Thought I'd try Sgc. Sadly....

[Phillies*phan]

I've been dealing with PSA since about 2002. I saw how everyone on net54 loves SGC, so I thought I'd give them a few cards and see how they do. I honestly think all the "overgraded" talk on this board may be raising they're standards. Any opinions on this Cobb would be appreciated. It has One 1/2" wrinkle at his shoulder and a clean back. I thought a 3 for sure maybe a 4. Huh. The Johnson is also crease free. The guy who filled out my paperwork said he was a grader and it would get a 5 or 5.5. Guess I'll just stick with PSA.

[Ladder7]

Accurate grading will not be tolerated in this hobby.

[sb1]

Both cards appear accurately graded. There is no way the Johnson would grade EX, not even on the west coast I would hope. The Cobb might warrant a VG grade based strictly on appearance.

[Delray Vintage]

Doug it seems like a reasonable grade, maybe cobb could have been a 40 but not higher

[Tcards-Please]

Nice cards Doug. It is hard to really tell from the scans, but from my experience with SGC, it looks like the Cobb and Johnson were graded pretty accurately. Depending on the wrinkle, it does appear that the Cobb could have received a 3, nothing higher though.

r/
Frank

[CMIZ5290]

For what it's worth, i agree with the grade of the cobb with it having a small paper wrinkle.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I have seen numerous T206s that look like the Johnson in 60 holders.

[Bicem]

grading is subjective, just keep sending them in until you get the desired grade.

[calvindog]

The Johnson is a 4 or a 5, the Cobb a 2 or a 3. Stop whining and go back to PSA.

[Delray Vintage]

I think the Johnson corners do not deserve a 60 close but not there.

[ullmandds]

When one is accustomed to PSA's overgrading...it can be frustrating to cross over to SGC.

[CMIZ5290]

I agree with peter, but those 60's were badly overgraded.

[nolemmings]

First of all Doug, those are nice cards. They look the same now as they did before you had them graded, which is to say they looked nice and I assume you were happy with them. I wouldn't get too bummed about your first submission.

I would tend to agree with what others have posted. I would not expect a card with a 1/2 inch "wrinkle" (read minor crease) across the image to receive any higher than a 3 on its best day. As for the Johnson, your scans are a bit blurry to these tired old eyes, but it looks like there might be some discoloration in that upper left corner. If not, I could maybe see that card grabbing a 60 on its best day, but the corners are a bit too rounded to call that a sure thing, and a 70 is a big stretch, IMO. Compare a Polar Bear WaJo PSA 4 on ebay right now--it has sharper corners and similar centering to yours with minor discoloration typical of that ad back. IMO, that card is accurately graded, and it too is very nice.

I know folks here are biased a little toward SGC, but I don't think you got a bum deal. I'd give them another shot or two.

[calvindog]

Yeah, definitely go back to PSA, they really grade cards accurately.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/calvindog/4581299311/" title="1911-14 Martens Bakery D304 (No Team) by calvindog65, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4062/4581299311_e3623b4e8c_b.jpg" width="900" height="761" alt="1911-14 Martens Bakery D304 (No Team)" /></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/calvindog/3210097170/" title="1911-14 General Baking D304 (No Team) by calvindog65, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3449/3210097170_3bac820a2f_o.jpg" width="900" height="735" alt="1911-14 General Baking D304 (No Team)" /></a>

[chaddurbin]

i'd take a t206 demmitt over that cobb (probably a 3 tho)

[Phillies*phan]

Jeffrey, do you work for SGC? You seem very upset. This was not my intention. If I offended you in any way, I'm sorry. I justed wanted some feedback on normal sgc grading as the diferance in a cobb 2 or 3 is several hundred dollars.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Perhaps you should have trimmed them first.

[Rickyy]

Nice cards Doug...Johnson might have gotten another grade up..but the crease is a big downgrade on SGC even if the cards look nice overall...

