Every slabbed card has a story, don't it?

[glynparson]

Originally Posted by campyfan39

Once grading got involved in was inevitable.
We will see lots of people able to get out major creases, ink etc. and nobody ever know. I don't necessarily have a problem with it. That's probably because I don't have cards graded.

If you think this wasn’t going on long.before grading became the norm you are a fool. It existed before PSA was a company by many many years and was a big reason PSA was able to gain some traction. Yes I get the Wagner was trimmed. That card should never have been graded but it was and that was wrong but at the same time from a business perspective it wasn’t and would have been slabbed at that time by any company that existed. Right or wrong. But thinking card doctoring is somehow a product of card grading is truly asinine thinking. As for this card in the og post if it is just water I have no issue with soaking if it’s chemicals it’s wrong but people will do it anyways.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by glynparson

If you think this wasn’t going on long.before grading became the norm you are a fool. It existed before PSA was a company by many many years and was a big reason PSA was able to gain some traction. Yes I get the Wagner was trimmed. That card should never have been graded but it was and that was wrong but at the same time from a business perspective it wasn’t and would have been slabbed at that time by any company that existed. Right or wrong. But thinking card doctoring is somehow a product of card grading is truly asinine thinking. As for this card in the og post if it is just water I have no issue with soaking if it’s chemicals it’s wrong but people will do it anyways.

Trying to deflect from the simple and obvious fact that getting cards into higher grade slabs to make $$$ is the primary driver of card alterations is asinine.

Nobody believes 0 cards were altered before PSA. The grading game is quite obviously the driver for the situation being discussed and which presently exists in the hobby.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by G1911

Trying to deflect from the simple and obvious fact that getting cards into higher grade slabs to make $$$ is the primary driver of card alterations is asinine.

Even if making money is the primary motivation for cleaning cards to some people, who cares? (it's certainly not for me, as I even clean $1 commons if it's a card I just want to look nicer for my set - and I promise you, there's no money in that). My motivation for cleaning my cards is the same motivation for me only wanting centered cards: I have OCD.

But even for those who earn money by cleaning cards, who cares? People earn money by cleaning all sorts of things. It's not fraud just because YOU (or whoever) don't like it.

The only reason people are capable of making stupid money by improving a card's condition is because there are idiots out there that will pay stupid money for it. Don't be that stupid buyer if you don't like how the game is played. But this is how it's played whether you like it or not.

My favorite condition for a card is a 4 or a 5. I don't play the stupid prices game. And I can clean my cards myself if I don't like how they look. I'm not paying someone else to turn a 2 into a 4 for me.

[4815162342]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Even if making money is the primary motivation for cleaning cards to some people, who cares? (it's certainly not for me, as I even clean $1 commons if it's a card I just want to look nicer for my set - and I promise you, there's no money in that). My motivation for cleaning my cards is the same motivation for me only wanting centered cards: I have OCD.

But even for those who earn money by cleaning cards, who cares? People earn money by cleaning all sorts of things. It's not fraud just because YOU (or whoever) don't like it.

The only reason people are capable of making stupid money by improving a card's condition is because there are idiots out there that will pay stupid money for it. Don't be that stupid buyer if you don't like how the game is played. But this is how it's played whether you like it or not.

My favorite condition for a card is a 4 or a 5. I don't play the stupid prices game. And I can clean my cards myself if I don't like how they look. I'm not paying someone else to turn a 2 into a 4 for me.

You have clearly expressed your opinion on cleaning cards. What about removing dents and creases? In one video on that guy’s channel, he “fixed” a Jordan rookie, and it went from a PSA 4 to a PSA 7.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Snowman

My favorite condition for a card is a 4 or a 5. I don't play the stupid prices game.

Hold the phone!!

What about all your talk about paying 5x comps for perfectly centered cards? Doesn’t that count as playing the stupid prices game?

Or are the prices you pay somehow less stupid because 5x comps for a 5 grade is still relatively inexpensive?

