can you cut n paste the list of submitted cards so we can know if two or more of us submitted the same cards?

***ATTENTION: All Submitters***

Combing through the data, I found that this is the list of cards that have multiple examples submitted. It is quite possible that some or all versions of a single card were submitted by the same person, but that's neither here nor there.

What to do:
1. If you submitted a card appearing on the list below, contact Bobby and tell him how many of them you submitted.

2. If you submitted all examples, then nothing else needs to be done.

3. If you only submitted one (or two if there were a total of three examples sent in), then make sure you have scans, pics, whatever to 'prove' which are yours.

4. Immediately contact Bobby (to save him from a heart condition :rolleyes:) and arrange sending him the pics.


1. 1909-11 American Caramel Co. E90-1 Tommy Leach

2. 1909-11 Sweet Caporal T206 Nap Lajoie

3. 1912 T202 Hassan Cigarettes #113 Sweeney Gets Stahl

4. 1912 T202 Hassan Cigarettes #114 Tenney Lands Safely

5. 1912 T202 Hassan Cigarettes #55 Dooin Gets His Man

6. 1912 T202 Hassan Cigarettes #6 Ambrose Mcconnell At Bat

7. 1912 T202 Hassan Cigarettes #69 Grant Gets His Man

8. 1912 T202 Hassan Cigarettes #7 A Wide Throw Saves...

9. 1912 T202 Hassan Cigarettes #96 McIntyre At Bat

10. 1952 Topps #195 Orestes Minoso

11. 1953 Topps #104 Yogi Berra

12. 1953 Topps #114 Phil Rizzuto

13. 1954 Topps #1 Ted Williams

14. 1954 Topps #10 Jackie Robinson

15. 1954 Topps #250 Ted Williams

16. 1955 Topps #47 Hank Aaron

17. 1958 Topps #150 Mickey Mantle

18. 1958 Topps #476 Stan Musial

19. 1958 Topps #487 Mickey Mantle

20. 1965 Topps #170 Hank Aaron

21. 1980-89 Pliva #74 Gari Kasparov


Hopefully, I didn't miss anything. As each card is 'resolved,' I can mark it as such, if that'll help.

Thank you Darren

thanks Darren, does the t206 Lajoie list the pose, or 150 vs 350 series , or the factory # ?

No, do you have a scan of yours you can post?

Nope. Each card 'description' is how it appears on the pdf of the SGC invoice that was sent to me, so nothing has been omitted.

I'll have to dig them up, but I submitted t206 SC150-30 Lajoie Portrait and t206 SC150-30 Lajoie Throwing.

so those two probably represent the "duplicate listing" if there are only two 1909-11 Sweet Caporal T206 Nap Lajoies on the list.

if that's the case, I wont look for the scans

Thanks, Bobby, Darren, & Phil!

There's only two so they're both yours.

I submitted
 

Several on the list-

(2) Leach throwing
(3) 1958 All star Mantles
(3) 1958 All star Musial
(2) 1954 Robinsons
(1) 1958 Mantle
(1) 1953 Berra
(1) 1953 Rizzuto

Hope this helps

Bob

Believe it or not, there are ZERO duplicates on the list. I broke down the groups on a hard copy that I will forward to Darren, and I don't see ANY duplicate cards by duplicate people

Guys....sorry for all the panic over nothing. It seems as though NO ONE has subbed the same cards as other members. As hard as that sounds to believe!!

No worries Bobby, better to figure it out now so it's not snafu later.

Hey Guys, I am not sure Darren understood what the issue was. And judging by my DM's, maybe I didn't make myself clear.

The problem WAS NOT the issue with duplicates. SGC can handle sending in 100 of the exact same card. The issue arose with duplicates among DIFFERENT MEMBERS. Take for example a Pete Rose rookie card, all of similiar quality. Say I submit 4 Pete Rose rookie cards. Darren Hughes submits 1 Pete Rose rookie card. With the way SGC enters cards into their system, they ignore the way I have them on the sheet and enter them randomly. Doing it that way, I would have no idea which Pete Rose rookie Darren submitted was.

PSA never does that. They enter them in the same way I have them on the sheet. Which basically one big sheet is broken down into various groups (to make it easier for me). But everyone's order stays together. That is how I am able to know whose card is whose when I get 5 Pete Rose rookies from various people.

I believe we dodged a major bullet this time, because as far as I can tell, no one has submitted the exact same card as another member. Instead of putting cards chronologically like I do with PSA, with SGC, I simply pull out the sheets you sent me and go grocery shopping.

As long as I know the rules, I can work around it. Another problem arises in that SGC has no customer service number for customers to call to hash out issues. They have to call me.

I have learned a lot dealing with my first (and probably my only) SGC group sub. Or maybe have to talk amongst yourselves and be like (Are you sending a 1953 Topps Yogi Berra?). I can't see myself doing that.

