PSA 5 with paper loss?
 

Seems like a lot of missing paper for a 5:

T206 green Cobb PSA 5

Following is how a 5 is described on PSA's site. Not attacking PSA - just wondering what their grading standards really mean.

EX 5: Excellent
On PSA EX-5 cards, very minor rounding of the corners is becoming evident. Surface wear or printing defects are more visible. There may be minor chipping on edges. Loss of original gloss will be more apparent. Focus of picture may be slightly out-of-register. Several light scratches may be visible upon close inspection, but do not detract from the appeal of the card. Card may show some off-whiteness of borders. Centering must be 85/15 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the back.

Scott- i agree completely. From a corner and appearance stand point, the card does appear to have a psa 7 quality. But from my experiences with psa, they normally hit a card for around 4 grades for paper loss. That you would think should make this card a psa 3 at best. PSA missed this one.

Thanks for posting this Scott! I saw this but if I posted it they would think I was busting grading.

NO WAY this is a 5, NO WAY!

This card should be a classic example of buying the card and not the holder, especially with it being cobb.

Thanks Kevin and Dan. I hesitate to post this sort of thing for the same reason, but I really am trying to better understand both PSA's and SGC's grading.

a 3
 

Probably should have been a 3.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/1909-T206-TY...-/330666819874





.

If someone can help me post a scan on net54, i would like to show a card going the other way on grading. I have a t206 george brown (wash) that is graded a psa 2. It looks like a psa 7 with the exception of a tiny, tiny tape mark on the back that does not even take off any of the paper!

Scott saw that card was excited because it looked good was ready to bid but then saw that and said ouch don't need that timebomb.

John

Haha - well-put.

I prefer a card that looks great, but has a horrible grade (as long as I didn't send it in). I just crack it out and let it speak for itself.

I'm posting the 'massive' version, so you can see how horrible :) this card really is:

http://www.t206themonster.com/Cards/...98MatP1.5.jpeg

.

Agreed, there are some nice cards out there with minimal damage that kill the grade.

http://i.imgur.com/AgZh8.jpg

Yeah, I couldn't believe this one either when I saw it...

That's pretty bad.

Rob

That's just a HUGE error. On a card like that I would hope they would have gotten it right. Grader had a bad day, submitter had a good day. All in all, I would hope somebody isn't dumb desperate enough to pay for that psa label. I guess it's like many people have stated, a fool and his money...

I'm sorry to say that graders will see what they want to see & do what they want to do.

Just out of curiosity, why doesn't PSA buy back certain cards that are misgraded? Figure it would be a legal way to get rid of the "evidence".

There's just way too much 'evidence'.

I really hate to bring up the elephant in the room, but it's very tempting.

Okay....

Have you ever noticed that when a large lot of graded cards arrive in the mail from a major auction house, they are often in nice brand-new, sequentially-numbered holders? Do you think the consigners, who had already decided to consign because they didn't want to mess with the hassle of breaking up their collection into smaller lots, or because they needed 'fast' cash...

...decided they didn't mind the hassle of packing up the cards and shipping to PSA or SGC, getting them back, then sending them to the auction house, and also didn't mind the associated wait time and expense?

I think a lot of these 'WTF!?!?!' cards are part of what I'm describing.

But maybe I'm paranoid - have any of you sent in a card like this Cobb, and had it come back as a '5'? If so, can I mail my cards to you?

Scott, I'd love to throw a bunch of cards in with a card submission like the Hall collection auctioned off by SCP a few years back. Talk about some generous grades and the good fortune to not have a card come back as trimmed or altered (that was obviously trimmed or altered). Yup, would defininitely like to have the benefit of the doubt everytime I threw in a submission....

Another example from PSA that SGC wouldn't cross to a 30 - Good because of the paper loss on the front. My experience with SGC in sending cards in is that paper loss, front or back, is going to get a 20 - Fair.

http://www.net54baseball.com/picture...pictureid=5724http://www.net54baseball.com/picture...pictureid=5725

I sent this in thinking at worst it would be an 60 - EX. Didn't see the spot of paper loss on Harder's left shoulder. Sure enough it got a 20.

http://www.net54baseball.com/picture...pictureid=5035http://www.net54baseball.com/picture...pictureid=5036

No way that green Cobby should be in a holder higher than a 2 with that back damage.

