Graders?

[Potomac Yank]

Do grading company's slab soak jobs?

[HRBAKER]

Knowingly or unknowingly?

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Potomac Yank

Do grading company's slab soak jobs?

If it was soaked in water and only left water marks (or no marks) they will slab and grade accordingly, at least that is my experience. Personally, I have no issue with soaking a card to get crap off of it....but that might be for another thread. Here is one that had a hunk of paper, the size of a dime on the back, and much of it couldn't be read, pre-soaking.

[Potomac Yank]

Originally Posted by HRBAKER

Knowingly or unknowingly?

*
*

HRB ... Good question. --- But for the sake of the question, let's make believe somebody knew.

Do grading company's slab soak jobs?

[JK]

The answer is yes if soaked in water. My understanding based on a few limited discussions is that there is no way to tell if a card has been soaked in water (assuming it was done correctly) and that the card will be graded.

[Rob D.]

I just dug around a little and found that, yes, soaked cards can be graded.

[calvindog]

Rob, can you post a link to your research? I'm curious about this issue but am just so busy today. Thanks.

[Rob D.]

Jeff,

Busy or not, you'll find it more rewarding to dig for yourself. Plus, I don't think you really want to pick my brain.

Unless, of course, you're a newbie. Or a flipper.

Or Bubba.

[Matt]

Excellent show gentleman. You're keeping me amused

[Potomac Yank]

Originally Posted by Rob D.

I just dug around a little and found that, yes, soaked cards can be graded.

*
*

Bubba, we know they can ... that was proven in 2001, when SGC slabbed the worse amateur alteration job in history.

The question remains ... where do the Graders stand on soak jobs?

Like the trimmed card, do they consider it an alteration, and thus the Authentic listing?

Leon's Weaver is a great example ... a beautiful back soak job ... where's the Authentic marking on the slab? ... It was altered no?

What's the difference?

Are there any graders on this forum?

[Peter_Spaeth]

I am virtually certain grading services know that many older cards that are submitted have been soaked to remove residue from scrapbooks.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Potomac Yank

*
*

Bubba, we know they can ... that was proven in 2001, when SGC slabbed the worse amateur alteration job in history.

The question remains ... where do the Graders stand on soak jobs?

Like the trimmed card, do they consider it an alteration, and thus the Authentic listing?

Leon's Weaver is a great example ... a beautiful back soak job ... where's the Authentic marking on the slab? ... It was altered no?

What's the difference?

Are there any graders on this forum?

There are graders from probably every grading company that read this forum quite a bit. I doubt they want to come on and explain a policy as it could be a two edged sword and a no win situation for them. That being said a couple things come to mind...

1. I have spoken with several head graders about "alterations". They don't consider soaking a card in water an alteration because it isn't one. (at least in their and my opinions).
2. If it has a slight stain from a soaking it gets graded as such and downgraded depending on the severity.
3. Maybe this is for another thread but the purists who think that if you do absolutely anything to a card, it's an alteration, are entitled to their view. It is contradictory to the graders I know and most of the hobbyists that don't collect ONLY by the number on the plastic. But again, everyone has a right to their own opinion. Personally, I think if we worry too much about minute things then it starts to take some of the fun out of the hobby....again, just my opinion.

[Potomac Yank]

It was one of the Chief Mahas of SGC that gave the OK to slab the amateur job in 2001 ... so much for expertise.

[iggyman]

A few weeks back, I sent a few T206 cards to get graded by SGC. One of them was a T206 Hal Chase card. This one had some scrapbook paper on the back side, which I had soaked to remove the paper. The paper came off nicely and only a tiny bit of barely noticeable glue residue was evident on the back side. Otherwise, the card displayed no creases but did have a tiny nick (or print imperfection) on his neck. I submitted the card to SGC and it was graded "SGC 30". Which, considering the circumstances was fair.

Here is the pic. Please excuse the glare from my camera and the registration on the card is way better then my picture shows...





On another note, just to prove how subjective grading really is. In the same submission, I sent a T206 Billy Campbell card to get graded. This one was NOT soaked and had what appeared to be tobacco(?) stains on the front side borders. It came back as an SGC 40. Both cards, were probably graded by the same person(s) (although, I have no way of confirming this). This small sample does not prove anything, other then what most already know..... SGC/PSA will grade soaked cards.....and at least in this small sample, it appears they grade tobacco stains not as harshly as glue stains.





Lovely Day...

[onlychild]

Got this one.

Every grader I have talked to does not consider soaking in water an alteration and will grade it accordingly.

There are times where you can tell a card has been cleaned, it has a different smell and if you look "very very closely" you can sometimes see loose fibers. These tiny hair-like pieces that usually all go the same direction. Also on vintage cards with rounded corners the worn edges will look somewhat cleaner than they should.