Makes me want to go raw [Archive] - Net54baseball.com Forums

Archive

10-20-2008, 06:30 PM

Posted By: David RI have been a slabbed card guy up until now but the wide variation in the grades of my slabbed cards makes me reconsider. If I cover up all the slabs and rank the cards based on appearance, they don't seem to correlate very well with the numerical grades. When "technical" grades don't correspond well with the aesthetic appeal of the cards, I begin to question the whole system. This is especially true for me, given that aesthetic appeal is a major reason for collecting the things in the first place. I just got the grade back on this one. Any guesses (there are no creases)? <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1224548944.JPG"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1224548962.JPG">

Archive

10-20-2008, 06:33 PM

Posted By: Steve5? Steve

Archive

10-20-2008, 06:35 PM

Posted By: TFerg4 or 5, IMO a very sweet card

Archive

10-20-2008, 06:39 PM

Posted By: Chris My guess is vg/ex but probably vg. Go raw, slabs are bulky and cost lots of $$$.

Archive

10-20-2008, 06:39 PM

Posted By: Robyeah, I'd guess a 4 or 5 also. Great centering, strong color, very clean. if there is even a hint of paper loss on the back though, maybe its a 2 - i'm just guessing something must be wrong, and thus why u're posting <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> nice card!

Archive

10-20-2008, 06:39 PM

Posted By: Tim4, maybe even a 3 if there is paper loss in the lower corner.

Archive

10-20-2008, 06:44 PM

Posted By: JimBProbably a 4. I could not agree with you more. I have been beating the same drum for a few years now. I see the need for acknowledging technical flaws, but if the grade has little to no relation to the actual visual appeal of the card, then what is the point? Why grade at all if a 4 is more desirable than a 7 before they were slabbed? JimB

Archive

10-20-2008, 06:48 PM

Posted By: Anthony S.AUTH? Great looking card, but is it a tad short?

Archive

10-20-2008, 06:50 PM

Posted By: David RRob, you're right I'm just a little "raw" about this one. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> It came back an SGC 30. The only flaw is the bottom left corner; I've got 40s that have more wear than that on every corner. I just continue to question how often the "technical" grade bears little resemblance to how the card looks. And more importantly, how many people will pay more for a card because it has a higher "technical" grade, even though it looks a lot worse. JimB, I totally agree with you.

Archive

10-20-2008, 07:11 PM

Posted By: Fred CWe can all debate grading and I think more and more people tend to agree that the grading servcies should render opinions that indicate a card is Authentic (w/ no modifications) or Altered. The numbers game is what can be easily debated. SUBJECTIVITY. Eye appeal. Some people might not mind an off centered card if all else is stellar. Look at PSA, they can't even adhere to their grading criteria, especially as it relates to centering. How can PSA indicate that a card must have xx/yy centering or the highest grade it can achieve is GG. PSA should have stuck to their grading standards and put an OC qualifier on all cards that deserve it. This obviously hasn't happened. I refuse to play the numbers game. Sadly, I've sold a few "overgraded" cards and the buyers know the cards are "overgraded" yet their comments were that the label has the number they want on it. Sad, sad, sad...

Archive

10-20-2008, 07:41 PM

Posted By: steve yawitzStrange. I looked at that card and thought that it probably had a relatively high technical grade - say an SGC 50 or 60 - but that it looked horrible because of the weak registration. Turns out it has a relatively low SGC grade and that most people find it quite appealing. Doesn't necessarily make me want to go raw but it does make me want to keep looking for cards where there's a gap between numeric grade and my own visual preferences. Case in point: <img src="http://photos.imageevent.com/yawie99/myothercards/combined/websize/1910%20E93%20Mathewson.jpg"> On one hand, it's just an accurately graded SGC 20; but on the other, I find the overall visual appeal stunning. I'm not at all bothered by minor paper loss like that and my eye is not drawn to the crease in the lower left. I'm sure many collectors would rather gouge their eyes out than look at this card, but I love pieces like this. I've taken just about every approach on the raw-graded continuum before finally figuring out what works best for me: avoiding the numbers game and simply maximizing appeal to my own eye while hopefully minimizing cost.