I have an Old Judge with 2 small spots of paper loss on the front that was graded a psa5 and I also bought another OJ from the same batch of graded cards that was graded a psa2 and looks much nicer than the 5. It was as if they mixed up the two grades but got the names on the labels right

sgc 20

" 5 " for that card is absurd. I seem to remember reading an article once in SMR from Joe Orlando himself stating that any card with paper loss would never grade any better than a "2"

That's amusing as I have a T205 McElveen I cracked out of a PSA 4 holder a couple years ago that has an oval spot of paper loss on the front about 2 or 3 mm in diameter.

What I like to think, is that some graders slack off and forget to check for paperloss on the back of the card here and there. I mean, they must process hundreds of cards a day. There has to be some room for error. And there has to be some overgraded cards due to laziness. Come to think of it, I've made mistakes at my job due to the repetitive nature of it.

This may be very true but even if I graded hundreds of cards a day a T206 Cobb that had that nice of a front would catch my attention. One would think that a card like that would be graded more accurate.

http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n...y/Ewing-f2.jpg http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n...y/Ewing-f3.jpg

Is the picture of the Cobb really bad or is the case frosted on the left side?

Amazing what a little flick of paper loss will do to a grade...

http://photos.imageevent.com/ltsgall...20SGC%2010.jpg

yup...

http://i1023.photobucket.com/albums/...920/Page11.jpg

Okay, so two of us see the elephant. That's more than would admit it seven years ago.

Re: PSA 5 with paper loss?
 

I know I'm getting old, but where the heck is the paper loss on that gorgeous E90-1 Clarke?

In fairness to PSA, here's an SGC-graded one that I don't quite get - PSA would only give this a '2', correct? I know at the 3 and under levels, the grading companies don't put much emphasis on corners, but this is quite bad:

SGC 40 T206 Johnson

grade
 

All of the corners look good except for the top left...cutting it close. I have a few SGC 40's that are on the edge of being a 30 b/c of the corners. Subjectivity...we could go on for days about this subject :eek:

Do grading companies really stick by their own standards? I think we have enough evidence to made a sound answer.

If everyone on this board would agree to crack out all their cards at the same time, you could count me in. But what I'm finding from selling T206s on this board, both graded and raw, is that you guys much prefer graded cards - in the eyes of cash-holding board members, the slab seems to add quite a bit to the value. And I think the value is the actual slab, for better or for worse.

Personally, I think the cards look really cool in those tiny tobacco top-loaders, and that's where all my 'keepers' end up. But slabs look good also.

There's obviously a lot of subjectivity that goes into it. There are many T206 cards in the 30-40 range that you could argue a bump up or down. In the case of the Johnson, sure, you could argue that the corner should bump it from a 40 (3) to a 30 (2). It's one of those cards that should probably be right in between... either an overgraded 40 or an undergraded 30. But the paper loss on that PSA 5 is an entirely different beast. That's a HUGE miss by the grader; I would think that the grading companies would want to get those "off the street."

It wasn't just the corner - they normally crush cards that are miscut like this, especially if there's anything else wrong with them.

There's the tiniest spot on one of the bat handles on the back. Look close with a loop and you will see it. At first I thought it was just a missing line from printing but it is a little chip out of the paper. A bit of a crime to knock it down that far, but such is life. I no longer own it but wish I did! Come back to me, Fred!

I admit I'm one that (so far) has only bought graded (SGC) cards. For one I have a display case that is made for the holders, I also like the fact it displays year, name and back etc.

Now having said that, I'm not unwilling to buy "raw" cards but I have a hard time spending the same amount of $$$ (or more) on a EX raw card for something that might come back as trimmed, alt. etc if it was sent in. I guess it's just more piece of mind??? but what do I know..:confused:

I know a lot of people have their opinions about the grading companies, but I believe this Cobb is a great example of what seems to happen at PSA every once in a while. I've seen it with 3's, 4's and now a 5...the card itself looks outstanding, but there is a small to moderate amount of paper loss and for some reason PSA can't bring themselves to bring the grade all the way down to the grade to which their stated standards imply.

