![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Not really sure what the OP is asking. "How did this happen?" You linked to dozens of instances where PSA graded this fake as real, so why should/must we be surprised that SGC missed one? You claim it is well documented, yet your link shows that this was outed only a year ago. Was the SGC card graded since, and is your point they should have known?
I will reserve my comments on the grade received and the price asked for a fricking reprint, fake or not, but am just unclear as to the point of the original post.
__________________
Now watch what you say, or they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh, fanatical, criminal Won't you sign up your name? We'd like to feel you're acceptable, respectable, presentable, a vegetable If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other.- Ulysses S. Grant, 18th US President. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
They should only authenticate real reprints, damn it.
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. ![]() My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I mean it’s fine if they don’t want to authenticate the 1983 reprint release from Topps. But since they are, they should be correct about it.
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Surely so, but it is obvious the fake has made its way through grading undetected dozens of times, so I really don't see a point in asking how. The answer is it happens because SGC made a mistake, just as PSA did dozens of times over. I just don't see it as particularly noteworthy. That SGC graders should be able to tell what they are looking at before authenticating is obvious, that they did not in this case is clear but not shocking, to me anyway. There are worse mistakes made by grading companies that are highlighted here about once a week it seems.
__________________
Now watch what you say, or they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh, fanatical, criminal Won't you sign up your name? We'd like to feel you're acceptable, respectable, presentable, a vegetable If we are to have another contest in the near future of our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but between patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and superstition, ambition and ignorance on the other.- Ulysses S. Grant, 18th US President. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
To finish the sublime with the ridiculous, Topps ought to issue an Authorized Reprint of the Fake Reprint card. Then let the grading companies figure out what to do with THAT.
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I am wondering who the knuckleheads were that printed the back of the sham reprints upside down. Were they that careless to make a mistake that should easily be identifiable by any reputable reprint authenticator? Or is there something else much more sinister going on here...
Brian ('sham reprints' and 'reputable reprint authenticator' should become accepted hobby terms) |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
The Blowout discussion post #102 is saying that the card was graded by SGC 3/24. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Wait, wait...
Nope, I tried but I just don't care.
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true. https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/ Or not... |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
There was an sgc 9.5 with a big stain, but it wasn't counterfeit.
__________________
"Trolling Ebay right now" © Always looking for signed 1952 topps as well as variations and errors |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Admittedly, my mind is blown that a fake of some sort was made on a reprint set; but outside of that I just cant care. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
However, now that we are here maybe there can be a best reprint of a reprint...maybe with some high-end designation. Like... 1 of 1 (TPG du jour) reprint reprint PWCC E? .
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
![]() |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Seller changed ebay ID from liquidate-it to Buchanan’s Loot
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is this 58 Mantle a Counterfeit? | bradmar48 | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 9 | 03-29-2018 09:20 AM |
Counterfeit 1952 topps mantle on eBay | Rookiemonster | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 1 | 01-07-2017 01:32 PM |
Counterfeit Mantle card being auctioned as PSA 5 | betafolio2 | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 53 | 05-26-2014 01:52 PM |
Counterfeit PSA Holder 1952 Topps Mantle | delawarevintage | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 15 | 08-08-2012 06:50 PM |
1965 Mantle Counterfeit? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 04-06-2004 06:46 PM |