Archive

10-20-2008, 08:00 PM

Posted By: leonAs much as I am a supporter of grading as I think it's done far more good than bad, I think there should be some debates about revisions to the standards. It's already relative so why not have a portion of the technical grade be for eye appeal? Is it too subjective? (sort of being sarastic though maybe it is) For the record these are probably accurately graded per "standards"....excuse the Clarke, please... <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1224554271.JPG"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1224554346.JPG">

Archive

10-20-2008, 08:05 PM

Posted By: Fred CIs that paper loss on the back of the Bender? I tell you what, I'd take that card in a 1 holder any day over most of the cards that are creased w/ rounded corners in a 2 or 3 holder. Heck, I'd probably take that card over a card graded 4 with rounded corners. The Bender has fantastic eye appeal. I'll look for cards in low grade holders all day long if the eye appeal is right.

Archive

10-20-2008, 08:15 PM

Posted By: Tony AndreaHow about this one. Just picked it up via a buddy on the board. It's gonna get nailed if graded due to the faint tape residue on top, but who cares. The eye appeal is spectacular. <img src="http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a95/andreatny/1chanceredEPDG.jpg">

Archive

10-20-2008, 08:23 PM

Posted By: leonFred- Yes, it's paper loss. There is a small wrinkle on the Mathewson on the front near his head. I paid a solid price for it many years ago...from some guy named Brockelman.... Tony- Your card and the Bender are the epitome of perfect cards (for me)..

Archive

10-20-2008, 09:07 PM

Posted By: Fred CLeon, You actually got yourself into a transaction, or two, with that Brockelman guy? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> That Bender is the reason that grading should be handled differently. The over all appeal of that card is incredible. Some people may not like paper loss but I tell you what, as long as it's on the back and it doesn't affect the overall appearance of the card then paperloss is fine with me. Let me know if you ever want to sell that Bender for the going "1" price! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

10-20-2008, 09:26 PM

Posted By: JantzGrading sometimes has me scratching my head also. I agree that it is helpful to a collector or investor, but there are those occurrences when something was obviously missed. Here is my example. The black substance that you see is not from my scanner or on the slab, its on the card itself. <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1224559042.JPG"> David - I can see why you are upset, that is a nice card you have. My first guess was a 50/4. By the way, the card that I have posted received a grade of 4. Its still a mystery to me. Jantz

Archive

10-20-2008, 09:27 PM

Posted By: steve yawitzI'd argue that not only does the grading game work just fine but that you can play it to your advantage. One can exploit - and I'm not sure if that's the right word - differences in PSA's/SGC's/XYZ's standards and your own. Why pay a big premium for a 50 or 60 when you can sometimes find 10's and 20's that look at least as nice? I'd take cards like that Bender or Chance all day long. <a href="http://imageevent.com/yawie99" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://imageevent.com/yawie99</a>

Archive

10-20-2008, 11:40 PM

Posted By: Robert BI've been turned off by the grading and the "If psa says it so, it must be" attitude of that place. I felt the grading was inconsistent. I've seen some very appealing 4-5's and some 7's that were not. Also the qualifiers has to go. I disagree that a 9 or an 8, because it may be slightly off center would drop two numbers because of that. How is an 8 slightly off ceneter the same as a 6 ? With some, 54 topps comes to mind slightly off center does not take down the eye appeal. I used to get most my cards graded but haven't in three yrs or so. Robert

Archive

10-21-2008, 05:43 AM

Posted By: Marty OgelvieI prefer a combination of both.  Graded and Raw.There is more to a graded card than the number on the flip.  For me, the slab adds tremendous eye appeal, at least SGC slabs do, as well as long term protection.  Raw cards have great appeal also and there is no substitute to holding these gems in your hands. martyOgelvie

Archive

10-21-2008, 06:05 AM

Posted By: Eric BrehmA numerical grade is only a first approximation to the desirability of a card, condition-wise. Third party graders have to apply a standard that can't possibly match all collectors' feelings regarding the effect of different condition attributes on desirability, and sometimes they just make mistakes. As long as collectors keep that in mind, and always buy the card, not the holder, they should be fine. For my T206's, centering is more important to me than sharp corners, so I buy many EX 5 examples and reject many NM 7's that I see for sale. To echo what Steve said, this is win-win for me since I get the card I prefer, and usually save some money in the bargain. The grading standard isn't wrong to assign a '7' to a card I don't like; it just doesn't quite fit my tastes in this instance, so I have to take it with a grain of salt. On balance I think third party grading is good for the hobby. Graders (in theory at least) provide a starting point for condition assessment by screening out fake and altered cards, identifying subtle defects that are difficult to detect, measuring the centering of the image, and so on. The rest is up to collectors to figure out.