I know that graded cards aren't for everyone and really you have to examine the card and determine what it's worth to you and not let the grade on the holder determine it for you.

Scott...not to be crazy about the johnson grade, but I do think that the WoJo would be more fitting in a 2.5 holder instead of a 3...too nice for a 2, but not quite a 3? Another reason SGC should have half grades in the lower portion of their grading system :confused:

Cobb
 

I believe the case has been cracked out and replaced with a different card...Notice frosting on left side and round pin under the flip on the left side has been popped....Also why are the two front scans done with a black background and the back scan done with a white background to hide the frosting...I seriously doubt PSA would miss that big a piece of missing paper.

If I owned it, I would not complain about the grade. I just thought I'd flush out some opinions about corners and miscuts grading. I recently picked up a nice, large group of SGC 40's and 30's, and it was very interesting to see representative cards at both ends up each grade - horribly rounded corners on a no-gloss card that got a 30, then another 30 with strong corners and pack-fresh gloss that also got a 30 due to a single horizontal crease.

That's why when someone agrees to buy/trade a card from me based solely on a grade, without ever having seen the card, I make them look at a scan first. Maybe they don't care, but if you like cards, you need to get used to looking at them.

Regarding the nice way the slabs stack/display - that's all fine, but there is so much you will discover about a card once you are looking right at it - gloss, lithography detail, etc. Even my horrid eyes pick up a lot. They look better out of the slab.

Totally agree with taxman. I did not want to come out and say that initially, but now that someone has, i am. Absolutely no way psa missed that, especially being cobb.

Cobb
 

I might have to recant my statement....Here is a link to where the seller purchased the card. Notice it is a very old flip.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/220896981433

When I started collecting 206's I never even really looked at the card, I just went for anything that was in the 1.5-3 range. This was definitely a rude awakening for me b/c I realized paper loss and pen/pencil markings were present on a decent amount of them, not to mention the appeal of the card (which is the primary thing I look at now) was usually gone.

Now that I look at the card as a whole, my collection has much better appeal...had to learn the hard way tho :(

As of right now, I collect only graded cards...mainly so I don't get burned by trim jobs or have to completely trust Ebay sellers (we know how that goes). Plus by the grade, I know what defects the card may have.

Ughhh! Ughhh! Ughhh!

Sorry, I couldn't help it - there's another chunk missing at the lower left :eek:

Or you could just purchase/trade from people who you trust, or strangers who give refunds for raw cards. You look at it, you be the judge. The problem would only be if you needed to trade/sell it, but that's not really a problem either because you can also give the same deal. That's the old school way of dealing with other hobbyists - trust and fairness.

I recently traded for a T206 that looked like it might have been Tinker'd with on the right side (or did I take a 'Chance'? - I always get these two cards mixed up). I simply asked the trader and he said it was good. I received it, looked at it and was happy. Is it trimmed? I don't think so, and if I ever get rid of it, that's still my opinion. If the next guy who ends up with it thinks it is trimmed, he can give it back to me. It shouldn't ever be any big deal, as long as you are working with good people.

(The more we talk about this, the more I'm considering freeing all my guys)

I know most of you are distracted by the paper loss, but does anyone else notice the massive stain that engulfs almost half of the back? Why is there no evidence of similar staining on the front? I'm thinking that stain and paperloss aside, this card has probably also been doctored, and therefore should be "AUTH" at best. Chemical cleaning could be an explanation for the bleeding on the bottom border of the front.

I trust everyone here...but Ebay is a different story. Just don't feel like getting burned and going through the hassle. Now if I was able to get a good deal on a card and knew it was authentic, then I would purchase it. Just a preference I guess :)

The "staining" actually covers about 80% (or more) of the back (top and bottom). It's likely an instance of scrapbook removal and not a doctoring job.