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

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snowman

I use distilled water. It does the same thing though. You don't need some special formula to flatten out a bent corner. Honestly, this stuff isn't rocket science. Go take a card, toss it in a bowl of water, then let it dry between some paper towels and stick a book on top of it. I promise you'll change your mind afterward.

I didn't ask about water. I asked about this dude's solutions. If you haven't used them and don't know what they're made of how do you know what they do or that they are the same as water? Your answer is a non sequitur.

[FrankWakefield]

+1 G1911

and

+1 Campy

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Michael B

I don't normally jump into these arguments, but I agree with Snowman. The water does not alter the 'chemistry' of the wood fibers that make up the paper. The paper is still paper, whether it is wet or not. It may be easier to say the 'structure' of the molecules that make up the card are not changed. No chemical reaction has occurred which changes the paper into something else. After the card is dried it is still a card made of paper and ink.

People often fear that which they don't understand or can't explain. They just assume that soaking a card in water will damage it and then attempt to justify their position because it just feels wrong to them. The hobby is like a religion to some with viewpoints that cannot be challenged.

The ironic part to me is that these same people are completely fine with collectors putting their grimy oily fingers with French-fry grease, dirt, snot, and god knows what else all over their cards, as if none of those substances "alter" the card. But the moment you talk about removing any of that or of even just water touching the card, they completely lose their marbles as they chant "ALTERATION!!!" and start calling for heads to roll. I honestly find it hilarious.

[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 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.

[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

[steve B]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Not totally disagreeing with you, but what if that stuff can be made to disappear and there is no chemical residue or detectable signs of alteration on the card?

Rebuilt corner, maybe - but how? Not for profit or anything other than purposes of my own experimentation, but I have gotten a crunched corner back to NM appearing state on a junk era card before using nothing more than his spray and a few minutes time. By “rebuilt corner” I’m thinking many are envisioning razors and glue and donor cardboard. That’s not at all what Kurt does or teaches.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Here's a screenshot of the 74 with the rebuilt corner.
No way that's a bit of water and poking with a stick.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Snowman

That's why you let it dry lol

Also, so does moving from Vegas to New Orleans.

Soaking paper in water does not damage it in any way. Museums soak documents that are far more precious than any of our beloved sports cards all the time. The US Constitution, Biblical scrolls, Shakespeare's original writings, etc. These are all cleaned and preserved using the same techniques.

And that's all done with materials and processes that are proven to do no long term damage.

Not some mystery stuff hawked by someone who seems to have profit as their primary goal.

[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.

[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 steve B

Here's a screenshot of the 74 with the rebuilt corner.
No way that's a bit of water and poking with a stick.

Maybe, maybe not. I didn't see what he did on those particular cards, but can tell you his MO is not alteration that involves cutting stuff up, or adding things that are not there.

I did his corner trick using only the spray and a cotton applicator on a 1984 Donruss card, and even with references to the pics you attached - let's just say you would be surprised. I'd be glad to hand you as stack of '84 Donruss cards and invite you to point out the one I worked on. You wouldn't be able to.

People can think that cleaning or "corner improvement" is alteration all they want, but at the end of the day it's all a moot point if no residue or trace is left behind; if nothing is added or removed. A TPG is not going to call a card like that altered, nor should they.

[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.

[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.)

[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?

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

One question. What was it soaked in? Water or some "miracle" cleanser? I have a feeling your going to tell us it went from a 2 to a 1.5 since it now has paper loss on the back.

I'm glad that you noticed it but I find it hard to believe that the grader didn't see it.

Dahlen 2 to 5.jpg

[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.

[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.

[gunboat82]

Originally Posted by Snowman

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.

This is a poor analogy. When people clean houses, remove stains from upholstery, or wash your car, they don't do it in secret. The end-user knowingly pays for that cleaning service and, presumably, isn't selling the house, upholstery, or car with the hope that no one discovers they've been cleaned.

In the sports card context, the fraud doesn't suddenly spring into existence when the card is sprayed with Kurt's and manipulated with a tortillon. The fraud comes into play when that card is marketed and sold to an unwitting third-party.

You've made it clear that you don't think any of this is an issue... Caveat emptor, sucker born every minute, etc. etc. But let's at least be honest about the distinction between (1) paying people to clean stuff; and (2) selling an item without disclosing that it's been cleaned, presumably because you're afraid of shrinking the market for it and depressing its value.

There's a reason card doctors don't announce, "Hey, I trimmed this card for you so it's aesthetically pleasing and doesn't trigger your OCD. PSA really shouldn't have given it a numeric grade, but I managed to sneak it through, so win-win!"

Likewise, you won't see too many eBay listings like this:

"This Fleer Jordan used to have a big dent. I sprayed it with Kurt's Card Care, a proprietary product with ingredients that are probably all natural, but I'm not really sure.

Anyway, it worked just like Bondo... as you can see, no more dent! I can't tell you how it works exactly, because I'm not a chemist. But let's just say that the water-like mystery substance probably saturated the cardboard fibers and made them rise like yeast, restoring the surface to its original state. It's safe to assume the dent won't return, because why would it? Also, I don't think Kurt's will affect the color or texture, because we probably would've seen it by now, right?"