Wondering if the recent crash in ultra modern prices will cut into Psa volumes. Noticed a couple Youtubers dealing in new stuff at trade shows buys the shiny PSA 10s and trades them that day for for pre 1970 Hofers, Early Topps and pre-war. Maybe getting religion, or is this a natural migration to more stable collections? I think both.

Ummm...I understood perfectly fine. Look at post #162, outlining what members need to do if they submitted a card on the list of duplicates shown there. They would have to show you 'proof' of which of the duplicates was theirs, so you'd ultimately sent them back the correct card. Quite clear.

I'm glad it's been resolved, and I want to meet some of the people who have multiples of epic cards from the 50's to send in. Yowza! :eek:

Well, the 4 Minnie Minoso rookies were mine. I am thankful I was the only one to submit one.

I paid upcharges for 4 cards. None were mine. So would like to get reimbursed for that. The 4 upcharges were....

R136 Kashin Babe Ruth = +67
T206 Ty Cobb Bat off shoulder = +67
E93 Honus Wagner = +67
1933 Goudey Lou Gehrig = +67

The upcharges were $67 each.

Also, some cards didn't grade, so I will be owing refunds to some.

Bobby

Can you post the grades?

Congrats on the upcharges and nice grades.

I dont have them yet.

Since I have too much experience in the area, can you tell us which cards are being returned ungraded?

He was going so fast. Definitely the Desert Storm Ken Griffey Jr. They don't grade the issue. I will know better once I get the package back.

I am pretty sure one is mine. A chimeric Gilhooley E135 front with a Johnson stamp back. I think these were faked in the 1970s or 80s. Dopey me.

One is mine and one is Teza11. They both have skinned backs. They told me they don't grade blank back cards. I was like, these aren't blank backs....they are SKINNED backs.....and I pointed out that they graded those in the past. So we will see.

Do you mean 1991 Topps Desert Shield Ken Griffey Jr?

Not sure the exact issue. he said they don't grade desert shields.

That is the only year they done DS cards. They must have just stopped grading them in the last few days then or maybe it is one of the many fakes out there.

1928 Yeungling Mostil
 

Expecting this guy to come back either a replica or altered. Shall soon find out...

Maybe they stopped grading the Griffey. I have seen that they graded Desert Sheilds, but I have not seen any Griffeys in a SGC holder. That is a commonly faked card?

They are all commonly faked because the only difference between them and the regular issue Topps cards is a foil stamp. The foil stamp is what gets counterfeited. The Chipper Jones rookie card is the biggest money card of the DS cards.

If their guarantee is worthless/deleted, not sure why they wouldn't grade bad cards. They have no liability anymore except bad press, which seems to fall under "all news is good news."

The DS Griffey is mine. A DS expert looked at my scans and told me it's legit. I believe he advises PSA. So I'm not worried about it as a fake.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

The 1933 Gehrig is mine. It was previously judged as altered by SGC. My valuation was correct according to VCP for that card in Auth condition. Do you know why they upcharged me?

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

Maybe you got a numerical grade this time.

I sent it in the cardsaver with their sticker attached to it. I just wanted the card slabbed and protected. If they changed their opinion after seeing their previous opinion I would be surprised.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...759c0c0b59.jpg

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

That would surprise me too

I'm guessing they see the sticker and as a precaution assume its fake or being used in a nefarious way in an attempt to say a fake is at least authentic altered. Of course it's the same card but they don't see it that way. They could've done a second evaluation after ignoring the sticker and judged it as not being altered this time around.
Just a thought

that's plausible. hadn't thought of that.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

VCP Average on an Authentic Gehrig is $3,200. The limit per card was $1,499.
Of course there are varying degrees of "authentic" that would make it higher or lower. I am thinking that this authentic didn't appear to be totally falling apart to warrant squeezing in under a $18 sub.

I'm pretty sure they don't want to grade bad cards. That would make them no different than PRO, or latter day GAI.

Are upcharges a blessing or a curse?? Look, I get it. Everyone would rather pay $18 to grade a card instead of $85. But look at the bright side. If you are hit with an upcharge, that means that your card was deemed worth more than $1,500 in the eyes of SGC. For some, maybe they got the card for less than $1,500? That would be like winning a nice scratch off ticket.

It's okay. I don't follow Gehrig card values, so I'm a little shocked.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

I remember this card. The seller guaranteed a numerical grade, and it came back authentic. The seller then refused any refund (partial or full) and Leon banned him. Funny how things come back around.

I'm confused why you wouldn't put it in a different card saver - you had nothing to lose and everything to gain. There is no way SGC would give it a numerical grade after seeing that it previously gave it an A.

However, if you had removed the prior label, there is a chance SGC would grade it a 1. What was your logic in simply resubmitting it with the SGC A label still attached?

