The Superiority of SGC

[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....

[brad31]

SGC needs to fix their cert lookup. Most of what I have bought from PWCC are in SGC holders. Since I am indifferent between SGA and PSA I tend to get outbid on most of the PSA cards I try for. Without the cert lookup the super smart people putting together Moser submissions cannot uncover additional SGC cards that are likely suspect.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by brad31

SGC needs to fix their cert lookup. Most of what I have bought from PWCC are in SGC holders. Since I am indifferent between SGA and PSA I tend to get outbid on most of the PSA cards I try for. Without the cert lookup the super smart people putting together Moser submissions cannot uncover additional SGC cards that are likely suspect.

SGC certs have been random for at least a year anyhow, so even if they had a cert lookup there would be no way to recreate subs made since then.

[brad31]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

SGC certs have been random for at least a year anyhow, so even if they had a cert lookup there would be no way to recreate subs made since then.

Thanks Peter - was not aware of that. Still might uncover some older ones if they fixed it. Some of the submission runs published for PSA go back to 2017. However, would not help as much as I would have thought.

[swarmee]

Of course it would help, as well as consignment houses like Greg Morris and painthistorian and others who have sold raw cards to Whitman111 over the years to upload those scans to a file sharing service for the blowout guys to have more photos for comparisons to identify even more tainted cards.