[Peter_Spaeth]

--

[Peter_Spaeth]

another

[calvindog]

Doug, I don't work for SGC but I find it annoying when people run on the board with fairly graded cards (either SGC or PSA) and whine about how unfairly they were treated. As Todd pointed out, they're the same cards prior to you getting them slabbed and you liked them just fine then. I routinely feel like I get the shaft upon submitting cards...but it is what it is. And I'm not down on PSA as I have thousands of cards graded by them including some high grade vintage sets.

[Peter_Spaeth]

and another

[calvindog]

This one still drives me crazy.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/calvindog/3084954078/" title="1908 Detroit Free Press PC 773-4 by calvindog65, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3015/3084954078_91616db3e7_o.jpg" width="475" height="882" alt="1908 Detroit Free Press PC 773-4" /></a>

[CMIZ5290]

Oh boy, that gasper is hideous!!

[CMIZ5290]

Jeff- what about the reverse of that cobb??

[packs]

Both cards appear to be miscut. Does that factor into the grading at SGC?

[Peter_Spaeth]

here's one for you kevin
i would give the walt a 60

[steve B]

How did that rate a 60? Mine seem to get hit pretty hard. Edit to say I mean the Cranston. Slow typing and I'm a whole page behind....

I'd think the Cobb is right as a 30 with the crease, and the Johnsone seems right as vg-ex.

The ones below I think are a little low. Maybe a lot low looking at those last two.

Steve B

http://www.net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=2593http://www.net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=3317http://www.net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=3318 http://www.net54baseball.com/picture.php?albumid=123&pictureid=3319

[CMIZ5290]

Peter- decent looking corners on the doyle, typical staining with polar bear, but i get your point. Just for kicks and giggles, is it available for sale?

[Peter_Spaeth]

scans were on a quick ebay search all cards are there

[egbeachley]

If you want 5's or 6's, send them to PSA. If you want 10's, send them to BCCG.

[David W]

Grading is an opinion. You payed for SGC's opinion and they gave it to you.

Send them off to PSA and see if they agree with SGC's opinion. Maybe they will, maybe they won't.

I finally wised up last year and quit wasting my money sending cards off to PSA for their opinion, when mine worked just fine.

[wonkaticket]

Yep those are the breaks welcome to my world....

Those wacky grading guys they will get you every time. :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/conroy_1.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/hugginsper201.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/Foster.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/killian.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/devlin_1.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/oldring_1.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/matty.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/wheat_1.jpg

[wonkaticket]

Two more...

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/flecther.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/delehanty_1.jpg

Doug no offense if they gave you a SGC 70 5.5 on your Johnson...I would have too knock stuff over at SGC's booth in Oakes. :)

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/large/johnson_1.jpg

[bobbyw8469]

I see alot of wonderful, undergraded cards (especially on page #4!)....if anyone wants to sell any at VCP average, I am a buyer (with my Drimmel at hand!).....

[3-2-count]

That's why I buy the card, not the number on the slab. I could give a rats arse what number's are displayed on the flip.

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/andreatny/tinkerfront-5.jpg http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/andreatny/clarkeportfrontfinal-1.jpg http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/andreatny/9-18lajoieportfront-1.jpg

[Anthony S.]

Wonka, I hope you don't let hemophiliacs linger near the corners of those cards. Very sharp.

[wonkaticket]

Tony as always wow! That Lajoie is off the hook amazing! The others too. :)

[CMIZ5290]

Tony- how much for the lajoie?

[3-2-count]

2 more, (who cares what the flip says) cards!!

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/andreatny/1johnsonport-1.jpg http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/andreatny/1chaseport-1.jpg

[3-2-count]

Thanks John, much appreciated. Yours are stunning as well. Kevin the Lajoie is what one speaks of when they say, "Untouchable".... ;)

[CMIZ5290]

tony- obviously, these cards have other issues such as wrinkles or other condition problems. would that be accurate?

