Mike Baker Authenticated

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

I think we would all agree that being able to truly render an opinion on a card, especially if we are giving it a "trophy", it needs to be outside of a holder...that is why graders view cards outside of the card savers they are sent to them in. I would expect there is much that cannot be determined rendering an opinion on a card inside of a sealed holdernot for sale?

Kind of hard to detect the clues to trimming that visualizing the edges can provide (see the Net 54 link on this for example) if you can't see the edges because they're against the slat or gasket. Then again, I think a whole generation of collectors does not understand this.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Kind of hard to detect the clues to trimming that visualizing the edges can provide (see the Net 54 link on this for example) if you can't see the edges because they're against the slat or gasket. Then again, I think a whole generation of collectors does not care about this.

I fixed it for you. Just give them their cards and the assumption is that since it is in a holder it must be good!

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Kind of hard to detect the clues to trimming that visualizing the edges can provide (see the Net 54 link on this for example) if you can't see the edges because they're against the slat or gasket. Then again, I think a whole generation of collectors does not understand this.

Go Mike Go!

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...&postcount=880

So much for trophies!

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Go Mike Go!

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showpo...&postcount=880

So much for trophies!

I didn't watch this video, but in general, I think it's funny that anyone in this hobby finds it even remotely dishonest for someone to resubmit a card for grading when it was previously rejected for being "trimmed", absent any actual evidence that it indeed has been. The irony is that it's always the exact same people who complain about PSA's incompetence that cast these judgements, as if PSA's incompetency could only possibly apply to one particular vector in a hyperspace of all possible ways a grading company could fuck up. I've had cards that I pulled myself straight from packs get rejected for "trimming" and vintage cards that I've had since childhood get rejected for trimming as well. Of course, none of them had actually been trimmed.

I have a Jackie Robinson card that I bought from a guy who pulled it from a pack in 1955 and who kept it in a shoebox ever since. He was an octogenarian gentleman who didn't know anything about grading cards, but he decided to sell his collection so that his kids wouldn't have to do it after he's gone. Someone told him he needed to have his cards graded if he wanted to get fair market value for them, so he sent them off to PSA. The Jackie card got rejected for "trimming". He didn't understand why. He knew the card had been in his possession for the entirety of its existence and that it had certainly never been trimmed. So he sent it in again. Again, it came back "trimmed". He was devastated and furious. He disclosed the full story to me before I bought the card. He even gave me both of the rejected flips. I examined the card closely and just laughed. There was zero evidence of trimming. I bought the card and submitted it for grading. It came back in a 5 holder like it should have the first time.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I didn't watch this video, but in general, I think it's funny that anyone in this hobby finds it even remotely dishonest for someone to resubmit a card for grading when it was previously rejected for being "trimmed", absent any actual evidence that it indeed has been. The irony is that it's always the exact same people who complain about PSA's incompetence that cast these judgements, as if PSA's incompetency could only possibly apply to one particular vector in a hyperspace of all possible ways a grading company could fuck up. I've had cards that I pulled myself straight from packs get rejected for "trimming" and vintage cards that I've had since childhood get rejected for trimming as well. Of course, none of them had actually been trimmed.

I have a Jackie Robinson card that I bought from a guy who pulled it from a pack in 1955 and who kept it in a shoebox ever since. He was an octogenarian gentleman who didn't know anything about grading cards, but he decided to sell his collection so that his kids wouldn't have to do it after he's gone. Someone told him he needed to have his cards graded if he wanted to get fair market value for them, so he sent them off to PSA. The Jackie card got rejected for "trimming". He didn't understand why. He knew the card had been in his possession for the entirety of its existence and that it had certainly never been trimmed. So he sent it in again. Again, it came back "trimmed". He was devastated and furious. He disclosed the full story to me before I bought the card. He even gave me both of the rejected flips. I examined the card closely and just laughed. There was zero evidence of trimming. I bought the card and submitted it for grading. It came back in a 5 holder like it should have the first time.

Was not going to invest the time into the video. I was referring to the screen cap of the text which indicated the card had been given a trophy by MBA. You and I will never agree on the value of an MBA trophy but my post was to illustrate that there is a lot that cannot be assessed once a card is encapsulated. I feel paying for the opinion of an MBA or worse, paying more for a card that has an MBA type of cert, is simply not wise. It is not even duplicitous. It is a far from complete evaluation.

And to your other point, we might agree for the first time which is a statistical impossibility. If you or I were to send in the same card 5 times to PSA there is a very good chance we would end up with at least 3 different results in grading. That someone resubmits a card that was rejected that they in good faith disagree with, I totally support. Nat does not agree with that decision based on his interviews but they get it wrong far too often.