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by raulus

Hold the phone!!

What about all your talk about paying 5x comps for perfectly centered cards? Doesn’t that count as playing the stupid prices game?

Or are the prices you pay somehow less stupid because 5x comps for a 5 grade is still relatively inexpensive?

4's and 5's can be perfectly centered. Most are not. I would guess it depends on the card which ones go for "stupid" premiums in midgrade because they are truly perfectly centered.

[campyfan39]

The thread isn't about snowman but he has already addressed that. He has OCD.
I also have been diagnosed with OCD and will pay more for a card that is centered because it bothers me so much to see it off-centered.

Originally Posted by raulus

Hold the phone!!

What about all your talk about paying 5x comps for perfectly centered cards? Doesn’t that count as playing the stupid prices game?

Or are the prices you pay somehow less stupid because 5x comps for a 5 grade is still relatively inexpensive?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by campyfan39

The thread isn't about snowman but he has already addressed that. He has OCD.
I also have been diagnosed with OCD and will pay more for a card that is centered because it bothers me so much to see it off-centered.

Did you have this problem the entire time you have been collecting? I ask because centering wasn't the big deal it is now before the huge centering pump and dump from a few years ago. I am amazed at how long the centering craze has lasted this time.

[campyfan39]

Ben, yes. I have struggled with this along with a few other medical issues most of my life. Even seeing a picture hanging on the wall that is not straight will bug me to the point of getting up and straightening it.
I am not familiar with this "pump and dump" you are referring to but it peaks my interest. Any link or info in a DM would be appreciated

Originally Posted by bnorth

Did you have this problem the entire time you have been collecting? I ask because centering wasn't the big deal it is now before the huge centering pump and dump from a few years ago. I am amazed at how long the centering craze has lasted this time.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Did you have this problem the entire time you have been collecting? I ask because centering wasn't the big deal it is now before the huge centering pump and dump from a few years ago. I am amazed at how long the centering craze has lasted this time.

This is of course utter nonsense. Centering has always been in high demand ever since the first cards were printed. As a kid growing up, trading cards with my friends, centering was pretty much the only thing any of us ever looked at (with the exception of obvious major flaws like creases and completely ruined corners). But the only thing that mattered as long as the card was otherwise EXMT or better was the centering. A centered NM card was worth just as much as a centered "Gem Mint" card is today. Nobody would have paid a penny more for it back then. And a centered NM card was worth significantly more than even a 55/45 "Gem Mint" card would have been. This was true of every single collector I knew, and I knew a lot.

I have no idea what you're talking about when you say there was a "huge centering pump and dump a few years ago", and neither do you. The "centering craze" is not some fad like WNBA cards or Wresling cards that kids are trying to pump. Centered vintage cards always have been and always will be the ocean front property of this hobby whether you like it or not.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Snowman

Even if making money is the primary motivation for cleaning cards to some people, who cares? (it's certainly not for me, as I even clean $1 commons if it's a card I just want to look nicer for my set - and I promise you, there's no money in that). My motivation for cleaning my cards is the same motivation for me only wanting centered cards: I have OCD.

But even for those who earn money by cleaning cards, who cares? People earn money by cleaning all sorts of things. It's not fraud just because YOU (or whoever) don't like it.

We all know damn well why the current situation exists. I get that you love card doctoring and fraud. Here, you're about to say the same thing I did.

Originally Posted by Snowman

The only reason people are capable of making stupid money by improving a card's condition is because there are idiots out there that will pay stupid money for it. Don't be that stupid buyer if you don't like how the game is played. But this is how it's played whether you like it or not.

See? This is a rephrasing of what I said.

Originally Posted by Snowman

My favorite condition for a card is a 4 or a 5. I don't play the stupid prices game. And I can clean my cards myself if I don't like how they look. I'm not paying someone else to turn a 2 into a 4 for me.

You have repeatedly and frequently bragged on these boards about paying huge multiples of comps. Don't play the stupid prices game? This is about the only thing you post about besides defending fraud and card alteration. You just lie and make things up to serve your purpose at the moment, with no regard for contradicting your last post.