[CMIZ5290]

tony- in the world of sports cards and memorabilia, nothing is "untouchable"!

[RayBShotz]

Holy Crap Tony! Those cards are brilliant beauties!
RayB

[CMIZ5290]

Come on guys! Ease up a little on sgc grading. All of tony's examples are sgc grades. I have numerous cards, like tony, graded by psa that appear to be 3 to 4 grades higher than the grade given. One small paper wrinkle literally naked to the eye will lower the overall grade by up to 3 full grades. i have a t206 green cobb psa 4 that you would swear is a 8!

[wonkaticket]

Tony, LOL right there with you who needs the flips, if I want to collect plastic there is always Tupperware. LOL

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/bell_1.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/McIntyre.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/rube.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/40071275_f.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/Dooin.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/cobbbaton.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/fiene_1.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/Sullivan.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/Jones_1.jpghttp://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn3/ebay/doyle_2.jpg

[wonkaticket]

Wonka, I hope you don't let hemophiliacs linger near the corners of those cards. Very sharp.

LOL now that is funny. :)

[oldjudge]

Easy Jeff. His name is Doug Bacon, not Doug Allen.

[3-2-count]

tony- obviously, these cards have other issues such as wrinkles or other condition problems. would that be accurate?

Kevin. Yes, all have a blemish, but who cares. Not I for sure.


ps- John your kill'in me with those cards. I think we share the same "IT" factor in our criteria of collecting..... Those are just gorgeous.

[calvindog]

Easy Jeff. His name is Doug Bacon, not Doug Allen.

Sorry, all I saw was "Doug" and some whining.

[murcerfan]

You can post scans all night long, but the standards are supposed to be:

http://www.sgccard.com/grading_scale.htm

[mintacular]

Well, I'm not going to take sides on what these cards should've graded but I must say that I am really annoyed with the recent spate of cards on eBay in which the seller lists a TPG grades but puts in title "Looks like a (blank)"....

While I understand there are many cards undergraded in ;ow grade slabs it has gone waayyyy too far with sellers basically ignoring TPG grades, etc. and claiming cards "looks NM" even though they reside in a VG slab with a huge crease. 9/10 times the TPG gave the low-grade card for a reason...

I think there is a tendency for everyone to think their card is undergraded reminiscent of a parent who thinks their butt ugly kid looks Grace Kelley or Brad Pitt.

[wonkaticket]

Uhh yeah “murcerfan” I think we are all familiar with the grading companies standards, but thanks for posting them just in case somebody here doesn’t have the internet or access to the TPG websites. :p

I don’t think anyone here at least Tony and I weren’t debating any third party’s rules or grading guidelines or crying the blues as we are very happy with our cards regardless of what some TPG says. (correct me if I’m speaking wrong for you Tony)

The point we were trying to illustrate via shared scans was that cards can have a visual appearance well beyond the technical grade given by any third party, and those cards shouldn’t be ignored and in many cases offer a better looking card to that of an equally or higher technically graded card. Also as Jeff pointed out if you liked the card prior to the slab or the old slab it's the same card you can still be just as happy regardless of a number.

For me it’s all about how a card looks first and foremost, regardless of the plastic tomb it’s in or the number attached.

Cheers,

John

[3-2-count]

I don’t think anyone here at least Tony and I weren’t debating any third party’s rules or grading guidelines or crying the blues as we are very happy with our cards regardless of what some TPG says. (correct me if I’m speaking wrong for you Tony)

Cheers,

John

Yep!! That was the only point I was making as well. Nothing more.
Well said John.........

[vintagetoppsguy]

Well, I'm not going to take sides on what these cards should've graded but I must say that I am really annoyed with the recent spate of cards on eBay in which the seller lists a TPG grades but puts in title "Looks like a (blank)"....

While I understand there are many cards undergraded in ;ow grade slabs it has gone waayyyy too far with sellers basically ignoring TPG grades, etc. and claiming cards "looks NM" even though they reside in a VG slab with a huge crease. 9/10 times the TPG gave the low-grade card for a reason...