[MattyC]

Long before there were even PWCC eye appeal stickers, cards with exceptional eye appeal for their grades would perform accordingly at auction. All it took were savvy, experienced collectors' eyes to be laid upon the cards, and the deserved fireworks would ensue. I know this because I was involved in many of those auctions. At that time, it's interesting to note that whenever such a card broke out of the then-sacrosanct VCP grids, some guys, I like to call them grade-queens who worship the sticker number, would lose their sh!+, wondering why on earth a 2 just sold like a 4, who were these morons that would bid up a 2 when they could get a 4, or a 6 when they could buy an 8, and so on. Others would get it. Different camps, whatever, the usual conflict and beef that breaks out among card people.

Then along came PWCC with their stickers, hanging lanterns on the sweeter-looking cards (in many cases also doctored cards from their big submitters, as we'd all later learn). Now, because so many people out there are insecure in their own opinion and eye, they start saying, "Well, if PWCC says this card is better than others in its grade or special, now, okay, I want it." So premiums for eye appeal become more commonplace, more mainstream perhaps one could say.

That's all this Baker diamond thing is, same as the PWCC stickers. The reason I spit on it is because it reeks to me of needing affirmation. If one's eye tells them a card is sweet, it's sweet. Then pay accordingly, because it's the specimen you want to enjoy looking at in your collection every day. Not because some random dude slapped some tiny sticker on the slab.

It's like if one got an A on an exam, doesn't the A suffice? Does one need a little puffy sticker from the teacher's assistant next to the A to make one feel better? Or if a guy went 4-4 at the plate, does he need some kind of extra affirmation from the coach or fans or his nana? You went 4-4. You know you did. In the same vein, we know if a card is pretty. We know if it's focused, centered, etc. Our eyes tell us that. So I don't get why we'd ever need a sticker from some random dude to tell us what our own two eyes know is a fact like the sun is in the sky. And then to PAY for that affirmation? Makes zero sense to me. Maybe if I didn't get enough love as a kid I'd go for it, I don't know. What I do know is I'll take my eye for free over paying for Baker's. And I'll bet a card I deem high end will sell for the same with no sticker as the same card with Baker's sticker.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Long before there were even PWCC eye appeal stickers, cards with exceptional eye appeal for their grades would perform accordingly at auction. All it took were savvy, experienced collectors' eyes to be laid upon the cards, and the deserved fireworks would ensue. I know this because I was involved in many of those auctions. At that time, it's interesting to note that whenever such a card broke out of the then-sacrosanct VCP grids, some guys, I like to call them grade-queens who worship the sticker number, would lose their sh!+, wondering why on earth a 2 just sold like a 4, who were these morons that would bid up a 2 when they could get a 4, or a 6 when they could buy an 8, and so on. Others would get it. Different camps, whatever, the usual conflict and beef that breaks out among card people.

Then along came PWCC with their stickers, hanging lanterns on the sweeter-looking cards (in many cases also doctored cards from their big submitters, as we'd all later learn). Now, because so many people out there are insecure in their own opinion and eye, they start saying, "Well, if PWCC says this card is better than others in its grade or special, now, okay, I want it." So premiums for eye appeal become more commonplace, more mainstream perhaps one could say.

That's all this Baker diamond thing is, same as the PWCC stickers. The reason I spit on it is because it reeks to me of needing affirmation. If one's eye tells them a card is sweet, it's sweet. Then pay accordingly, because it's the specimen you want to enjoy looking at in your collection every day. Not because some random dude slapped some tiny sticker on the slab.

It's like if one got an A on an exam, doesn't the A suffice? Does one need a little puffy sticker from the teacher's assistant next to the A to make one feel better? Or if a guy went 4-4 at the plate, does he need some kind of extra affirmation from the coach or fans or his nana? You went 4-4. You know you did. In the same vein, we know if a card is pretty. We know if it's focused, centered, etc. Our eyes tell us that. So I don't get why we'd ever need a sticker from some random dude to tell us what our own two eyes know is a fact like the sun is in the sky. And then to PAY for that affirmation? Makes zero sense to me. Maybe if I didn't get enough love as a kid I'd go for it, I don't know. What I do know is I'll take my eye for free over paying for Baker's. And I'll bet a card I deem high end will sell for the same with no sticker as the same card with Baker's sticker.