[G1911]

As for the Wagner, it seems deductively very very unlikely it was cut from a 'sheet' as in a full sheet or anything close to a full sheet.

If it was, where are the others?

[jggames]

Originally Posted by G1911

As for the Wagner, it seems deductively very very unlikely it was cut from a 'sheet' as in a full sheet or anything close to a full sheet.

If it was, where are the others?

According to Mastro there was a whole pile of others.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by jggames

According to Mastro there was a whole pile of others.

Mastro did not claim there was a whole pile of other Wagners. There should be several Wagners if it was an uncut sheet.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

As for the Wagner, it seems deductively very very unlikely it was cut from a 'sheet' as in a full sheet or anything close to a full sheet.

If it was, where are the others?

The Plank sold at the same time is said, I think, to be from the same sheet. Have to refresh my memory though.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

As for the Wagner, it seems deductively very very unlikely it was cut from a 'sheet' as in a full sheet or anything close to a full sheet.

If it was, where are the others?

I thought part of the thinking was no pack issued Piedmont backs have been found. Could it have been a panel, i don't know, but the point is that it was not originally a factory issued single.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I thought part of the thinking was no pack issued Piedmont backs have been found. Could it have been a panel, i don't know, but the point is that it was not originally a factory issued single.

I have no idea what the origin is. We've had members claim to have evidence of the origin but then stop posting once they are asked for it. There's the rumor photographs of the pre-trimmed state that nobody has ever shown. We have different versions, sometimes conflicting, told at different times from some of the people involved.

It seems very unlikely that there was an uncut sheet found, or a nearly uncut sheet. The single subject presentation of it and the Plank make this very, very unlikely - what we have does not match a sheet. Maybe it was strips. Maybe there were some oversized scraps. Maybe the cards are the product of the conspiracy theory of a 1950's perfect reprint ring that has been endorsed here. Maybe Santa made them in his shop.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by G1911

I get that you love card doctoring and fraud.

With due respect to what Travis may have said before or elsewhere nonwithstanding, this thread started out being about the Kurt's Card Care products. That is not doctoring or fraud in the state it's been presented, at least not yet. Folks may think it is, but I would challenge them to show me out of a huge pile of cards which ones specifically had doctoring perpetrated upon them or fraud then later employed in their sale if it was only Kurt's stuff that had been used on them.

Not saying it can't happen. i just haven't seen how it has happened yet with this particular stuff and the cards the products have been used on.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

With due respect to what Travis may have said before or elsewhere nonwithstanding, this thread started out being about the Kurt's Card Care products. That is not doctoring or fraud in the state it's been presented, at least not yet. Folks may think it is, but I would challenge them to show me out of a huge pile of cards which ones specifically had doctoring perpetrated upon them or fraud then later employed in their sale if it was only Kurt's stuff that had been used on them.

Not saying it can't happen. i just haven't seen how it has happened yet with this particular stuff and the cards the products have been used on.

See my first two posts in this thread. Nowhere have I had any real issue with the exact case in the OP. Kurt’s does way more than soaking, and is well known for removing creases, dings, etc. that is clearly alteration, except in the eyes of those who want to profit off of it.

The history here is obvious and we all know it.

[campyfan39]

Let’s please keep it civil so we can keep this thread alive
I have t seen anyone advocating for fraud and on this thread except for the post about what PSA did being good for business re: Wagner.

Do you believe if only using water and no other chemicals but pushing down on a corner is altering and is fraud? We all have pushed down a finger corner with our fingers or a book or to try to make it look better. I did that at 8 years old. Honest question. Is using panty hose to get wax off the back of a card an alteration?

Originally Posted by G1911

See my first two posts in this thread. Nowhere have I had any real issue with the exact case in the OP. Kurt’s does way more than soaking, and is well known for removing creases, dings, etc. that is clearly alteration, except in the eyes of those who want to profit off of it.