I think there is a tendency for everyone to think their card is undergraded reminiscent of a parent who thinks their butt ugly kid looks Grace Kelley or Brad Pitt.

That really annoys me too. Here is one that was recently listed:

http://cgi.ebay.com/1909-11-T206-Ty-Cobb-Green-Portrait-PSA-1-looks-PSA-4-/200586862415?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item2eb3e89f4f

It's a PSA 1, but says "Looks PSA 4" in the title. Ummm, no, it looks like a 1 because it has paper loss, Einstein.

[steve B]

That's how I think of it as well. I'm happy with the cards I showed no matter what grade they got. I wouldn't have bought them if I didn't like them.

But I am puzzled by the grades, especially when I see a lot of cards with VG or worse corners getting 50 or 60. I may have the ones I showed reviewed. I haven't found the flaw with 2 of them yet. The Bescher I think should be higher based on their own standards. The Smith too.
[80/20 or better centering, minor rounding or fuzzing of corners, roughness or chipping along edge (no layering), one VERY slight surface or "spider" crease may exist on one side of the card, gloss may be lost from surface with some scratching that does not detract from the aesthetics of the card.
A 60 EX 5 card with higher grade centering or corners.

The Bescher has a slight bend on the lower left corner. Certainly nothing I'd call a crease. It's only visible by looking at the card from a certain angle and tilting it. while tilting you can see a change in gloss from one angle to another. So I'd think 60 would be right.
The Smith has a very small bit of chipping on one corner. That one is a bit less clear to me.

Overall I'm happy with SGC. Most of the few cards I submitted I feel got the grades they should have, usually 40 or 50. I'd been against grading for years, but I think that now there's enough questionable stuff that's raw, and the price difference for nicer cards is large enough that I should get some graded. I'm not sending in the ones with obvious problems that would keep them in the 1-3 range, as I still see no point to that.

Steve B

QUOTE=wonkaticket;878524]Uhh yeah “murcerfan” I think we are all familiar with the grading companies standards, but thanks for posting them just in case somebody here doesn’t have the internet or access to the TPG websites. :p

I don’t think anyone here at least Tony and I weren’t debating any third party’s rules or grading guidelines or crying the blues as we are very happy with our cards regardless of what some TPG says. (correct me if I’m speaking wrong for you Tony)

The point we were trying to illustrate via shared scans was that cards can have a visual appearance well beyond the technical grade given by any third party, and those cards shouldn’t be ignored and in many cases offer a better looking card to that of an equally or higher technically graded card. Also as Jeff pointed out if you liked the card prior to the slab or the old slab it's the same card you can still be just as happy regardless of a number.

For me it’s all about how a card looks first and foremost, regardless of the plastic tomb it’s in or the number attached.

Cheers,

John[/QUOTE]

[T206.org]

I will never get tired of seeing John or Tony's T206... <drools>!

[T206Collector]

Those sharp-cornered 3s demonstrate the true value of TPG. Indeed, every time I see one of them I think, "There's another nice-looking card with hard-to-see flaws that an unscrupulous or unknowing dealer won't be passing off as Mint."

I am allergic to paying mint prices for creased cards.

[jerrys]

IMO these T206 cards were graded in a consistent and accurate manner.


http://home.roadrunner.com/~jspillman/mt206.htm


http://home.roadrunner.com/~jspillman/mt206h.htm

[danmckee]

Cobb is a 3 and Johnson is a 5

[danmckee]

If a flaw can't be seen with the naked eye, then who cares. I am a collector and if the card looks good in my binder in the plastic sheet, then it is for me. I don't care if it has a flaw that you can only see when it is magnified 100 times.


This used to be a hobby, before TPG

Dan Mckee

[Ease]

nevermind...

[novakjr]

The borders on the Cobb aren't exactly square either. Slightly diamond cut, I'm sure that didn't help the grade any.