Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>rand brotman</b><p>i am seeing this more often, a card is trimmed or colored and its graded authentic. A card is missing part or a complete corner and its graded 1 Poor. If there is a piece of a card missing, why does it deserve a Poor grade at all. I think the range of what gets a Poor 1 grade is extremely vast.

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>I suppose PSA 1 means that a card has natural wear and tear, whereas an PSA authentic trimmed card was trimmed by the owner.<br /><br />Peter C.

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>What are the guidelines for how much of the card can be missing and still get a number grade?

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>I agree, Peter. This leads us in to the long standing question, would you prefer an exmtish looking card with a tiny bit of trimming and graded authentic or a trashed and ugly looking PSA 1 or SGC 10? Most people here have weighed in on the latter although I think someday the value of the former is going to reach or exceed the latter.

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>Dave F</b><p>I showed this before...but I think GAI is the only company that would grade this a 1. I think PSA and SGC would both grade it authentic with what was purposely down to the eyes. I'm thinking screwing up a card in anyway is considered the same as trimming it. Anyone disagree?<br /><br /><img src="http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l111/asphaltman76/matf.jpg">

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Hmmmm. I remember seeing a ton of CJs at the National which were all graded 1s and they had the same eye problems. I believe they were all PSA.

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>Phil Garry</b><p>The way the grading companies see it (if I can speak on their behalf) is: if a card is purposely altered in such a way as to "improve" the perceived condition of the card, it will receive an "Authentic" grade, at best. A card with any amount of natural wear given that a huge chunk is not missing and the card is still reasonable ledgible will ge graded a "1 - Poor".

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Phil - I agree; the quesiton is, how huge a chunk can be missing to still get into a 1?

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>ItsOnlyGil</b><p>I wonder if a card which has been graded Authentic due to a taped repair could be upgraded by removing the tape.

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Gil - but by doing so, you've done something to the card to improve it! It's the old ink issue; ink added for recoloring is improving the card, and hence an 'A.' A random ink spot on the card is fine, but removing said ink spot (which is akin to removing tape) gets you an 'A.' So, both adding and removing ink gets you an 'A' but a card can have ink or no ink and still get a number.

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>Phil Garry</b><p>Matt:<br /><br />I would estimate anything larger than 5% - 10% of the overall card size missing would be too much to grade a "1 - Poor".

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>Mike Mattison</b><p>I just had a card graded by SGC "A" because it didn't meet their minimum size requirements. It wasn't trimmed or altered in anyway. It probably would have received a 10 due to some paperloss on the back, so it didn't bother me too much.<br />

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>Phil Garry</b><p>Mike:<br /><br />What set was the card from?

Auth vs (1) Poor grade
 

Posted By: <b>Mike Mattison</b><p>It is an E93 Waddell