As long as they didn't pay more than their max bid, they don't care if they were shilled or not. That's evident from some of the shilling discussions that I've seen on the board.

My whole point is, what's important to some may not be important to others. What affects you, might not affect me and vice versa.

[Runscott]

To me the most relevant point here is that the 'EE' letters were modified AND moved on the surface of the card, so effectively that the alteration could not be detected under whatever magnification PSA uses.

This is huge and scary.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Runscott

To me the most relevant point here is that the 'EE' letters were modified AND moved on the surface of the card, so effectively that the alteration could not be detected under whatever magnification PSA uses.

This is huge and scary.

their magnification must suck because myself and others could see somethings wasn't right with scans.

[gregr2]

Originally Posted by Runscott

To me the most relevant point here is that the 'EE' letters were modified AND moved on the surface of the card, so effectively that the alteration could not be detected under whatever magnification PSA uses.

This is huge and scary.

This ^^^^

Frightening to think that card doctoring has become this advanced. Scary to think about how good they might become in 10-20 years.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Runscott

To me the most relevant point here is that the 'EE' letters were modified AND moved on the surface of the card, so effectively that the alteration could not be detected under whatever magnification PSA uses.

This is huge and scary.

If PSA misses paperloss on a PSA 6 without magnification, how can they determine an alteration with magnification?

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

If PSA misses paperloss on a PSA 6 without magnification, how can they determine an alteration with magnification?

David, I always assumed they look at cards under magnification - especially prime alteration suspects like this Magie, but I assumed they would magnify any card of 'value'. When David and I looked at Pete's 'missing name' T206, the loupe was imperative. I feel certain we would have noticed 'EE' tampering, which is why I think it's a big deal if PSA checked this card out the way we do, and couldn't see any tampering. Not knocking PSA - I'm assuming David (Cycleback) and I wouldn't have spotted the problem either.

Anyone, am I wrong about this?

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Runscott

David, I always assumed they look at cards under magnification - especially prime alteration suspects like this Magie, but I assumed they would magnify any card of 'value'. When David and I looked at Pete's 'missing name' T206, the loupe was imperative. I feel certain we would have noticed 'EE' tampering, which is why I think it's a big deal if PSA checked this card out the way we do, and couldn't see any tampering. Not knocking PSA - I'm assuming David (Cycleback) and I wouldn't have spotted the problem either.

Anyone, am I wrong about this?

scott...you guys would have undoubtedly detected the alteration.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

Not sure if you were referring to me...or the other Peter...BUT...a board member has opened my eyes to how easy it is to remove colors/print from topps cards from the 50's-modern to the point I don't think I would ever touch a "rare" variation...graded or not.

Hey, Pete. I was actually referring to the other Peter. I think I know the thread you're talking about where the board member was able to get the yellow color to fade to white. However, if you look closely at this scans, you can still see traces of yellow. He may have been able to remove most of it, but not all of it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Peter and Glyn,

I can honestly say, I don't think I've ever been a victim of card doctoring and nor will I ever be. I don't mean to toot my own horn, but I'm better at detecting alterations than they are at creating them. I'll put my card doctoring detecting skills against the best card doctors out there.

And you can do this on a slabbed card where you can't see the edges? Well you're a better man than I then.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

And you can do this on a slabbed card where you can't see the edges? Well you're a better man than I then.

Peter, that's not a fair question. The card doctors are not altering edges through a slab, how can I detect it through a slab? I can't detect it though a locked box either, so that statement is kind of ridiculous. I have to be able to see it the entire card.

The edges are about the only thing that you can't see through a slab though - everything else you can. On the cards in question, there is no doubt in my mind that if I had the cards in hand (slabbed or not) I could detect the alteration.

As far as edges go, even though you can't see them completely through the slab, you can still get a pretty good look. So, if I were buying a slabbed card and I thought there may be a problem with one of the edges, but couldn't tell for sure since it's in the slab, then I would pass.

[Peter_Spaeth]

David you are proving my point. A high percentage of cards on the market are slabbed, and thus no matter how good you might be at detecting alterations, and I will just take you at your word there, you and everyone else are at a huge disadvantage once the card is slabbed.

[Rollingstone206]

...

[drcy]

I would use a combination of magnification (Scott and I were looking at 200x power, by the way), gloss (including in comparison to other T206s), black light, infrared and provenance.

Duly note that it was provenance (past sales) that identified these cards. Card collectors often dismiss provenance, but if you can document that a Magie has been around in that state for twenty years, the sage collector would pay a premium. On the other hand, a forger can't show where he obtained the cards-- because he made it.

As board member Jim Stinson once said about another form of collectible, “Authentic autographs have a history or source … forgeries do not. They just ‘appear’.”

Obviously, provenance isn't fool proof and has obvious limitations, including because rare cards really can be found in shoe box collections and in attics and inherited and because for every forged JFK signed baseball is a made up story where it came from, but it is something collectors should keep in mind. And I included it in my list as a supplement to, not a replacement of physically examining the card.

P.s., forgeries, alterations and shilling are all bad. Why is there this debate? As my dad would say "The answer isn't either/or. It's a both/and." Or if I asked "Where would you rather live, Siberia or the Sahara Desert?," he'd say "That's easy. Neither."