Ya, for me it's all about the eye appeal as well. I completely get the sentiment about not needing the Gold Diamond stickers too. I really do. I thought they were stupid at first too. But I happened to buy a card that had the little gold sticker on it, and for whatever reason I just liked it. I'm super OCD. As in remarkably so. When I was a kid, I wouldn't be able to sleep at night unless I got up out of bed and walked over to the light switch and flipped it on/off 3 times before going back to bed. In high school, after basketball practice, I couldn't leave the gym until I swished a 3-pointer, even if it made me late for class. If a card isn't well-centered, I can't stand looking at it. It's almost a physical reaction. It's like fingernails on a chalkboard to me. An off-centered Mint 9 or even 10 card is pure trash to me. I can't change that. But for whatever reason, I really like how these Gold Diamond stickers look, particularly on SGC slabs (the silver stickers, not so much). So my OCD has decided I want more of them.

Again, I fully realize this is crazy. Hence my posts. Though I do find it interesting that the market does appear to place a value on the stickers that the data appears to suggest is in addition to centering alone. I think people interpret them as "this card is undergraded" and likely bid with the hope of cracking it out for a grade bump in mind. And to be fair, they probably succeed at a higher rate than they would with cards that don't have the stickers.

But overall, I'm very much in agreement with you. Buy the card, not the slab. And yes, these stickers are dumb. But what can I say, I like dumb shit sometimes.

[MattyC]

Hey man, if you dig'em, you dig'em, and enjoy. The cards you showed are all great-looking and I'm sure all collectors would agree they are. My friendly advice as a fellow collector would be just save your money and the risk of shipping them and just make your own; you clearly have a good eye so your sticker would be no different than the one that costs you money is all!

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

If you or I were to send in the same card 5 times to PSA there is a very good chance we would end up with at least 3 different results in grading.

Nat does not agree with that decision based on his interviews but they get it wrong far too often.

This is dead on. Back when I would submit, crack, submit, I would often get 2-grade deviations on the same card. 7s to 9s, 8s back as 6s, all over the place. That's all you need to see a few times, to see the grading game for what it is, not take the grade stickers so seriously. As that old saying goes and holds so true: Buy the card, not the holder.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Was not going to invest the time into the video.

For reasons I may never understand, I decided to give the video a listen while I was getting some work done...

This is a classic example of the type of content that drove me nuts over at Blowhard. Here I was thinking from the clickbait/screenshot that this hobby hero blogger had uncovered another major scandal! He buries some "card trimmer" who supposedly submitted a card he knew was trimmed to PSA 4 times, then decided to try BGS and they slabbed it for him. Then he sent it to Mike Baker to get a gold diamond sticker to try to further hide his crimes. Then he is "associated with PWCC" and tries to sell the card through them, but PWCC gets informed that this card is "TRIMMED"!, as does Beckett. Then Beckett supposedly decertifies the card because they are informed of PSA's evidence of it being trimmed [lol]. Then PWCC supposedly removes the card from their sales history because it was either shill bid or they wanted to hide their crime from the "ongoing" FBI investigation.

Of course, however, this is ALL NONSENSE. Here's what ACTUALLY happened...

This guy bought the Kobe Bryant card already in it's BGS 9.5++ holder with the Gold Diamond sticker on it. He thought it would/should cross to a PSA 10, so he tried to send it in as a crossover. PSA rejected it for "evidence of trimming". His dumbass then supposedly tries to send it in AGAIN as a crossover IN THE SAME SLAB WITH THE SAME SERIAL NUMBER to PSA because he's an idiot who doesn't realize that PSA asks for the serial number in the crossover submission form for a reason. They enter that number into their system and log the results. If someone submits that same card again with the same serial number, instead of doing the honest thing by informing the customer that they've already looked at the card and rejected it, they just take your money and the card and then send it right back to you with the same reason for rejection. That card never even makes it to a grader's desk the next time it gets sent in. This card probably hasn't even been trimmed. This "trimmed card" opinion is from ONE GUY (probably one of those near-minimum wage teenage graders) from PSA who looked at a card in a competitor's slab and said, "it's trimmed" despite it having passed both BGS's and Mike Baker's eyes. That "trimmed" tag is then forever associated with that serial number in PSA's database. The owner of the card, now surely furious as he's basically just been ripped off by PSA multiple times, decides to sell the card. He lists it with PWCC, not because of anything whatsoever to do with some trimming scandal of which this card does not apply, but because it's probably the best marketplace to sell a high-end Kobe RC on (despite the lemmings saying otherwise).

Meanwhile, the guy making this video claims that the card's cert was taken down by BGS. He even shows himself logging in to their website and entering the serial number only to have it say "No match found"! "AHA!" he declares. "See, I told you so!". Nevermind the fact that he's looking it up on the BAS lookup site, and not the one for BGS lol. I checked the cert number myself. It's still there. The card is not tainted. He also claims that PWCC purged the sale from their records. Again, not true. I looked that up too, and it's right there on their website. Sold for $120k.