The history here is obvious and we all know it.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by G1911

Kurt’s does way more than soaking, and is well known for removing creases, dings, etc. that is clearly alteration, except in the eyes of those who want to profit off of it.

All fine and well, "that's alteration", except that you would not be able to prove it on a card 10 minutes later. Until you can, this discussion is entirely academic in the real world where people continue to add cards to their collections - oblivious now by what we have just said as to what may or may not have happened to them in the past to affect our perception of how desirable they should be considered.

[gunboat82]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

With due respect to what Travis may have said before or elsewhere nonwithstanding, this thread started out being about the Kurt's Card Care products. That is not doctoring or fraud in the state it's been presented, at least not yet. Folks may think it is, but I would challenge them to show me out of a huge pile of cards which ones specifically had doctoring perpetrated upon them or fraud then later employed in their sale if it was only Kurt's stuff that had been used on them.

Not saying it can't happen. i just haven't seen how it has happened yet with this particular stuff and the cards the products have been used on.

I think part of the disconnect is that you seem to take for granted that Kurt's Card Care products are no different from water, or moist air, or any other natural substance. Others are not willing to take that on good faith without knowing what's in the product.

Spray distilled water on my card - maybe I don't care. Alcohol - eh, maybe I'm not so sure. Acetone or bleach - OK, please drop the bottle and step away from the card.

Focusing on whether the card appears doctored when Kurt is done with working his magic is beside the point. Undetected alterations are still alterations, so the eyeball test isn't dispositive. All you'd really prove is that he's good at doctoring -- not that he didn't do it.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by gunboat82

Undetected alterations are still alterations, so the eyeball test isn't dispositive. All you'd really prove is that he's good at doctoring -- not that he didn't do it.

If undetected alterations are still alterations, or cards that are literally physically unchanged are capable of still having been "doctored", then prove to me that every vintage card in a numbered slab anywhere isn't somehow altered? Or taking it a step further - that every raw card you've ever had in your possession in your collection since you originally pulled it from a pack is not altered? Did you have surveillance cameras on every card every minute to see what did or did not happen to them while you were not physically present? Absurdity.

This whole thing seems to be much more a slippery slope about people being po'd at the INTENT of messing with cards than it is what was actually done in the final analysis to the physical card.

Just based on the "act" of someone doing something which may or may not be illicit - then what is the point of all of this empty discussion? Alteration has to be provable on a card later, or it isn't alteration, by any practical or realistic judgment. Period. If Kurt's alteration cannot be detected later, anymore than 9 year-old Billy immediately wiping a booger off of a card in 1957 can be detected in 2024, then neither should be realistically considered "altering" cards. The cards as ephemera / artifacts are not logged upon some blockchain of history where you can go back and see what was or was not done to them over the course of their existence. They are not conscious beings who can say "Hey, a dealer pressed my left corner back down for a little bit too long at a show in 1982, maybe you should tell PSA I'm altered!"

To me this starts to cross a strange boundary where realism / sanity in the judgment of "what is" is no longer a factor. And that is where I cannot continue to follow the script.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by gunboat82

Undetected alterations are still alterations, so the eyeball test isn't dispositive.

Respectfully, I don't think you realize how ridiculous this sounds. If you pour a beer into a glass, and then later wash that glass, you have not altered the glass. It's still the same glass. In order for a card to be altered, you have to actually alter the card itself, not just remove something from it. You can't just call it "altered" because you dislike the practice.

[perezfan]

For those who’ve been following this for a while… Brent Huigens’ “tenets” now prevail. He never should’ve been an FBI target… he was a hobby trailblazer!

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by glynparson

If you think this wasn’t going on long.before grading became the norm you are a fool. It existed before PSA was a company by many many years and was a big reason PSA was able to gain some traction. Yes I get the Wagner was trimmed. That card should never have been graded but it was and that was wrong but at the same time from a business perspective it wasn’t and would have been slabbed at that time by any company that existed. Right or wrong. But thinking card doctoring is somehow a product of card grading is truly asinine thinking. As for this card in the og post if it is just water I have no issue with soaking if it’s chemicals it’s wrong but people will do it anyways.