You and I both know why they don't say all that. Purists and skeptics spend money too, and they generally want to know what they're buying. The only way to keep them in the market for your goods is to keep them in the dark about what you to do them.

To circle back to your original point about people paying for cleaning, I think a closer analogy would be this:

I've got a lightly-used recliner with a stain on it. I pay someone to remove the stain for me. It looks so good afterward, it could pass for brand-new. A friend comes over to help me set up for a garage sale, and he compliments me on my brand-new recliner. I don't correct him. He slaps a "For Sale: Brand New Recliner" sign on it for me. It sells.

Did I commit fraud? I say yes. But something tells me you'd shrug and say no one cares.

[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.

[campyfan39]

He admitted to trimming it with a paper cutter to make the borders better and corners sharper. This after denying it multiple times of course.

Originally Posted by jchcollins

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.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by campyfan39

He admitted to trimming it with a paper cutter to make the borders better and corners sharper. This after denying it multiple times of course.

Yep. Got caught on a wire saying that when the Feds were looking for something else.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

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.

In the book "The Card" it says that Bill Mastro gave Rob Lifson (who founded REA) a lesser Wagner (which Lifson sold weeks later for $30K) in exchange for $25K to buy the jumbo Wagner from a guy named Alan Ray who had consigned the card (along with an Eddie Plank and many others) to Bill Sevchuck, who owned a card store in Hicksville, NY.

The Wagner had wavy edges and a red printer's line at the top. Mastro apparently commented about the Wagner, "It's not cut right, but I'll take it off your hands."

After Mastro obtained the jumbo Wagner, he proceeded to trim it so that it had straight edges.

Alan Ray has never definitively said where he got the cards from, but at one point claimed it was a relative.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

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.

No, it was a single card when Alan Ray sold it to him. But sheet cut by all accounts. I don't think anyone has traced it back to the owner of the sheet. But if this is correct, all Mastro did was make a nicer looking AUTH. The whole trimmed or not trimmed thing seems a red herring.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

No, it was a single card when Alan Ray sold it to him. But sheet cut by all accounts. I don't think anyone has traced it back to the owner of the sheet. But if this is correct, all Mastro did was make a nicer looking AUTH. The whole trimmed or not trimmed thing seems a red herring.

The whole story has always fascinated me. It is true today you hear "trimmed" way more often in relation to that card (now Ken Kendrick's Wagner) than you do tell of it being sheet cut or just AUTH.

[Seven]

I think some very interesting and well written points have been made, I wanted to chime in and comment on a few things.

I am not going to pretend like I am an expert at identifying alteration, far from it. Concerning grading, I also live by the adage "Buy the card, not the grade." I would also say, I've purchased cards that have been labeled by the grading companies as "altered" as I have found that I can get a nice looking card, that presents well, for a fraction of the price.

Altering has been going on in our hobby, for a long time. The unfortunate part is that so many cards slip through the cracks, that are altered and then assigned number grades all the same. If you want to soak or trim your cards, for your own personal collection, I am not going to judge you.

I do have a problem with the people that do it, strictly for some sort of financial gain. It's dishonest, and I know there's a lot of dishonesty in the world, but I think it's a damn shame that it occurs. You can call my viewpoint naïve, but that's what I maintain. It doesn't surprise me that it occurs, but I don't like it.

It was also referenced before, I can't recall which post off the top of my head. It aggravates me to no end, that certain parties or individuals can get away with submitting clearly altered cards, or altered cards with a long history, and yet still receive number grades. I'm not calling out specific parties due to the nature of the rules, and myself wanting my name to be private, if there's an issue with this paragraph, Leon, I will gladly delete it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

The whole story has always fascinated me. It is true today you hear "trimmed" way more often in relation to that card (now Ken Kendrick's Wagner) than you do tell of it being sheet cut or just AUTH.

I have never understood the emphasis.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I have never understood the emphasis.

I think it comes from people in the media - sports people even, but not necessarily card people - latching onto that because they hear "trimmed" used in context of just talking about sheet cut and factory cut, etc. and they think it's something that gives their story more oomph.

[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?

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

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.

Well said

[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.

[jggames]

Originally Posted by G1911

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

I don't want to derail this thread about alterations, but I should have clarified, I did not mean a whole pile of Wagners, he said the others were "obviously cut" from a sheet when he went in to pick up the Wagner

[G1911]

Originally Posted by 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?

I've read a whole lot about alteration here. Kurt's openly alters cards and the people who do this want to legitimize it to cover their asses, so that it isn't fraud when they don't disclose their alterations.

The things are you asking have nothing to do what what I have actually said? I am not defining 'alter' in any strange, unusual, or unique way. When did I object to pushing a corner flat with your finger? When did I object to water or imply as such? Does not my first post suggest the exact opposite? Kurt's openly engages in practices almost everyone here, until convenient for it to change, has long held to be altering. Go check out their own advertising.