NY Times covers the scandal

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Glenn—Ken’s collection is more condition rarities than really rare cards. He has the trimmed Wagner, a PSA 10 ‘52 Topps Mantle, and other high grade cards such as the M101-5 Thorpe, a nice, albeit blank back, M101 Ruth, etc. None of the rarest cards in the hobby are in his collection.

I harsh assessment of what by almost any standard is at worst one of the top 2 or 3 collections in the world, at least as far as I'm aware. The article is actually referring to what are generally accepted as the top 25 cards in the hobby in terms of value, significance, and popularity. Keep in mind this article was written by a journalist who obviously doesn't collect. A few details are bound to be incorrect.

[RedsFan1941]

congratulations to peter on joining the 1 percent

[oldjudge]

Jesse, I never said his cards are not valuable; I just said that they are not rare.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Jesse, I never said his cards are not valuable; I just said that they are not rare.

I never said you did. Rare is a relative term but some of his cards are what most would consider rare.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Rare is a relative term but some of his cards are what most would consider rare.

I think rarity is an absolute term in this context and just the inverse of population, so if there are 70 T206 Wagners that makes the card more rare than one of his cards with 100 copies but less rare than one of his cards with 10 copies, doesn't it?

[jhs5120]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I think rarity is an absolute term in this context and just the inverse of population, so if there are 70 T206 Wagners that makes the card more rare than one of his cards with 100 copies but less rare than one of his cards with 10 copies, doesn't it?

I mean, I don’t believe there are many Wagners floating around in that condition. Nor any other of his cards for that matter. He has some of most difficult to obtain cards in existence.

[ruth_rookie]

Originally Posted by jhs5120

I mean, I don’t believe there are many Wagners floating around in that condition. Nor any other of his cards for that matter. He has some of most difficult to obtain cards in existence.

Especially in high grade. His PSA 9 CJ Shoeless Joe is absolutely sick.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I think rarity is an absolute term in this context and just the inverse of population, so if there are 70 T206 Wagners that makes the card more rare than one of his cards with 100 copies but less rare than one of his cards with 10 copies, doesn't it?

Doesn't your example show rare to be a relative term? 1 card is considered rare relative to another, yet common when compared to a 3rd card rarer than them both.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

Doesn't your example show rare to be a relative term? 1 card is considered rare relative to another, yet common when compared to a 3rd card rarer than them both.

Yes, in the same sense that tall is a relative term, but I wouldn't claim to be the tallest person in the world when others are objectively taller than I.

Maybe we're in agreement here. I guess my point is just that rarest is not a relative term.

[aaroncc]

Originally Posted by pokerplyr80

I harsh assessment of what by almost any standard is at worst one of the top 2 or 3 collections in the world, at least as far as I'm aware. The article is actually referring to what are generally accepted as the top 25 cards in the hobby in terms of value, significance, and popularity. Keep in mind this article was written by a journalist who obviously doesn't collect. A few details are bound to be incorrect.

Jay stated condition rarities. Not too hard to comprehend.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by aaroncc

Jay stated condition rarities. Not too hard to comprehend.

I understand what Jay wrote. It's your comprehension of my statement that needs improvement.

[MULLINS5]

If Moser was looking for just bumps the certs would be the same....

I bet the feds can pull some of his fingerprints off them.

[oldjudge]

Patrick-I don't think that is so. His best chance for a bump, even if he did nothing to the card, would be to break it out and resubmit it. That would generate a new certificate number.

[MULLINS5]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Patrick-I don't think that is so. His best chance for a bump, even if he did nothing to the card, would be to break it out and resubmit it. That would generate a new certificate number.

Ah, gotcha. Wasn't considering that. I was thinking, if he submitted as reviews, and they were bumped, the certs would remain the same.