The Superiority of SGC

[calvindog]

For what it's worth, PSA graded it and SGC caught the trim.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

For what it's worth, PSA graded it and SGC caught the trim.

It may not be worth much given the CJ Jackson and the Leaf Jackie and others that are coming out of the woodwork. At the end of the day, I don't think anyone is going to look great among the TPGs.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It may not be worth much given the CJ Jackson and the Leaf Jackie and others that are coming out of the woodwork. At the end of the day, I don't think anyone is going to look great among the TPGs.

None of Moser's cards got by GAI.

[Griffins]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

None of Moser's cards got by GAI.

You aren’t looking at his ‘55 Bowman’s

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Griffins

You aren’t looking at his ‘55 Bowman’s

I believe he actually came on here to post after those were mentioned 10 plus years ago.

[glynparson]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

None of Moser's cards got by GAI.

Actually he was a huge submitter to gai. I suggest you research 1955 Bowman’s GAi and moser for one example. Oh I see Anthony beat me to it. Lol.

[swarmee]

Dale, maybe you're confusing a soak in distilled water with a chemical bath with a bleaching agent. One is reasonably well accepted, the other is not. Moser is doing the latter, along with a whole host of other alterations.
As to whether the TPGs should catch them, they all claim to be able to, and that's why they charge up to $5,000 per card to authenticate, detect alterations, and grade cards. The fact that they're either not using the proper techniques to detect alterations or they're unable to detect them at all, they promise that they can.
They should either do their jobs properly or stop lying to their customers.

[irv]

Originally Posted by irv

I agree with Jeff 100%!
Cleaning, in general, is an accepted practice with most collectors so if one can't discern what products (no smell) were used to clean a card then how can a TPG not accept the card as real and give it a number grade?

Imo, comparing this to a trimmed card is not an apple to apple comparison. I believe most would accept a card that has been soaked but fully reject a card that has been trimmed and/or recolored.
Having before and after photos when purchasing is not an option for most collectors so even if a card looks a little faded or doesn't present the best, most collectors would just assume time and the sun got to it over the years.

Personally, and although they are not perfect, my grader of choice if and when the time comes will be SGC, which I have stated many times here.

Originally Posted by swarmee

Dale, maybe you're confusing a soak in distilled water with a chemical bath with a bleaching agent. One is reasonably well accepted, the other is not. Moser is doing the latter, along with a whole host of other alterations.
As to whether the TPGs should catch them, they all claim to be able to, and that's why they charge up to $5,000 per card to authenticate, detect alterations, and grade cards. The fact that they're either not using the proper techniques to detect alterations or they're unable to detect them at all, they promise that they can.
They should either do their jobs properly or stop lying to their customers.

I agree, John, but like I wrote above, if there is no discernible way to detect if it was bleach, peroxide or water, how does a TPG not grade those cards?

I am unsure if the technology exists or not but if the TPG's don't have the technololgy that can detect bleach or peroxide, and the smell test doesn't work, then how can they not grade those cards?

I have never sent a card in for grading nor have I ever soaked a card but I couldn't imagine having my cards sent back as ungradable because someone guessed that I had soaked them in bleach or peroxide.

Edit: Just read Peter's thread here on the SGC Joe Jackson card. Do detectable means exist for detecting bleach or peroxide and if so, is it safe to say they weren't utilized when this card was graded? https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=3297

[steve B]

Originally Posted by irv

I agree, John, but like I wrote above, if there is no discernible way to detect if it was bleach, peroxide or water, how does a TPG not grade those cards?

I am unsure if the technology exists or not but if the TPG's don't have the technololgy that can detect bleach or peroxide, and the smell test doesn't work, then how can they not grade those cards?

I have never sent a card in for grading nor have I ever soaked a card but I couldn't imagine having my cards sent back as ungradable because someone guessed that I had soaked them in bleach or peroxide.

