T206 Wagner, Memory Lane style

[cmcclelland]

This is just my two cents worth, but I think it is very funny how critical the hobby has become about distinguishing between what the numerical grade is for a low end card.

My opinion is that a card that is graded a "1" or "Poor" grade should be an extremely "poor" looking card that almost does not look like a card any more. To me, this means things like pieces of the card that are missing, holes in the card, very bad marks or writing on the card, extreme paper loss, etc. To me, this was always the standard back in the day.

These days, all it takes is some small, easy to miss flaw to potentially throw a card into the "1" category. I have always viewed the "2" or "Good" category as the cards that are pretty beat up but not having the horrible flaws that make you say it's one of those cards that makes you kind of say this is just a poor card that couldn't get much worse.

So, I think this PSA Wagner is very much worthy of the "2" grade based on the way I have always graded cards going back to the "olden days" before professional grading. I have always thought a heavily creased card with severely rounded corners was a "2" or a "Good" card. A "poor" or "1" card had to either be so heavily creased to render the image so poor that you couldn't make out the image, or there had to be some other major flaw such as a piece of the card missing or a hole, etc.

Again, just my two cents, but I think the hobby has become waaaaay too critical on the low end of the grading spectrum.