Archive

10-21-2008, 08:05 AM

Posted By: RedIs there a pin hole at top center on the T206 Lajoie? All the great looking ones and twos are extreme examples of what makes nailing a card down to one grade that everyone will agree on so difficult. Sure they're all gorgeous cards, but they all have defects that causes the technical grade assigned to the card to not accurately reflect the value.

Archive

10-21-2008, 09:09 AM

Posted By: Scott SarianI think I've shown this card of mine before, but it is perfect for this discussion. This Walter Johnson has a perfect front, but has a couple of areas of minor paper loss. For that, it got a PSA 1? (I've since crossed it to SGC, but only got a 20, so not much better.) There are no hidden creases, and the corners are all nice and sharp. The grade is totally based on the minor paper loss on the back. <img src="http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f81/scooter0729/walter.jpg"> This is better than many 4's and 5's I have seen, so this is a perfect example of the technical grade not truly being representative of the eye appeal.

Archive

10-21-2008, 10:56 AM

Posted By: E, DanielGrading reduces a card's condition to measurables that are mostly unambiguous. A card either has a wrinkle, crease, paper loss, poor centering, etc.., or it doesn't. Now you want grading to somehow reflect the extraordinary variation in peoples estimations of beauty? Or a really pretty card gets to offset a pull, rub or tear by how many grades? Or does a super super pretty card with perfect registration somehow overcome a neglible border at top? To who? And how many grades is everyone going to agree on? That's insane and far better left to each collector's excrutiatingly personal impressions. Try and grade on beauty, and there is no grade at all that can be agreed on. Go down that road, and we'll end up with a previous poster's notice of descriptions such as 'Nice', and maybe stunning, pretty, desultory and others! I love grading, love slabs, love a third party's opinion outside of the seller's less-than-unbiased estimation. But every card in my collection has to be one I love, and I've lost count of the times I've 'downgraded' a card to a lower number slab example because I enjoyed it visually more. Doesn't mean I think it's worth the same equivalency in dollars and cents than a higher graded card - or that it should grade the same, merely that it 'fits' my collection better. But mostly, I love being able to look at a card and decide for myself what it's worth, framed or nude. Why are people so hung up on grading? So there's some variation - big deal? How much do you think people would agree on this site on a card's condition and value, and how many disputes would fill the page asking for a group opinion and resolution of descriptions based on aesthetics overcoming structural definitions? Seriously, buy what you like for a price you can manage and just get on with enjoying the cards themselves. Daniel

Archive

10-21-2008, 11:06 AM

Posted By: T206Collector...RE-eeee--alllly miss the point of third party grading. Third party grading is MOST VALUABLE in cases of your T206 Lajoie. It is SGC telling prospective buyers to beware of hard to see damage (paper loss, pin holes, creases, etc.) Third party grading HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH aesthetic appeal and, frankly, would be useless if that were the case. You don't need someone to tell you how beautiful a card is -- you can see that and judge for yourself. FINALLY, it is important to remember (as I've said a zillion times on here) that grading is like a pyramid. At the top, all 10's will look the same, but as you move down the scale towards the 3's, 2's and 1's you will find that there are numerous reasons for a card's grade. 1's, by definition, are like snowflakes -- no two 1's will look alike. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Visit <a href="http://www.t206collector.com" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.t206collector.com</a> for Net54 T206 archive, signed deadball card galleries, articles and more!