Edit: Just read Peter's thread here on the SGC Joe Jackson card. Do detectable means exist for detecting bleach or peroxide and if so, is it safe to say they weren't utilized when this card was graded? https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...postcount=3297

That gets to be a complex subject. Most light colored cardstock that's wood based was bleached when it was made.
None of the traditional methods to detect bleach that I've heard of would be acceptable.
It *may* be possible to check with a spectrograph, but I haven't read of anyone doing it.

Bleaching is done sometimes in some actual conservation.
https://www.conservation-wiki.com/wiki/Bleaching_(PCC)
See the section on appropriateness, and section 2.6 on testing.

Note, none of that applies to some guy with a tray full of stuff from the grocery store....

[Leon]

Originally Posted by glynparson

Actually he was a huge submitter to gai. I suggest you research 1955 Bowman’s GAi and moser for one example. Oh I see Anthony beat me to it. Lol.

LOL....there are reasons cards are still in GAI holders. It isn't because they are more valuable either.

As far as the other comment about a name with an opinion. It was added and more will be added as they are needed. And if anyone sees anything suspicious concerning any members, a confidential PM or email is always a good thing. Same thing concerning the opinion rule where names are needed. There won't be any member who can say a PM wasn't at least followed up on and usually extremely quickly.
As with any internet site it is caveat emptor. I can say though, anyone who has pm'd me in the past 15+ yrs, has not been scammed doing a trade or sale here. And I can't remember an outright scammer ever getting too far on our BST. Thanks to all members for their vigilance.

.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

None of Moser's cards got by GAI.

Wait until Monday...

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

It may not be worth much given the CJ Jackson and the Leaf Jackie and others that are coming out of the woodwork. At the end of the day, I don't think anyone is going to look great among the TPGs.

I don't believe either of those were trimmed. I think it's a lot tougher for a grader to spot cards which were cleaned than cards which were hacked to pieces, like all the cards that got past PSA and Beckett.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

I don't believe either of those were trimmed. I think it's a lot tougher for a grader to spot cards which were cleaned than cards which were hacked to pieces, like all the cards that got past PSA and Beckett.

Perhaps so as a general matter, and maybe the scans/pics weren't true reflections of the cards, but the color on the Jackson looked quite off and the Jackie was too white, even without the before photos. The Jackson also had a crease taken out, or are we now excusing failure to catch those too?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Perhaps so as a general matter, and maybe the scans/pics weren't true reflections of the cards, but the color on the Jackson looked quite off and the Jackie was too white, even without the before photos. The Jackson also had a crease taken out, or are we now excusing failure to catch those too.

We're not excusing anything. You claimed that SGC was as bad as PSA based on the Leaf Robinson and the CJ Jackson which both got by SGC. Ask any grader and they'll tell you that a card that is bleached is much tougher to spot than a card that is missing a border. Neither of the Robinson or Jackson were trimmed, just cleaned. Much harder to spot.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by calvindog

We're not excusing anything. You claimed that SGC was as bad as PSA based on the Leaf Robinson and the CJ Jackson which both got by SGC. Ask any grader and they'll tell you that a card that is bleached is much tougher to spot than a card that is missing a border. Neither of the Robinson or Jackson were trimmed, just cleaned. Much harder to spot.

I used those as examples of what I thought was likely to be the conclusion at the end of the day when as many bad cards as can be identified from before and afters are on the table. But to your point, aren't we trusting and paying these TPGs to spot the difficult to find alterations as well as the easy ones?

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I used those as examples of what I thought was likely to be the conclusion at the end of the day when as many bad cards as can be identified from before and afters are on the table. But to your point, aren't we trusting and paying these TPGs to spot the difficult to find alterations as well as the easy ones?

Of course. But I think considering the circumstances we should make the best of an imperfect situation. And there really is no test which can discern whether a card is cleaned or not usually. Not surprisingly, therefore, most collectors aren't as offended by a cleaning as they are by a trim job. That PSA routinely can't spot the most obvious trimming and SGC seems to do much better in this area should be appreciated.