|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
LMFAO...that is bad centering to you? That is bad corner wear to you? Not hardly....what you see through the 'G' is the spider wrinkle, which I am sure has been spooned out by now.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Wow - that Bobby Jones card is nice!
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
I thought so too Chris....I am well versed in the Sport Kings series.....If it wasn't for that spider wrinkle, that '5' had a real god shot at a much higher grade.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Although these are both post war examples here are my thoughts. I sent in a 68 topps mantle that they had kicked back years ago as too short, this go around it got a 3.
I sent in 64 mantle that had several light none color breaking creases and they gave it a 1. A freaking 1 thats a poor. I assumed i missed a pin hole or paper loss but nope. The card should be a 2 all day. As far as cracker jacks i have never felt that psa was consistent with them and even 10 years ago i would not buy a card in a psa holder without seeing it in person. I do tend to buy the card often as i have picked up a couple low grade cards that present really well, James G
__________________
WTB Boston Store Cards esp Ruth, Hornsby and 1915/16 UNC Strip cards and other Boston Store's too. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Mike
Mike is correct the Bobby jones is absolutely correctly graded. The card has excellent eye appeal which so often makes people think it should have a higher technical grade.
Last edited by glynparson; 08-11-2017 at 11:39 AM. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
It got that grade because of the spider wrinkle...I get that. If auctioned now, if the wrinkle in the card is not gone, I have no doubt the card would have the PWCC-HE designation. I've seen '5's' in that set. That card doesnt look like a '5' (save for the wrinkle).
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Save for the wrinkle but you can't it's there. No wrinkle I could see a 6 or 6.5 that's no 8.
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
It looks to me like someone already tried to remove it and only ended up removing some of the red on the Sport Kings banner--and blue background underneath it--instead.
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
It's back.
I still can't see the justification in only a 2.5 but I used it is what it is. You guys agree or disagree?
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
Well, the staining is there obviously, but the main thing I'm understanding is that in the past, the staining wasn't taken into account for the grades (as I'm guessing it's hard to get Cracker Jack's WITHOUT staining), while now they ARE taking stains into account.
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
I would be pissed though. VCP is all over the place on the card. The last PSA 4 sold in REA for $1560. The last PSA 2.5 sold in Love of the Game for $180. Don't know if the REA was abnormal or not, but that is quite a spread.
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
I would say one of those prices is abnormally high and the other abnormally low.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
As far as staining, yes it is impossible to get a 1914 CJ without staining unless it was snuck out the back door. All 14's were inserted inside the box. |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Agreed
Agreed but I don't believe there is any factory sets that have rounded corners and would only receive a 2 or 3 grade. They're all 8-10's. I could be wrong and someone please correct me if I am. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
PSA Review | cardsnstuff | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 09-24-2016 07:39 AM |
Any luck with a PSA 'Review'? | Kzoo | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 21 | 07-24-2015 10:18 PM |
2014 In Review | Joe_G. | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 12-28-2014 07:32 AM |
55,56 topps raw review FS | zachclose21 | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 4 | 06-05-2013 07:44 PM |
PSA review question | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 14 | 06-01-2007 11:28 PM |