Archive

10-21-2008, 11:09 AM

Posted By: Ol' ProfI own two T206 Tinker portraits, both graded by PSA: <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1224608536.GIF"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1224608566.GIF"> Of the two, the PSA 4 seems to me to have better color (the scan doesn't do it justics), better centering, better registration etc. There's a small problem with two of the corners, but nothing to detract significantly from the overall appearance of the card. Yet PSA lists one at $275 and the other at $750. So their missed calls keep me from selling either. I won't sell the 4 because I like it too much, but the 6 holds more value. But my favorite is this Chance, which, to be sure, has significant corner wear and some discoloration, but shows no creases, <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1224607604.GIF"> This is a 2?! Never. I have PSA 2s that make this look like an 8 or 9. And the reverse?: <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1224607661.GIF"> Ouch. Ol' Prof

Archive

10-21-2008, 12:06 PM

Posted By: CoreyRS.hanus"At the top, all 10's will look the same" Not sure that is true, at least with some types of cards. For example, with N172's, I didn't think a card's photo contrast figured into the mix. So you can have a card slab a 10 with essentially horrible eye appeal. "Third party grading is MOST VALUABLE in cases of your T206 Lajoie. It is SGC telling prospective buyers to beware of hard to see damage (paper loss, pin holes, creases, etc.)" I think that is a terrific point. While I know its been said many times, while I appreciate a grade reflects how a card measures up to technical defined criteria, in the end those criteria should be chosen and weighted such that the end result roughly approximates market value. When 2's can sell for more than 7's (as can be the case with blank-backed photographic cards such as many "N" issues), perhaps it's time the grading companies re-examined their criteria. I'd love to see the grading companies put on the slab along with the final grade numbers that indicate the grading company's assessment of the various characteristics that (should) comprise the final grade - corners, centering, contrast, registration, back damage, etc. That would be the ultimate in third party objectivity and would give each prospective purchaser all the relevant info to make a valuation decision. And by keeping intact the "final' grade, it wouldn't interfere with the set registry or materially impact how price guides are prepared.

Archive

10-21-2008, 12:16 PM

Posted By: T206Collector<<"At the top, all 10's will look the same" Not sure that is true, at least with some types of cards. For example, with N172's, I didn't think a card's photo contrast figured into the mix. So you can have a card slab a 10 with essentially horrible eye appeal. >> If you show me two 10's that look different, you've only got one 10. If one has worse photo contrast than the other, than it is by definition not a perfect card warranting a 10. <<While I know its been said many times, while I appreciate a grade reflects how a card measures up to technical defined criteria, in the end those criteria should be chosen and weighted such that the end result roughly approximates market value.>> How can you buy into my point about using grading to objectively determine flaws and then seek to tie grading weights to market value? When 2's sell for more than 7's that has NOTHING to do with grading and everything to do with subjective taste. When you hold a 7 and a 2 those numbers objectively tell you a lot about both cards. They do not, and more importantly, are not intended to tell you which one is more valuable -- even if there is typically a direct correlation between numerical grade and value. <<When 2's can sell for more than 7's (as can be the case with blank-backed photographic cards such as many "N" issues), perhaps it's time the grading companies re-examined their criteria.>> Again, why? The grading company is just telling you what they see as flaws in the card. If the collecting public does not agree that certain flaws warrant a substantial discount on retail value, then the public makes its decision in an educated fashion. Grading should not be in the business of applying any subjective criteria to the card's grade. The point is to provide as much objective information about a card in order to allow the purchaser the ability to make the best decision possible. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Visit <a href="http://www.t206collector.com" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.t206collector.com</a> for Net54 T206 archive, signed deadball card galleries, articles and more!

Archive

10-21-2008, 12:39 PM

Posted By: CoreyRS.hanusMaybe on this one we'll agree to disagree, but it's hard for me to understand that how the grading company is helping the purchaser make the best decision possible when the market values a 2 more than a 7. Also, in regard to your point that a 10 should be a perfect card -- so that its corners, contrast, resolution, centering, etc. are all perfect -- while I agree that in theory that should be the case, in practice it is not. I can think of many 10s that are not (close to) perfect in all of those categories.