This idea that water is OK but "chemicals" aren't doesn't much make sense to me. People like to joke that water is a chemical (dihydrogen monoxide), but it's not just a joke or really even semantics. Water is indeed a chemical, so I don't know what you're talking about when you say that chemicals shouldn't be used but water is OK. It seems to me that the more relevant question is whether or not whatever is used on a card causes damage and/or leaves behind some sort of residue on the card. Water does not, so it's OK to use. I don't know what else is in Kurt's Card spray, but whatever it is clearly isn't damaging cards and doesn't leave behind a residue because thousands of cards are being sent to the TPGs every day from submitters who use it (literally thousands) and none of them are being rejected because there's nothing on it to reject. And this isn't just because people are slipping them past some noobie graders and getting lucky. We're talking about the best graders at every TPG grading ultra high-end cards. Guys like Reza and Scott Hileman. These guys know what they're doing. They're the best of the best. The most experienced graders we have. These cards aren't "sneaking by them" because they're incompetent. They're being given numeric grades because the cards have not been altered. They're being graded because they deserve numeric grades. Cleaning a card correctly does not alter it any more than cleaning your car alters it. There's nothing there to detect. Unlike fingerprint oils and decades of grime, which very much do alter the card. It always cracks me up whenever I see a massive red wine or coffee stain on a card with a numeric grade, as if that card stock hasn't been altered. Those cards will degrade much quicker than other cards in the same grade without stains, yet nobody complains about that?

At the end of the day, as long as you're not adding to or taking away from the card itself, then you can't say it was altered. Not the actual card itself. Someone got gunk or grime on the card and someone else safely removed it. The card behind that gunk and grime was left fully intact and undisturbed. This is an absolute nothing burger.

Nobody cares except for some small vocal minority on message boards and a social media. This isn't a battle worth fighting. You can't win it. Just accept it or move on to another hobby (where cleaning of collectibles in that hobby will surely also be widely accepted).

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Snowman

This idea that water is OK but "chemicals" aren't doesn't much make sense to me. People like to joke that water is a chemical (dihydrogen monoxide), but it's not just a joke or really even semantics. Water is indeed a chemical, so I don't know what you're talking about when you say that chemicals shouldn't be used but water is OK. It seems to me that the more relevant question is whether or not whatever is used on a card causes damage and/or leaves behind some sort of residue on the card. Water does not, so it's OK to use. I don't know what else is in Kurt's Card spray, but whatever it is clearly isn't damaging cards and doesn't leave behind a residue because thousands of cards are being sent to the TPGs every day from submitters who use it (literally thousands) and none of them are being rejected because there's nothing on it to reject. And this isn't just because people are slipping them past some noobie graders and getting lucky. We're talking about the best graders at every TPG grading ultra high-end cards. Guys like Reza and Scott Hileman. These guys know what they're doing. They're the best of the best. The most experienced graders we have. These cards aren't "sneaking by them" because they're incompetent. They're being given numeric grades because the cards have not been altered. They're being graded because they deserve numeric grades. Cleaning a card correctly does not alter it any more than cleaning your car alters it. There's nothing there to detect. Unlike fingerprint oils and decades of grime, which very much do alter the card. It always cracks me up whenever I see a massive red wine or coffee stain on a card with a numeric grade, as if that card stock hasn't been altered. Those cards will degrade much quicker than other cards in the same grade without stains, yet nobody complains about that?

At the end of the day, as long as you're not adding to or taking away from the card itself, then you can't say it was altered. Not the actual card itself. Someone got gunk or grime on the card and someone else safely removed it. The card behind that gunk and grime was left fully intact and undisturbed. This is an absolute nothing burger.