I took it out of that card saver. I put it in a fresh blank one. I wanted him to have a fresh chance at a number grade. I may slip up from time to time, but for the most part, I know what I am doing.

Why would they change to Not grading skinned backs?
Here's one they slabbed for me a few years ago

https://www.qualitycards.com/pictures/1283689013.jpg

Bobby to the rescue!

If it comes back a numerical grade, and not just Authentic, the submitter owes you a nice Christmas gift as you will have significantly increased his card's value.

It didn't. It came back AUHENTIC only. At least they are consistent.

Are the cards current in transit back to you?

No.

Who is here has Spreadsheet experience and can help post grades in the group????

I'm happy to help, just let me know.

Also guys, whoever subbed the 1968 Nolan Ryan Milton Bradley variation. I called it as such on the form. SGC changed it back to the normal version, even though it is obviously not. Please don't blame that on me. I called it the correct thing.

This is obviously the Milton Bradley variation. The submitter has noted it as such, and I wholeheartedly agree. I have looked at a ton of this version. Someone at SGC removed the Milton Bradley tag and called it the regular version. The white line is super hard to miss......

https://imgsrv.sellersourcebook.com/...jpg?1669150535

I appreciate that. I really have no experience submitting, but I had a bunch of cards I wanted slabbed for protection if nothing else. Thanks for all you do!

Wow. Although the card's back is not posted, I'm confident that is a MB. The white line is impossible to miss.

I believe the MB's have a different tone of yellow, too.

Oh, well. Great look card still.

And there's the telltale black notch in the 'T' in the word "STARS."

It is...but what do you do now?? Sell it as a Milton Bradley and just say that SGC labeled it wrong???

They likely won't do anything before it ships but I would send it back to have it corrected.

Hey all,

Grade update: Bobby sent me the garbled info from SGC and I am in the process of organizing it into a clean document. Will post when ready.

Thank you. I know it looked a mess.

Sure, no rush at all... :cool:

Attachment 543691

No problem! Happy to help, considering how much work you have done already

lol

Stop screwing around on this thread and work on posting the grades! :p

Also guys....7 cards didn't get graded....SGC only refunded me for 6 though. I got to figure out what is up with that.

See next post

.

Thank you Bobby

Apologies for the blurry images....I can't seem to make it clearer without going past the max filesize. Hopefully everyone can manage to read it.

Thanks to the two Bobbies!

Thank you to both Bobby's....these are not grouped according to the submitters correct? I see my t206 lajoie portrait is away from the other 4 candy cards.

Yes..we all have to find our own cards somewhere in the list.

Attachment 543714
"Now it's time for the airing of grievances..."

Correct....SGC has the bright idea to randomize everything.

One correction from Bobby...#161 of the sub is a hand-cut A, not a 6. (And probably with a cert number of 6887001)

-Matthew

I can't complain loudly, my modern cards did very well. I got three 10s, including my 1991 Tiffany KGJ! My 1991 DS KGJ wasn't graded, so I guess I'll just need to send to PSA.

I am pleasantly surprised by my 1914 Polo Ground game Wagner, which got a SGC 5.

But my 2001 Bowman Heritage Bonds auto got a SGC 6! I was really expecting a better grade (8 or 9). It's centering is near perfect. That card immediately went into a holder. So I wonder what's wrong with it?

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

Also there are two 1998 Topps Chrome Adrian Beltre, #57 SGC 7 and #100 SGC 9 (refractor). I submitted the Refractor, but my card is 70/30 centering and I was not expecting a SGC 9. I thought 70/30 centering dropped a card two grades.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...0e138d7f7a.jpg

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

I submitted this card and can't believe it wasn't graded as a Milton Bradley. Here is a shot of the back.

I rightfully have grievances about the top pair here, and I don't know what's going on with the 1968 Mantle.

• The Winfield rookie is a wrong back card, so after talking with them about it, here was the reply:
"The Winfield would be labeled as wrong back and get an A."

But they graded it a 6.5, even though they told me directly it would only get an 'authentic,' as I wanted it to. WTF??

• The Brett rookie is just a cool, wildly miscut card that I was under the impression would also only get the 'authentic' grade. The card itself is pretty sweet, but they number-graded it an SGC 1, presumably because of how miscut it is. Argh!!! What's the point of that? Everyone can see it's crazy cut, so I wanted nothing more than an 'A.' Were I ever to sell it, how would I explain it? All anyone is going to see is an SGC 1 grade PLUS it's terribly cut, making it fall into the negative number grade category for anyone looking at it. Geez.

• And the 1968 Mantle got an 'A?' grade. What in high heck is that? Questionable authenticity?? Do they think it's a fake? Hopefully, the slab will have an explanatory word present.

Attachment 543751