This is entirely a nothing burger. There is zero evidence of anything even remotely shady about this card. It's just a Kobe RC that PSA rejected as a crossover. Happens every day. But these conspiracy theorist lemmings over at Blowhard are just all over this type of nonsense all day long. It's absolutely insane.

The real crime here is that this card is going to keep getting passed around from one person to the next and every single buyer is going to send it in to PSA expecting it to cross over to a PSA 10 because it is a BGS 9.5 "true gem plus plus" with a 10 subgrade for corners and a 10 subgrade for edges, and it has an MBA Gold Diamond sticker on it. But since one random guy at PSA thought it might be trimmed (despite the fact that the card is in a BGS slab with inner sleeve that PSA themselves admits they just can't see through well enough to accurately asses the card), it gets forever tainted in their database. But meanwhile, PSA will just keep taking everyone's money on this card over and over and over (to the tune of $5,000 a pop), handing out the same (and quite possibly bullshit) rejection reason.

Here are screenshots of the record of the sale at PWCC and proof that the cert is still valid at BGS.

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by Snowman

For reasons I may never understand, I decided to give the video a listen while I was getting some work done...

This is a classic example of the type of content that drove me nuts over at Blowhard. Here I was thinking from the clickbait/screenshot that this hobby hero blogger had uncovered another major scandal! He buries some "card trimmer" who supposedly submitted a card he knew was trimmed to PSA 4 times, then decided to try BGS and they slabbed it for him. Then he sent it to Mike Baker to get a gold diamond sticker to try to further hide his crimes. Then he is "associated with PWCC" and tries to sell the card through them, but PWCC gets informed that this card is "TRIMMED"!, as does Beckett. Then Beckett supposedly decertifies the card because they are informed of PSA's evidence of it being trimmed [lol]. Then PWCC supposedly removes the card from their sales history because it was either shill bid or they wanted to hide their crime from the "ongoing" FBI investigation.

Of course, however, this is ALL NONSENSE. Here's what ACTUALLY happened...

This guy bought the Kobe Bryant card already in it's BGS 9.5++ holder with the Gold Diamond sticker on it. He thought it would/should cross to a PSA 10, so he tried to send it in as a crossover. PSA rejected it for "evidence of trimming". His dumbass then supposedly tries to send it in AGAIN as a crossover IN THE SAME SLAB WITH THE SAME SERIAL NUMBER to PSA because he's an idiot who doesn't realize that PSA asks for the serial number in the crossover submission form for a reason. They enter that number into their system and log the results. If someone submits that same card again with the same serial number, instead of doing the honest thing by informing the customer that they've already looked at the card and rejected it, they just take your money and the card and then send it right back to you with the same reason for rejection. That card never even makes it to a grader's desk the next time it gets sent in. This card probably hasn't even been trimmed. This "trimmed card" opinion is from ONE GUY (probably one of those near-minimum wage teenage graders) from PSA who looked at a card in a competitor's slab and said, "it's trimmed" despite it having passed both BGS's and Mike Baker's eyes. That "trimmed" tag is then forever associated with that serial number in PSA's database. The owner of the card, now surely furious as he's basically just been ripped off by PSA multiple times, decides to sell the card. He lists it with PWCC, not because of anything whatsoever to do with some trimming scandal of which this card does not apply, but because it's probably the best marketplace to sell a high-end Kobe RC on (despite the lemmings saying otherwise).

Meanwhile, the guy making this video claims that the card's cert was taken down by BGS. He even shows himself logging in to their website and entering the serial number only to have it say "No match found"! "AHA!" he declares. "See, I told you so!". Nevermind the fact that he's looking it up on the BAS lookup site, and not the one for BGS lol. I checked the cert number myself. It's still there. The card is not tainted. He also claims that PWCC purged the sale from their records. Again, not true. I looked that up too, and it's right there on their website. Sold for $120k.

This is entirely a nothing burger. There is zero evidence of anything even remotely shady about this card. It's just a Kobe RC that PSA rejected as a crossover. Happens every day. But these conspiracy theorist lemmings over at Blowhard are just all over this type of nonsense all day long. It's absolutely insane.

