GAI Rejects; but SGC Grades-Very Scary ? [Archive]

View Full Version : GAI Rejects; but SGC Grades-Very Scary ?

Archive

12-07-2005, 04:50 PM

Posted By: Ted ZanidakisAt the Philly Show last week I decided I would get my favorite T206 card, Walter Johnson (portrait), graded. I took it from my set and submitted to GAI first for a $5 "preview". GAI rejected it for top border trimmed. Of course I was surprised, but undaunted, so I submitted to SGC. SGC doesn't have a "preview" so I took a risk and paid them the $25 up front to grade my Johnson. As you can see SGC graded it. I not happy with this grade, but they did explain it. There is a discoloration on the upper part of the back of the card; accounting for this low grade on a card which otherwise appears near mint. So, how can anyone have any confidence in the Grading of cards when experiences such as this demonstrate the very arbitrary nature of this industry. My point here is, what did GAI see, that SGC didn't ? <img src="http://freephotoserver.com/v001/tedzan/wjohnsona.jpg"> <img src="http://freephotoserver.com/v001/tedzan/wjohnsonb.jpg">

Archive

12-07-2005, 05:09 PM

Posted By: Peter_SpaethIt is unrealistic to expect perfect consistency on something so subjective. It is only opinions being provided. Noone is forcing anyone to submit or buy graded cards, so if people are, either they are mostly stupid, or maybe just maybe overall the grading companies are doing a pretty good job.

Archive

12-07-2005, 05:18 PM

Posted By: HolsteinI have had a similar experience. I submitted two very rare cards to SGC - both were returned as not gradeable (I forget the exact reason listed on the card savers). I wanted them graded for my personal collection, so I submitted them to PSA and both were graded 4's. I am not anti-PSA, I use both PSA and SGC. You can't expect any grading company to get it right every time. However, I believe the major companies do a pretty good job of catching most alterations etc. Without the grading companies it would be very difficult to transact business via the internet. The trick is deciding which grading company you have the most faith in. I rely on SGC for all pre-war cards and PSA for modern cards.

Archive

12-07-2005, 05:29 PM

Posted By: Josh K.First of all, nice WJ. It does not look trimmed to me - though the scan is a bit to bright to get a good look of the top edge from the front. It is possible that GAI's "preview" is a quick scan of the card w/o taking the time to examine it closely (such as with a loupe, etc) as one would do if actually grading it. Maybe it just looked too good to gai and they rejected it.

Archive

12-07-2005, 07:41 PM

Posted By: barry arnoldBottom line is the card looks great TRex Ted. Congrats on a fabulous Walter. We know it looks near mint and maybe that's all that matters. all the best, herbivore tbarry

Archive

12-07-2005, 07:47 PM

Posted By: Ted ZanidakisJosh K. I asked Steve Rocchi (GAI honcho) about this and he said even though their "preview" is done pretty fast, it is quite representative of a final grade should you follow up and have it graded. I am not really a fan of the graded card industry; however, if it looks like I have a card that is worthy of a High grade, then I go for it. And, I thought this T206 Johnson was a good candidate. Several years ago I had the very same experience as this one. I sub- mitted to PSA a really sharp looking 1949 Bowman Stan Musial. They rejected it as "evidence of trimmed". I tried to tell them that I had this card for many years before anyone ever thought of trimming cards. They did not want hear anything and during a heated discussion actually changed their opinion to stating that the card "was short". I turned around and submitted the Musial card to SGC. They gave this card a Grade 88. You figure it, I certainly cannot. But, consider this, how many High Graded cards are out there that are trimmed, but are now in plastic and collectors have paid high prices for ?

Archive

12-07-2005, 08:13 PM

Posted By: AnsonI had the same experience with a 1959 Brooks Robinson. There is always going to be some room for error, as they are graded by humans. Albeit cliche, buy the card and not the holder. In the case of your WJ, I would buy it in a heartbeat.

Archive

12-08-2005, 05:26 AM

Posted By: Pennsylvania TedAnson I agree with you, this is the nicest copy of this Johnson I have ever seen. This card is my 7th upgrade in the past 20 years and I am quite happy with this T206 card. I will soon crack open the plastic and let Mr. Johnson "breathe" again. Tell me what experience you had with your 1959 BRobby card ? T-Rex Ted

Archive

12-08-2005, 05:52 AM

Posted By: T206Collector. . . concentrate on cards that grade SGC 80/6 or lower. Of course, it helps that cards graded higher are way too expensive. But, I actually look for even corner wear as a sign that the card has not been tampered with. I do believe that an inappropriately high percentage of vintage cards that have been graded above an 80/6 may have been tampered with. Sharp corners on a T206 card always raise my level of concern. Given my grading experiences, SGC is the most conservative of the three major grading companies when it comes to T206 cards. GAI 'tweeners are routinely crossed over into a grade or worse lower. And about 25% of my PSA crossovers (with over 40 submissions) came back either a grade lower or EVID TRM from SGC. Determining whether a card is trimmed or altered is not an exact science. When you dabble in sharp cornered cardboard from before the 1st World War, your chances of getting a trimmed card in a graded holder goes up exponentially. Buyer beware...

Archive

12-08-2005, 11:25 AM

Posted By: Ted ZanidakisThanks T206Collector I agree with you on two accounts. (1) If I have to get a card graded I have more confidence in SGC. (2) There are probably more High Graded cards out there than we'd like to think that are subtlely trimmed in some manner or other. And, if they are never removed from their encapsulation, no one will ever know. After all, the most significant Graded card in the hobby, the Gretzy- Gidwitz-whoever now Wagner, we all know now is a trimmed card.

Archive

12-08-2005, 11:35 AM

Posted By: T206Collector...I have never been much of an autograph collector with cards/photos I did not get autographed myself. You are always taking someone's word for it if you did not see the item signed in person; you are paying for someone's word, more than you are paying for the ink on the image. Don't get me wrong, I love my Marquard autographed T206 cards, and James Spence has signed off on them twice -- once at PSA/DNA and more recently at SGC/JSA -- but, at the end of the day, Mr. Spence was not present when Marquard signed those cards and neither was I. I will never be 100% sure the cards were not autographed by someone other than old Rube himself. Would I like to own a PSA 8 or 9 graded T206 Mathewson portrait? Sure I would. But I could never justify the obscene amount of cash that would cost. And I would always wonder whether those corners weren't just a little too sharp, if you know what I mean.

Archive

12-08-2005, 12:04 PM

Posted By: warshawlawTrimming determinations are so subjective if the trim was vintage on these cards. Unless it is blatant, you are crap-shooting. Obviously, none of us can tell from the scans what the top edge looks like. I've had cards rejected as trimmed once then slabbed the next time by the same service. BTW, how'd you get Walter sunburnt? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

12-08-2005, 01:54 PM

Posted By: Ted ZanidakisAdam W. I am not so sure that it's a sunburnt effect. I would like to think it is more like a "golden" enhancement of a great vintage card of the best pitcher in BB history. Sure, Cy Young won many more games but he was on many winning teams. Johnson's 21 years were on the lowly Washinghton Senators. And, they were a contender for only a couple of years. Besides, Johnson's ERA = 2.17.....Young's = 2.63