Archive

10-21-2008, 12:42 PM

Posted By: David RCorey "I'd love to see the grading companies put on the slab along with the final grade numbers that indicate the grading company's assessment of the various characteristics that (should) comprise the final grade - corners, centering, contrast, registration, back damage, etc. That would be the ultimate in third party objectivity and would give each prospective purchaser all the relevant info to make a valuation decision. And by keeping intact the "final' grade, it wouldn't interfere with the set registry or materially impact how price guides are prepared." I agree completely. I would go further, however, which leads me to question the whole grading scale. If the grading company were to assess all those things that you mention and conclude that, for example, the corners are a "7", the centering is an "8", the registration is a "7", but there is a bit of paper loss on the back (even in a place with no writing) so the back is a "1", I question how the whole card then becomes a "1". It seems like there is something wrong with a grading scale like that. But maybe the problem is that the vast majority of collectors buy into it. Either way I scratch my head. I also don't like looking at a beautiful card with a big label on top that says "poor" -- as I said in a post a long time ago, it's like dating a beautiful woman who has "ugly" stamped on her forehead, it kind of detracts from her beauty, even if I know it's not true. <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14> David R.

Archive

10-21-2008, 12:58 PM

Posted By: barrysloateThe most important point made on this thread is that eye appeal has very little impact on a final grade, while technical flaws such as minor paper loss receive an enormous amount of weight. This is most prominent with Old Judges, where photo quality and contrast are almost irrelevant, but a little paper loss to the blank back might knock an 84 down to a 20. While it is true that grading has done more good than bad for the hobby, there is no reason to think that it is perfect. Far from it, there are poor decisions made by the graders on many occasions. Regarding Old Judges, I think photo quality should be at least 75% of what constitutes the grade, and reverse paper loss maybe 25%. But my guess is it is the opposite. Corey made a very important point that it is the marketplace, not the numerical grade, that determines the price of a card. However, I think the one place that may not be true is the set registry, since the only way you can have the #1 set is by having the highest average weighted grade. Eye appeal is not even factored into that. Eye appeal, of course, is subjective, and not all of us like the same thing. So while I agree it should be an important part of the final grade, how do you achieve a consensus of opinion regarding what constitutes great eye appeal? So to sum up my point, it wouldn't hurt the hobby if the grading services simply rendered an opinion of whether or not a card is authentic, and whether or not it has been altered. Beyond that, there are too many variables, and the numeric grades are simply not universally embraced by the collecting community.

Archive

10-21-2008, 12:59 PM

Posted By: JimBIf grading has no relation to the desirability of the card, as has been suggested, then we have lost perspective on what grading scales were initially set up to do. What is to keep grading from being based on some utterly arbitrary criteria? The best centering of a card is 50/50, not 80/20. Why? Because that is what is most aesthetically pleasing and desirable. All other things equal, I don't think you could find a single collector who would prefer 80/20 centering over 50/50. That is why proximity to 50/50 centering is a grading criteria. To say that grading should have nothing to do with desirability or eye-appeal is ridiculous IMHO. Otherwise, let's give mint grades to cards with 95/5 centering, creases and rounded corners and vg to clean, 50/50, crease-free, sharp cornered cards. JimB

Archive

10-21-2008, 01:09 PM

Posted By: leonThis is the debate I was hoping for. I know that some, if not all, of the grading companies read this board. Maybe in time there will be change that is for the good of the hobby. Corey- you and I have drank a many a beer being in agreement on this topic. Regardless of personal views, thanks to all who have chimed in so far. It's sort of like voting. Regardless of who you vote for it's important to vote...or in this case voice a reasonable opinion. best regards

Archive

10-21-2008, 01:12 PM

Posted By: Eric BrehmJimB -- you are correct, the whole point of grading in the first place is to assess the condition, i.e. the aesthetic appeal, of a card. But as I said before, it is only a first approximation, because the grading criteria cannot perfectly represent eye appeal, no matter how detailed they are, and furthermore, cannot please everybody equally because of different aesthetic sense among different collectors about different types of defects.

Archive

10-21-2008, 01:16 PM

Posted By: David RLeon, I think we need to be careful what (some of us) wish for. The grading companies should be very receptive to this because a revised grading scale would mean that many graded cards would be resubmitted. Now there's something that should get their attention. David R.

