Question about PSA Flip

thunderdan · November 21, 2009 8:28AM

I've never seen a solid blue back on the PSA flip. Has anybody else or should I simply return the card?

lawnmowerman · November 21, 2009 8:29AM

Do you have a scan of the front?

thunderdan · November 21, 2009 8:34AM

Here's the front, Matt.

fattymacs · November 21, 2009 8:36AM

That dosen't look kosher.

lawnmowerman · November 21, 2009 8:38AM

Thanks

The front looks real but I don't recall a blank back. At least I don't own any like that.

Pigs · November 21, 2009 8:38AM

Something's fishy about that card. The two top corners don't look "9" worthy to me. It's sometimes hard to tell corners from the '68 cards, so maybe I'm way off here.

gumbyfan · November 21, 2009 8:39AM

The bottom of those 9's just don't look right on the flip.

Edited to add: the flip looks too narrow in the holder, too.

lawnmowerman · November 21, 2009 8:43AM

<< 

Edited to add: the flip looks too narrow in the holder, too. >>

Yeah, it looks like it was installed too far to the right.

fattymacs · November 21, 2009 8:44AM

The font looks off, so does the vertical spacing between lines

KatsCards · November 21, 2009 8:45AM

Too much spacing between the lines . Cert number looks bigger than the rest of the font. No little PSA on the bottom right corner of the slab (that I can see). Looks bogus in my opinion

nam812 · November 21, 2009 8:46AM

<< ..........No little PSA on the bottom right corner of the slab (that I can see)........... >>

Good catch, I dont see it either.

bxb · November 21, 2009 8:50AM

Fake flip.

swartz1 · November 21, 2009 8:52AM

the PSA in the flip - top center red is not right...

SDSportsFan · November 21, 2009 8:52AM

That is a bad flip. The spacing between the lines on the front is way off.

Remember that a real PSA flip has four evenly-spaced lines of type. There is no way this one is real.

Steve

lawnmowerman · November 21, 2009 8:52AM

<< 

<< ..........No little PSA on the bottom right corner of the slab (that I can see)........... >>

Good catch, I dont see it either. >>

Here is an older flip and slab with no "psa" on the slab either. I believe the psa stamp was not on the older slabs.

Also the spacing is off as well.

gumbyfan · November 21, 2009 8:53AM

<< Too much spacing between the lines . Cert number looks bigger than the rest of the font. No little PSA on the bottom right corner of the slab (that I can see). Looks bogus in my opinion >>

I think I can see the little PSA on the bottom right corner, but I agree with the rest.

Dan, could you rescan with the scanner lid open?

thunderdan · November 21, 2009 8:55AM

<< 

<< ..........No little PSA on the bottom right corner of the slab (that I can see)........... >>

Good catch, I dont see it either. >>

I'm not disagreeing with previous opinions, but "PSA" is emblazoned on the bottom right as it should be.

RipublicaninMass · November 21, 2009 8:56AM

no good, never seen a damaged flip

lawnmowerman · November 21, 2009 8:59AM

Another older flip with the same spacing.

I would just contact Joe and ask him if blank backs were ever issued and send him the scans as well.

Imo, it's good.

thunderdan · November 21, 2009 9:00AM

I will contact Joe. Can somebody please PM me his email address?

thunderdan · November 21, 2009 9:02AM

Thanks for everybody's opinions. I'll run it by Joe and let you know what he thinks.

KatsCards · November 21, 2009 9:16AM

Found this on the web. Personally I had never seen spacing like that before, but I am by no means an expert on the history of flips. So the spacing on the front does appear okay (still bothers me that the cert number appears bigger than the rest of the font). I have never seen a blank back label though.

itzagoner · November 21, 2009 9:17AM

here's a card i purchased recently, which has a similar flip with a serial number which is pretty close to the Rose....i verified it before i bought it and it does match, but i had a strange suspicion about the flip because the hologram on the back has a strip which looks kind of muddled compared to the rest.....i have no reason to believe the card is bogus, i inspected it very carefully and it definitely matches the grade, but anyway i thought i'd offer this one up for comparison.....fire away speculators.

lawnmowerman · November 21, 2009 9:20AM

<< because the hologram on the back has a strip which looks kind of muddled compared to the rest >>

Some of the older flips/slabs I have are the same way. No worries there.

itzagoner · November 21, 2009 9:21AM

what a relief! i'll climb off the bridge now.

lawnmowerman · November 21, 2009 9:32AM

<<

what a relief! i'll climb off the bridge now. >>

I was lying. What bridge are you on?

itzagoner · November 21, 2009 9:36AM

ruh-roh.

lawnmowerman · November 21, 2009 9:36AM

SDSportsFan · November 21, 2009 10:40AM

Wow, if three-line flips, like in itzagoner's post, are real, I just don't know what to believe now.

I'm completely confused!

Steve

fuj · November 21, 2009 2:54PM

I think the flip is real. The thing to worry about is if an old flip has been cracked out and put into a newer slab with a less than mint card. If you look at itzagoner's card, slabs from that era had the PSA logo and hologram on the outside of the slab and the flip inside has a blank blue back.

