Over the past weeks/months, I feel like there’s a growing trend of people restoring cards specifically to chase higher grades on PSA submissions (and other graders). This is largely driven by content creators showing it off and promoting it on social media (Facebook, YouTube, etc.). This includes how-to videos and even selling kits/tools for that exact purpose.
This goes way beyond basic cleaning. It includes things like:
Fixing dents by adding moisture and pressing the card (modifying cardstock)
Polishing surface / holo scratches (which removes material/layers of the card)
Repairing edge wear
…and more
These creators crack low-grade slabs, restore the cards, and explicitly say they intend to resubmit for higher grades. The comments are often full of people excited to use these services or buy the tools for their own gain. Critical comments seem to get deleted.
To be clear: everyone can do whatever they want with their own cards. If someone wants to alter/restore a card for their personal collection, that’s their choice. The problem starts when (a) altered cards are re-sold without full disclosure, or (b) they’re re-submitted to grading companies without declaring that the card has been altered. At that point, in my view, it crosses into fraud/deception: intentionally changing a card and then presenting it as “original condition” to obtain a higher grade and make money. And the immoral intentions of these people is clear in the comments when you read “hopefully the alteration is not getting detected by PSA”.
I’m not posting any profiles here because I don’t want to give them a platform. But I do think this is genuinely dangerous for the hobby.
So what can we actually do as a community?
Ignore it, call it out, report it, push graders to tighten policies/detection? What’s the most effective approach?
It’s beyond any one person’s or group('s) ability to do much of anything. 0% defeatist rhetoric, 100% belief that altered cards will always have tells for people who actually like Pokémon trading cards to see, in our case… it’s just more reason to use regulated commerce methods to acquire cards. Make sure you can get your money or trade back if you suspect any funny business.
As far as professional grading companies go… I don’t ultimately see the difference between an altered card and a fake card when either/both are encapsulated with a certificate of “authenticity” to match.
TL:DR trying to stop this behaviour would be like Indiana Jones trying to stop the boulder after he swipes the Golden Idol in Raiders of the Lost Ark. I’m sure some of us heard about the poor Disney employee who was injured doing this IRL at the Florida park.
Like pack weighing or scanning, it’s not preventable. Some people will use any means necessary to optimise their luck in the card grading lottery, they stop only when they realise it’s not worth the effort. Best to continue self-educating and educating others on how to detect them
Nothing will happen as the major grading companies do 0 work to actually stop these people and the world is full of losers who will do anything to make money off of the hobby, no matter how scummy the method.
If the only thing that differs action A from action B is a bucket of free money then it’ll spread like wildfire until it’s the new norm, which has happened like clockwork with so many questionable practices in the hahbee already.
You’d hope that people would put a premium on “trustworthy” sources, but I’m not holding my breath.
I’ve heard of these services for the last 2 years or so. However, I never seen an instance of somebody doing this and claiming they got a PSA 10 out of it. That’s not to say that that hasn’t happened though ofc. And frankly if people are able to get PSA 10s from just cracking their older cert 9s a few times while doing nothing to the card itself, I’m a bit confused why people would want to do this cards and risk damaging them unless it’s a super valuable card that could benefit from going from like a a 5 to a 6 or something.
Look at some of the photos on this instagram. Idk how she does it, but the results are crazy and she has definitely had cards upgrade higher than one point.
That’s the answer. Either go for 10 when collecting slabs or else buy a binder copy. Problem solved. Card alterations mostly concerns 1 to 9 range, and collecting non perfect cards in slabs was a bad idea in the first place.
On the pokemontcg sub on reddit it is considered a type of tampering with the cards and is not encouraged although like several have said, its like pack weighing where it happens but you dont want to call attention t.
I feel that doing these things dont fix cards but merely cover up the issues and once the card is left to reacclimate there is a chance that the issues will return.
I think if people discourage the use through education and dont encourage it in general, it will be minimal value added. Currently the understanding being pushed by people with an interest in fixing cards is that you can take a creased card and get out the crease completely, they neglect chip to mention that its not every case and they dont know exactly what happens when cards get heavily humidified, pressed, and then go through normal humidification cycles through the year. Or that polish can at times be detected by grading companies and make your card ungradable.
But the main thing is to actively make people aware that, similar to fakes, if someone has an altered card then you can assume there will be more. Its better to walk away completely rather than take the risk.
That’s convenient thinking. I’ve seen a lot of 9s and NM raw that would make easy 10 candidates with scratch wax or dent removal. The post above yours links to a cleaner who claims to successfully clean cards into 10s
You make a lot of presumptuous claims. It’s a bit confusing sometimes because there is a lot of “big shot” collectors on this forum, and none of them see the hahbee in as black-and-white terms as you. Or if they do, they’re smart enough not to post their opinions on every thread like it’s a fact. I can understand the appeal of “10 or bust” when it comes to slabs, but not all of these ‘cleaned’ cards are being sent to grading companies. Some of them are being sold as what collectors here would consider a “binder copy.” I also think that the normal buyer should be able to shop freely without being in danger of buying a tampered card.
Anyways, I would never buy a card that has been knowingly tampered with. Even for a binder copy. You never know what process was used to “restore” the card, and how those chemicals will change the card over time.
I think I would if it’s cheap enough. I even do it myself, if I see some blunt corner I will try to flatten it before putting it in the binder. If I see dirt I will try to clean it. Other things I won’t bother because too lazy and well, it’s just a binder copy, I got it in the first place just to collect and admire the card closer and clearer than I could with a slab. (Hence why I have most cards in both slabs and binder)
You’re overthinking what it means to alter what is just cardboard. Like I said in another thread, pokemon cards are not sacred paintings by da Vinci, it’s just mass produced cardboard.
Same with the debate about 10s. Most 10s are 10s and most 9s are 9s. Some 10s I bought I am not happy with I will just sell them and get another 10 that satisfies me. No big deal.
When I say just buy 10 or nothing, I of course know it will trigger people who can’t deal with the fact they are outpriced of the card they want and try to cope with it justifying collecting lower grades. That’s the point. In general antiques and collectibles you don’t want to be in the middle of the road. Either get the top spec or the low cheap stuff. Don’t be in the middle, that’s what suffers the most when the dynamics go bear.
This. Also, with the current high grading standards, what´s the point.
The way I see it, the risk is that you destroy your card, and the reward would be that the 5 you ´altered´, turns into a 7/8. Hardly useful as we all know that in the modern market a 7 is trash (I know, there are cards where a 7 is still valuable, but in those cases, so is the 5).