Archive

10-21-2008, 01:19 PM

Posted By: JimBEric, I agree with you and with some of the statements made above about how grading company assessments should merely be a first step in a collector's evaluation of a card. That is often the case, but not always. We have all seen cards sell for more than one would expect given the assigned grade because they exemplify qualities in terms of eye-appeal that surpass technical criteria of the grading company. But more often than not, I think collectors blindly pay according to assigned grade. JimB

Archive

10-21-2008, 01:22 PM

Posted By: CoreyRS.hanus"The grading companies should be very receptive to this because a revised grading scale would mean that many graded cards would be resubmitted." For that to happen the grading company would have to first assure the resubmiters that under no circumstances would the card get bumped down. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

10-21-2008, 01:27 PM

Posted By: Eric BrehmAs others have pointed out, the set registry competitions probably do a lot to foster buying the highest grade possible, to improve one's standing. Perhaps even to the extent of accepting a higher graded card that is not as attractive to the owner as a lower graded one. I have some sets on the registry myself, but I never do this. I swear!

Archive

10-21-2008, 01:29 PM

Posted By: barrysloateAnother important point to make is that something has occurred with the business of grading that the grading services may not be giving much thought to, and that is the rash of resubmissions. And I'm not talking about the collector who may disagree with one of the grades he got; I'm talking about the cottage industry of dealers looking for undergraded cards, buying them up, and resubmitting them as many times as it takes to get a higher grade. I really believe if the graders knew that a card they once gave a 4 to has subsequently been given a 5, they would realize something is wrong with the system. And there are plenty of cards that jump two grades or more, cards that were once deemed trimmed that later get a numerical grade, etc. No grading service would want to know that they've done this, because it would render the grades worthless. But I know there are more than a few in this hobby who make a living solely on resubmitting borderline cards. That is perhaps the main reason why I think authenticity is the only thing we need from the graders. As far as numeric grades go, frankly, I don't think they are doing as well as they need to.

Archive

10-21-2008, 01:40 PM

Posted By: JBBAMAPersonally the biggest advantage for me is providing authentication, i agree with many ideas from several of the post as well. <img src="http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k147/EBAYADDICT_2006/cobb.jpg"> <img src="http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k147/EBAYADDICT_2006/cobb2.jpg">

Archive

10-21-2008, 01:46 PM

Posted By: T206Collector...which assigned phrases like VG/EX and NRMT to certain fundamental attributes of cardboard and then allocated a value to them. This debate goes all the way back to the dawn of time in our hobby about what makes a card "Very Good." The phrase "very good" means different things in different industries. How's the pie here? It's very good. Is it MINT? No, it's CHERRY! I, for one, would vote for a third party grading system that simply described the surface (clean), edges (sharp), corners (somewhat rounded, (lack of) creases or wrinkles, authentic, unaltered, etc. The idea that a single number between 1 and 10 could address all of these concerns in any detail is myopic. But it is a start... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Visit <a href="http://www.t206collector.com" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.t206collector.com</a> for Net54 T206 archive, signed deadball card galleries, articles and more!

Archive

10-21-2008, 06:02 PM

Posted By: E, DanielIf grading merely confirms or denies authenticity and presence or lack of alteration, tell me how it goes down on ebay. *(complete guess) 10,000 plus people buying and selling cards on ebay, and people want to be able/feel required to supply a description over and above a highly detailed picture. Cards won't change hands for money unless there is a percieved monetary value, and that value is partly rarity and historical/nostalgic enjoyment - and secondarily based on examples of the same card having better overall aesthetics than others. There's a pecking order so not every E90-1 Collins is worth $195 regardless of creases, corners, centering and edges. Some are clearly in better condition and there will be collectors who will pay a premium to own the example they enjoy more. So, when you (any reading) describe a card as in very good condition with superior color and mostly square corners for a sale, and the buyer gets the card but feels the color only average and the corners no better than (pure guesstimate) 70 % square....what happens? I've sold my share of cards, and I can reasonably guarantee that under such a scenario even with my very best description I would do no better than a 1 in 3 return ratio. I mean, people are an#l in this hobby, I know I am, and no way will someone happily shell out $100 plus if they can buy and return without any ramification until their craziness is placated. Until every word in every description has been parsed and proven true or untrue and a card perfectly matches the promises of the seller. The idea is ridiculous, and in fact the main reason so many people can happily trade raw cards is that they align their 'grading' assessments largely with the standards now widely instituted and accepted from the big 3 grading companies. I reckon the day such waffly card assessments based on subjective beauty become a large part of grading sports cards, 30% of the major sellers walk away from the game. There's no way its worth the hassle and cost to become a buyer's wet-nurse. And very quickly, especially on lower priced cards, the infamous "no returns under any circumstances" would become the mantra. Frankly, I'm amazed people see it differently.

