1940 Play Ball - Jimmy Foxx - SGC 4

[deadballera]

looks too nice to only get a 4

thoughts ?

[packs]

Looks like a stain on the left side, no?

[t206fanatic]

Looks like a stain on the left side, no?

I think thats the start of the infield grass. Agree that it looks undergraded.

[JollyElm]

Just a guess, but look at it real closely, tilting it in the light and whatnot. Since it was put into the VG/EX category, chances are there's probably some sort of hidden 'crease' somewhere. I put the word in air quotes, because it doesn't have to be what a normal collector would consider a crease, but some kind of small, crease-like anomaly maybe?

[deadballera]

don't see any creases with different angles in the light

[Leon]

Could it be the bit of OC top to bottom? Great looking 4. (assume the back has no issues)

[jchcollins]

Could it be the bit of OC top to bottom? Great looking 4. (assume the back has no issues)


That shouldn’t be egregious enough to get a 4. PSA’s standard for the front on a 4 is 85/15.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[tedzan]

An example for consideration......

http://photos.imageevent.com/tedzan77/images/large/T206JohsonSGC40.jpg


Many years ago, at the Ft Washington Show, I submitted this T206 Walter Johnson to SGC. I was quite disappointed
with the grade they gave it.

So I inquired. Derek Grady, who was the grader of it at that time, pointed out to me (under magnification) that there
was a very faint smear of a tiny glue spot (almost invisible) on this card's back.

My point here is, take a close-up look of the back of this Jimmy Foxx card.

The front of this card is perfect. That's not a "stain" in the lower left (it's part of the infield grass in the picture).

TED Z

T206 Reference (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=237816)
.

[deadballera]

thanks for all of the comments