Grading blank backed cards

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I am just home from the wonderful, annual MoreDirect (where I work) National Sales Meeting so I figure since I am back at home I will throw a question out to the crowd concerning blank backed cards. This is a retort to seeing Martin Neal's really nice Ruth Exhibit card on the New Pickup thread. The question was "do grading companies take off for back damage on blank backed cards?" I know SGC is pretty hard on them. I think that card would be a 10-20, with a very outside chance at a 30. I wouldn't be surprised to see it in a 10-20 holder but would be if it were in a 30. My thought on the grading of blank backs is that it's somewhat of a conundrum. They really need to be consistent and grade them the way they do but it doesn't seem fair on the other hand? I have some beautiful low grade cards that have a back issue and have been killed. Here might be the best 10 in existence with chipping to the blank back and paper loss to a part of one letter. It's a shame, <br />however in SGC's defense, they have said they would re-evaluate it....but with no promises until it's in hand of course. If this card was sold I doubt the number on the holder would keep the price down so I will probably just let it ride. I don't generally collect by the number but do like to know my cards haven't been tampered with according to a 3rd party expert, as SGC is...regards<br /><br />ps...get your guesses in on the new contest as I will say what the answer is and the winner will be picked at about 7pm CST this evening....<br /><br /><br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1207500429.JPG">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>I know it stings to have an otherwise beautiful card get dinged because of back damage, particularly when the card has a blank back.<br /><br />At the same time, the grading scale is what it is, and unfortunate as it may be, I definitely agree with it. To me it's like saying that the card is gorgeous, well-centered, great color and gloss, no wrinkles, but has four soft corners, it should be graded without considering the corners, because the soft corners are just one flaw and the rest of the card is dynamite. If you buy into the idea that we assign higher values to cards based on their condition, then it's only right to factor in all the components that make up a card's condition.<br /><br />The back of a card is a part of the card. To me, having a scrape of paper loss of a blank back is no different from having a scrape of paper loss of a blank spot on the front of the card - it's paper missing from the card that should be there. I want it factored into the grade. If I got a card in a 4 or 5 holder, and it had paper loss on the back, I'd be invoking the grading company's guarantee.<br /><br />-Al<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>BcD</b><p>That Bender looks like a high end 50*<br><br>BcD <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Leon,<br />That is a gorgeous card! I realize they are technically following their guidelines (though I have seen SGC 50s with paperloss and PSA 6s), I think there is a flaw in the scale when a card looks that nice and is assigned the lowest possible grade. I have said it before; I think that grading should reflect the visual appeal of the card to some degree. Physical flaws like creases lower the technical grade BECAUSE they detract from the visual appeal. When a minor flaw is exaggerated in technical grading to such a degree that it obviously does not correspond with the appeal of the card, I think there is a flaw in the grading system.<br />JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>boxingcardman</b><p>whether or not the card is blank-backed. Pricing is another matter. A T206 with back damage will be punished severely in the marketplace but from what I've seen, the prices on Exhibits and Zeenuts aren't affected all that much by minor back issues because many collectors don't care and others are just happy to find the cards in any grade. <br /><br />When I saw this post initially, I thought it was about how to grade a card with a printing defect. That is one I've not had a good answer for. If the card is blank-backed I'd think an "A" would be the only fair thing but I've seen the services grade them numerically at better than a 1. <br><br>Sic Gorgiamus Allos Subjectatos Nunc