Archive

10-22-2008, 05:54 AM

Posted By: Chris"Third party grading is MOST VALUABLE in cases of your T206 Lajoie. It is SGC telling prospective buyers to beware of hard to see damage (paper loss, pin holes, creases, etc.)" I am more of a raw guy, but I think this is a fantastic point, especially in our digital age of online auctions, sales, etc. Blurry photos, bad scans, no back scans, etc. make it easy for sellers to rip off buyers. That is exactly where a 3rd party grade can come in. Yes, buy a card based on the card's appearance and not the holder, but knowing that a card that looks like a 7 in an auction scan but has paper loss is valuable information for me.

Archive

10-22-2008, 08:48 AM

Posted By: dan mckeeYou people are nuts buying raw! I want an expert opinion if my card is real or not or altered or not. Seriously though, I agree that in this case, the grading helps the investor know there is an imperfection that the naked eye may miss. As a collector, this card is EX to me. Even with the tiny back of the corner. It is well centered, great appeal. I agree with Leon for only the 2nd time in my life! Grading has done some good and the standards need to be revisited. Sorry Leon, I am with you on this one. Dan.

Archive

10-22-2008, 08:53 AM

Posted By: JKI have no problem with the grading system as it is. I enjoy collecting great looking cards with technical defects: <img src="http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e211/jkrasner2/File0817Medium.jpg"> <img src="http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e211/jkrasner2/File0783LargeMedium.jpg"> <img src="http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e211/jkrasner2/File0812Medium.jpg"> <img src="http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e211/jkrasner2/1922W575-1JohnsonfMedium.jpg">

Archive

10-22-2008, 09:10 AM

Posted By: CoreyRS.hanusJK, Those are certainly awesome looking 1's and 2's!! Makes me wonder about a grading company's system of putting qualifiers on cards with a certain kind of back damage (staining) yet not otherwise reducing the grade, but on other kinds to simply hammer the grade down.

Archive

10-23-2008, 10:11 AM

Posted By: bigfishNice title. I just bought a PSA 5 card off ebay. Looks like an SGC 20 when I cross it. Josh's cards above blow away my 5. Want to trade?

Archive

10-23-2008, 02:31 PM

Posted By: David RToby, Did the eBay market price your card like a PSA 5 or an SGC 20? Did everyone look past the flip when bidding? David R.

Archive

10-23-2008, 02:42 PM

Posted By: Pennsylvania TedLet's see who guesses the grade ? ? <img src="http://i529.photobucket.com/albums/dd339/tz1234zaz/awjohnson-1.jpg">

Archive

10-23-2008, 02:45 PM

Posted By: Anthony S.Ted, Are those stray hairs or pen marks through the "W" and by his collar?

Archive

10-23-2008, 03:19 PM

Posted By: bigfishDavid, I paid the 5 price and should have looked at the scan better. Live and learn. Quality control is a concern!!!!!!!!! Makes me want to go raw!!!

Archive

10-23-2008, 03:41 PM

Posted By: Pennsylvania TedThose "hairlines" are not on the card. They must have been on my scanner.

Archive

10-23-2008, 03:50 PM

Posted By: Anthony S.Looks like an SGC 70 (possibly 80), but I get the sense based on the theme of this thread that it inexplicably graded much lower.

Archive

10-23-2008, 03:50 PM

Posted By: David RTed, I'll guess. SGC 50 although I'm sure it's probably a 30, thus your post. David R.

Archive

10-23-2008, 08:25 PM

Posted By: Pennsylvania TedMy Johnson (in above scan) was graded SGC 40. When I questioned SGC as to "why such a low grade ?" They pointed out that there was "a faint tiny spot of some residue on the back of this card". Well, that was the BAD news...... Here is the GOOD news......I sold it on ebay for a 4-digit price. I identified the "flaw" in my ebay lot description and I provided a scan of the card's back. But, that did not seem to bother most, as the bidding was quite brisk.