I can think of 2 possibilities:

1) Some scammer who is cracking open lots of slabs, could have cracked out the legit Rose card and put this old flip back into the wrong slab.
2) Maybe when PSA was switching over to the newer slabs, some old flips got put into the newer slabs by mistake.

hammered · November 21, 2009 3:19PM

I owned a blank back flip and sold it, it was a low $ PSA 8 card so can't imagine it would have been fake - not worth the $. I think it was a Yount can't remember the year.
I assumed at the time it was a PSA error.

nam812 · November 21, 2009 10:10PM

Since it is a $500+ card, having Joe O. look at it is the way to go.

diamondman · November 22, 2009 2:19AM

I would be leary, look at the flip and right after "Topps" it looks like a pinhole and tear on the flip.
my opinion a crack out with a lower grade card inserted . JMHO

RipublicaninMass · November 22, 2009 2:40AM

<< I would be leary, look at the flip and right after "Topps" it looks like a pinhole and tear on the flip.
my opinion a crack out with a lower grade card inserted . JMHO >>

bsfastball · November 22, 2009 7:10AM

fuj · November 22, 2009 3:35PM

<< I would be leary, look at the flip and right after "Topps" it looks like a pinhole and tear on the flip.
my opinion a crack out with a lower grade card inserted . JMHO >>

I would agree too. When I first looked at the scan, I assumed that was just stuff on the scanner. Now that I look at it again, I'm guessing that is probably the marks from the screwdriver or whatever the scammer used to crack the original slab. I still think he pulled this flip out and stuck it into a newer slab that had a lower graded Rose card.

Stingray · November 22, 2009 10:09PM

<< That is a bad flip. The spacing between the lines on the front is way off.

Remember that a real PSA flip has four evenly-spaced lines of type. There is no way this one is real.

Steve >>

I have seen several flips of this type (with the rounded corners where the red and white meet), where the font is not lined up nice and even. Not saying this one is good, but the font on this type of flip can be real uneven.

jackstraw · November 22, 2009 11:18PM

The PSA and Hologram are on the holder and not the flip. I wonder if its just an old holder before they started putting the logo and holo
on the holder. I am willing to bet this is a WIWAG card?

jackstraw · November 22, 2009 11:30PM

Just checked its these type flips that were blank backed because the holo/PSA were actually on the holder.
The newer flips square corners have the PSA logo on the flip.
I am standing by my claim that this is a WIWAG card that they just screwed up and didn't use the correct back to
coinside with the flip.

thunderdan · November 23, 2009 2:42AM

still haven't heard back from Joe, but I returned the card to the seller today for a refund. I'll let everyone know what Joe says. I'm very interested in his opinion.

hammered · November 23, 2009 2:57AM

<< The PSA and Hologram are on the holder and not the flip. I wonder if its just an old holder before they started putting the logo and holo
on the holder. I am willing to bet this is a WIWAG card? >>

Uh-oh
You mentioned the name of the unmentionable.

thunderdan · November 23, 2009 3:07AM

Here was Joe's response:

"The front looked like an old-style PSA label – really old- so it is possible that the label may be OK. I am not aware of a solid blue back but I guess it might be possible (if the printing or foil stamping didn’t take so to speak).

On the holder, it is always best to see in person before commenting."

jackstraw · November 23, 2009 6:17AM

So what are you going to do? Mail it in to him? Do you remember where you bought it?

thunderdan · November 23, 2009 7:02AM

I returned it to the seller for a refund who says he is going to take it up with PSA.

I can appreciate Joe needing to see it in his hands to give an educated opinion, but at this point I'd rather just get a refund and move on.

Here's a link to the auction if anybody is interested.

thunderdan · November 30, 2009 2:21AM

Seller granted me a full refund, told me he was going to send in to Joe to get the card reviewed.

Predictably, he went ahead and immediately relisted the card (without a picture of the back).

Linky

KatsCards · November 30, 2009 2:35AM

Looks like he's trying to pass the hot potato without getting stuck with it. You could always leave him feedback like 'questioned authenticity of slabbed card. Seller gave full refund'

hdunk · November 30, 2009 2:59AM

I started a post earlier in the year about this as well.

At the April Moeller High School in Cincinnati, a guy came in at the end of the show with some high dollar graded cards. A few had blank back flips. I remember a 1940 or 41 Play Ball Ted Williams in a PSA 8 had a blank back flip and the card looked like a higher end 6 instead of an 8. He was dropping names and bragging about the auctions he purchased cards from, etc.

I made a list at the show of the cards in question. I checked VCP and these cards did not sell from the auctions he claimed he bought them from in the past few years. Though it is obvious he may have bought them before VCP existed to track major auction transactions.

I passed on all of the cards because some of the blank back flips on part of the cards and a couple more had cracks on the front.

thunderdan · January 2, 2010 12:07PM

Man, this is the second time it's resurfaced on eBay since I returned the card. Perhaps other buyers are questioning the solid blue flip (on the back).

When I returned it, his first response was "I will definitely send it in to Joe to have him take a look at it." Uh huh.

1968 Topps Pete Rose PSA 9

Underwraps · January 2, 2010 12:51PM

the sellers feedback isnt to Rosey looking either.... a couple weeks ago he sold a Berra 55 topps psa 8 and the casing looked like someone smashed it with a hammer..Card undersold and the berra is up again with a diff seller not the buyer who must of been a shill.. LINK

vladguerrero · January 2, 2010 12:57PM

"Offered Refund on card whose PSA holder possessed questionable authenticity." ---that's what the last winner left as feedback

Also, he recently received negative feedback for this auction, which I believe a fellow board member had started a thread about...

Presidents 1961 Golden Press Book with cards

1960toppsguy · January 2, 2010 1:07PM

That is a fake holder

Question about PSA Flip

Comments