Nobody cares except for some small vocal minority on message boards and a social media. This isn't a battle worth fighting. You can't win it. Just accept it or move on to another hobby (where cleaning of collectibles in that hobby will surely also be widely accepted).

Well stated and reasoned.

[campyfan39]

Sorry if I struck a nerve. I am neither a "fool" nor an "asinine" thinker. I am also not new to the hobby as I have been going to shows since the mid 80's. I am extremely close with many dealers including hobby legend Uncle Dick DeCourcey who treats me like a nephew. I also interviewed Kit Young and Dr. Beckett and others for the book I wrote about a decade ago.

I realize things went on before grading. It was mainly trimming, pressing corners and adding color. One of Kurt's videos is fascinating as he removed red ink, a true alteration, from a 1953 Mantle (my favorite set). So grading has limited some of those alterations which is the grading companies singular positive contribution to the hobby IMHO. Yet they still grade cards that are trimmed as has been pointed out on this board many times.

I do not believe cleaning cards and soaking was as wide spread as it is now. With social media and videos like Kurt's and forums like this people are learning about it and seeing examples of how it works. I for one have not ever used one of Kurts "products" and I have yet to get up the nerve to soak a single card (though I may try a base card soon for fun).

What I find truly striking about your post is that you recognize the Wagner was trimmed and assert it "should not have been graded but it was and that was wrong." Then you make an incredible statement and say "but at the same time from a business perspective it wasn’t and would have been slabbed at that time by any company that existed. Right or wrong".

So even though a card had been clearly altered and at least one of the graders has admitted (in the book and the 30 for 30) that he knew it, that was ok from a business perspective? So it is horrible to use substances to clean cards or improve creases but its fine to grade a card that should have been labeled "Altered" for business purposes? Yikes! He knew that it would kill PSA if they rejected that card. So for money they essentially lied. Not to mention the hundreds of millions made since for the company and the trimmed card itself.

If you don't think grading and the registry is the main driving force in why this has become so wide spread then I don't know what to say. It is not "asanine thinking" it is instead basic logic and supply and demand.

Originally Posted by glynparson

If you think this wasn’t going on long.before grading became the norm you are a fool. It existed before PSA was a company by many many years and was a big reason PSA was able to gain some traction. Yes I get the Wagner was trimmed. That card should never have been graded but it was and that was wrong but at the same time from a business perspective it wasn’t and would have been slabbed at that time by any company that existed. Right or wrong. But thinking card doctoring is somehow a product of card grading is truly asinine thinking. As for this card in the og post if it is just water I have no issue with soaking if it’s chemicals it’s wrong but people will do it anyways.

[steve B]

AS far as paper and the use of water goes.

I believe both groups are partly correct.

One of the things that makes paper work, especially in wood pulp based paper is that the original maceration to produce the fibers also dissolves or partly dissolves the lignin that holds the cellulose fibers together.
During drying, that lignin solidifies.

This is the same as the process for steaming and bending wood.

It's more complicated than that, since there's some bonding between sugars that are part of the cellulose, and other things besides just lignin.


So soaking to remove a crease as this guy does is basically re dissolving the lignins and probably breaking the sugar bonds between the fibers. The fiber length which affects the density and strength of the paper was probably changed within the crease.
That softening allows what is essentially remaking the paper in the crease.

The chemistry - that there is cellulose fibers bonding and lignin as a sort of "glue" as well, does not change.
The fibers in the repaired area do get rearranged.

Enough soaking might change how much lignin is present. Less will tend to make the paper weaker.
In modern papers, there may be additives or a higher cotton fiber content to slow the Lignin degrading which helps form acid that will eventually ruin the paper. Soaking something like and 86 fleer basketball card might remove some of these additives.

The chemistry in most cases probably doesn't change enough to make a difference, but since some lignin or other binders will always be lost it does change.


I don't disagree with a light surface cleaning with water, a few decades of gunk accumulated from just ordinary air exposure is probably best removed.*
Trying to flatten a dinged corner so it doesn't get worse? Yeah, we've probably all done that. Using water and tools so that dinged corner gets overlooked by graders? Probably not as many.