The real crime here is that this card is going to keep getting passed around from one person to the next and every single buyer is going to send it in to PSA expecting it to cross over to a PSA 10 because it is a BGS 9.5 "true gem plus plus" with a 10 subgrade for corners and a 10 subgrade for edges, and it has an MBA Gold Diamond sticker on it. But since one random guy at PSA thought it might be trimmed (despite the fact that the card is in a BGS slab with inner sleeve that PSA themselves admits they just can't see through well enough to accurately asses the card), it gets forever tainted in their database. But meanwhile, PSA will just keep taking everyone's money on this card over and over and over, handing out the same (and quite possibly bullshit) rejection reason.

Here are screenshots of the record of the sale at PWCC and proof that the cert is still valid at BGS.

Damn. Well done. Good write up, good read. Just goes to show, we all gotta buy the card and not put stock in what the stickers say one way or the other.

[Peter_Spaeth]

It certainly sucks for the individual when they reject a good card, but I am guessing those mistakes are infinitesimal compared to the number of bad cards they've graded.

[Dead-Ball-Hitter]

Wow, your many lengthy replies addressing the slightest question of the value of these ill reputed stickers shows a deep insecurity. Now I understand why you are a sticker guy!

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Meanwhile, the guy making this video claims that the card's cert was taken down by BGS. He even shows himself logging in to their website and entering the serial number only to have it say "No match found"! "AHA!" he declares. "See, I told you so!". Nevermind the fact that he's looking it up on the BAS lookup site, and not the one for BGS lol.

This part actually made me laugh. The rest I assumed which is why I was not about to watch the video.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Kind of hard to detect the clues to trimming that visualizing the edges can provide (see the Net 54 link on this for example) if you can't see the edges because they're against the slat or gasket. Then again, I think a whole generation of collectors does not understand this.

According to the lemmings over at Blowhard, the telltale sign of a "trimmed" card is that it has a gap between the card's edges and the bumpers in the slab though.

Conveniently, Lemming's Law is also commutative: "gap = trimmed" and "trimmed = gap".

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Snowman

According to the lemmings over at Blowhard, the telltale sign of a "trimmed" card is that it has a gap between the card's edges and the bumpers in the slab though.

Conveniently, Lemming's Law is also commutative: "gap = trimmed" and "trimmed = gap".

We know that's not even close to all you need to know about a card, especially older ones.

Many modern cards though are die cut and should all be the same size.
What will eventually become a problem with some sets is that they're partly die cut and knife cut on the same card. If I didn't have a stack I bought in packs I'd think most of the cards in any A+G set are trimmed.

I don't know enough about that basketball card, but if that set is die cut and is accurate at 2.5x3.5 for that card any smaller should be EOT.
We'd also have to assume the bumpers in a Beckett case are accurate at that size as well.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by steve B

We know that's not even close to all you need to know about a card, especially older ones.

I'm with you there. I was being facetious.

Originally Posted by steve B

I don't know enough about that basketball card, but if that set is die cut and is accurate at 2.5x3.5 for that card any smaller should be EOT.
We'd also have to assume the bumpers in a Beckett case are accurate at that size as well.

These Topps Chrome cards do have a bit of variance in size from the factory. Not a ton of variance like some of the older Topps cards, but definitely enough that a simple measurement is usually not sufficient for determining EOT.

The bumpers in the Beckett case are just heat pressed into the inner sleeve. They are adjustable based on the size of the card, though perhaps they usually just keep it set at a standard size for most cards? I don't know.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Snowman

These Topps Chrome cards do have a bit of variance in size from the factory. Not a ton of variance like some of the older Topps cards, but definitely enough that a simple measurement is usually not sufficient for determining EOT.

The bumpers in the Beckett case are just heat pressed into the inner sleeve. They are adjustable based on the size of the card, though perhaps they usually just keep it set at a standard size for most cards? I don't know.

Well then the bumpers are out. Which is actually sort of nice in an "I won't have to think about that" way...

I don't think anywhere near enough study has been done on die cut sets. I only noticed the Old Judges because once you get a stack of them there are groups of obviously different edges.

The nice thing is that the die cut mats will always cut the same size, unless they get damaged. If there's only one mat, and that one always cuts the lower left card 1/64th short, then every lower left card will be 1/64 short.

[drcy]

I regularly disagree with Snowman, but there's nothing errant with having a resident board contrarian. Echo chambers and groupthink aren't healthy, so it's good to have counterviewpoints.

[Dead-Ball-Hitter]

Originally Posted by drcy

I regularly disagree with Snowman, but there's nothing errant with having a resident board contrarian. Echo chambers and groupthink aren't healthy, so it's good to have counterviewpoints.

Hey David, that's well put. "In the spirit of fostering amity" (Star trek line for those who recall) I'll say that, even though I disagree with the notion that stickers have any value, I can respect Snowman's opinion. Hey Snow, keep posting my man!