View Single Post
  #1  
Old 04-26-2002, 08:38 AM
Archive Archive is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 58,359
Default Wow. The incredible disparity of SCD

Posted By: James/jverri01 

I am amazed by some of the grading I have seen that has been done by SCD. Do they do the grading in-house, or out-source it and just allow the SCD name to be added? I don't mean to be overly-harsh, as I tend to be a bit conservative in condition assessment, but - can a card with paper loss, heavy chipping, etc., really be defined as very good? To me - not really. Here are some T206 examples, (sorry to only include examples of T206s - but, as most of you know - that is pretty much all I touch) currently on Ebay:

A Chance portrait with a "heavy chip" (heavy enough for me to consider it paper loss):
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1821887528
It was assessed as vg

A Bender that is moderately miscut (extensively enough that PSA probably wouldn't have slabbed it)
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1821887291
It was also assessed as vg

A Tinker portrait with heavy chipping
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1821888330
Also assessed as vg

A Keeler portrait that is seriously miscut and has a touch of paper loss on reverse
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1821888126
Assessed as EX

Am I just being harsh? Or, is this overgrading?

Other examples of other sets welcomed.

Thanks for hearing me out - and maybe following-up with a reply.

James

Reply With Quote