*I've done this to a couple cards, less than 5 and I'm entirely open about which ones. One literally had soot deposits that were into the cracks in the surface coating. another had soot on the reverse. Neither cleaned up all that well.One was fine, the other ended up with back damage. Another soaked card was used to show how water and pressure can't cause an offset transfer, wood grain from the pressing got pressed into the card, and last I checked was still present. (Relax, it's a T206 common in F-G condition. It's not much worse than before.)

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by campyfan39

So even though a card had been clearly altered and at least one of the graders has admitted (in the book and the 30 for 30) that he knew it, that was ok from a business perspective? So it is horrible to use substances to clean cards or improve creases but its fine to grade a card that should have been labeled "Altered" for business purposes? Yikes! He knew that it would kill PSA if they rejected that card. So for money they essentially lied. Not to mention the hundreds of millions made since for the company and the trimmed card itself.

Agreed this is wonky logic. If the "good for the hobby" argument that was used (depending on who you believe) when, wink wink, David Hall and others at PSA in the early 90's gave the Wagner they knew was trimmed an 8 assumes that profiting from such skulduggery is what makes it "good" - then nobody today should have any problem with any type of restoration or alteration so that all vintage cards can then be resubbed and get 8's and higher, and be sold at wildly higher prices.

Clearly this isn't the case.

Ironic to think - professional grading ostensibly came about because of the problems with card doctoring and the "wild west" scene in collecting 30+ years ago. Today however, due to the profit motive and ability to get such cards into high grade slabs anyway - the main driver that keeps alteration prevalent turns out to also be grading.

[Peter_Spaeth]

If as is commonly believed the Wagner was sheet cut and not pack issued, why does it matter if it was then trimmed? It was never anything but an AUTH.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

If as is commonly believed the Wagner was sheet cut and not pack issued, why does it matter if it was then trimmed? It was never anything but an AUTH.

It doesn't. It is AUTH. As a story, it sounds better / juicier because Mastro used either scissors or an office paper cutter or something to get it out of the sheet. It doesn't matter that he didn't "trim" 1/64 or whatever off the edge like we think of in traditional "trimming" to those telling the story of why the card is bad, or why Bill did something wrong.

But yes, to say that David Hall and others in that room didn't know it was at least sheet cut is absurd. That guy once owned the most complete T206 master set in the world? On the 30 for 30 he says "It didn't look trimmed to me." Really? Jeez do better. That's what an 11 year old kid at a card show would say. They were paying PSA, as supposedly the world's foremost experts on that type of cards - and that's the explanation PSA came up with? No wonder there will never be any "grading reports" out of that outfit.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

It doesn't. It is AUTH. As a story, it sounds better / juicier because Mastro used either scissors or an office paper cutter or something to get it out of the sheet. It doesn't matter that he didn't "trim" 1/64 or whatever off the edge like we think of in traditional "trimming" to those telling the story of why the card is bad, or why Bill did something wrong.

But yes, to say that David Hall and others in that room didn't know it was at least sheet cut is absurd. That guy once owned the most complete T206 master set in the world? On the 30 for 30 he says "It didn't look trimmed to me." Really? Jeez do better. That's what an 11 year old kid at a card show would say. They were paying PSA, as supposedly the world's foremost experts on that type of cards - and that's the explanation they come up with? No wonder there will never be any "grading reports" out of that outfit.

As I understand it, it was already sheet cut when Mastro acquired it. He didn't cut it from the sheet, that was done at an unknown time by an unknown person.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As I understand it, it was already sheet cut when Mastro acquired it. He didn't cut it from the sheet, that was done at an unknown time by an unknown person.

I thought that him and Rob L. saw / bought the original piece when it was a sheet (with other cards) in the early 1980's. I could be wrong on that.

If what you say is right, then maybe Bill's was a more "traditional" trim job, if the card resembled something like the Jumbo Wagner just with oversized borders when they got it.