how bad is it to have a pin hole?
 

I saw this on the Jackson bay last week and was wondering how many members don't mind having a "pin hole" in their cards? Now, I know some collectors dont give a hoot when putting sets together and/or are on a budget but what about big name or big budget cards?

I bought the OJ Fogarty and Weaver a few months back but I personally thinks this type of hole is pretty cool. Although the Weaver hole puncher went a little overboard.

What are your thoughts on "pin holes"???

So I didn't think the Jackson would be so small but that's the pin hole I'm talking about

Pin holes dont bother me much... As they tend to be in the corners and are ofter hard to see. Hole punches bug me more!

They are great to have when buying. Not so great when selling.

I avoid cards with Holes, paper loss, trimming or altering.
I'm okay with worn corners and mild creases.

I don't have any cards with holes but would not hesitate to buy them if they otherwise presented well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have a few T210's with this cool Y shaped hole punch and I like them. I think it adds character.

that is a different hole ben, some holes do add character. and i think the jackson presents well with the minor creases and that hole. being an affordable graded jackson i think i'd be happy to add it to my lower-budget collection

Ask 100 different guys and get 100 different answers....I avoid them on smaller cards but don't mind them on bigger issues (Cabinet cards, Goudey Premiums, etc) because those were more meant for display, hence why people tacked them to walls.

I think most collectors will agree that if there is a particular scarce item they have been looking for for a long time, they will gladly take one with a pinhole as opposed to not owning one at all.

Edited to add: in the case of the Jackson, I think all you need to ask yourself is "Will I ever be able/willing to spend the money on one WITHOUT a pinhole?" If the answer is yes, then wait....a couple of those show up every year.

I think that if you like it, that's all that matters. Some cards don't look good with them, some do. On very expensive cards, that's all some people can afford, so you have no choice but to grab one with a hole if you want to obtain one. Personally, I have never bought a card that expensive before, but if I did, I would have no problem whatsoever purchasing one with a pinhole.

I couldn't have been happier to add this one with multiple tiny pin holes in it. They let me afford one of my dream cards, and it still presents well to me!

I collect low-grade cards with nice eye appeal because they fit my budget. I love pin holes because they reduce a card's value much more than they reduce its appearance. Here are two of my favorite t206s:

sweet Jax! condition doesn't matter.

I don't mind having these in my collection!

Ambivalence
 

Yikes!!!! You can actually see through these cards.:eek:

Then again a small pinhole would be ideal for viewing a solar eclipse.;)

but Frank...you can make a camera out of these cards!

I would rather have a pin hole than this. That's not paper loss in the upper right corner, that is "mangle":

Doesn't bother me one bit especially if you can get some of the tougher cards in your price range.

Hole punches make it easier to hang my cards up. :D

That IS a pretty card! Nice.:D

There are two pinholes in this card
 

The one over his left shoulder can be mistaken for the moon.
<a href="http://s8.photobucket.com/user/zouraspm/media/scan0024.jpg.html" target="_blank"><img src="http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a47/zouraspm/scan0024.jpg" border="0" alt=" photo scan0024.jpg"/></a>

what about the one over his right shoulder? :D

i think the cracker jack jackson is fine due to the player but i think i'd pass if it were some schmo whose cards are super common. my weaver with 94+ holes was a temporary until i found this one...now to find a buyer for that one.

I thought it was the rare full moon variation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

off-topic, but why is Weaver in a follow-thru pose with a ball still in his throwing hand? :D

That is not a ball. It is the moon.

As for pinholes or hole punches I really don't care for them. I will on the other hand buy a card if the front is presentable and has lil paper loss on the back. Corners and creases don't bother me as well as long as it doesn't take away from the card. But hey it would all depend if a pinhole that real small get me a Wagner or Jackson for a lot less than one without then hey I think I could live with it.

Large pinholes allowed me to afford a large lot of e90-1s (and an e93 Wagz) when I was a kid. Here are a few of them. Some have since been sold.

Pinholes are all relative. Some don't bother me at all.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3167/2...1f47551c_o.jpg

I totally love an expensive card with a pinhole, particularly a nice small crisp one. Many times its the only defect on a really nice card, and it brings the price of the card WAY down.

As to cards with punch-holes, i have a couple, and while i am not crazy about punch-holes, they can be not too bad looking. What i do is scan the card in and print it out so that i have a duplicate of the exact color, and then put pieces of that color behind the card in my plastic sheet. This makes the punch-holes stand out way less.

Paul, some of those holes look like gun shot wounds, but your right about price reduction. The e90-1 Jackson I posted went for $6k with the hole and a couple light creases...how much without just the hole in that condition, maybe $9-10k??? I bid on it a couple of times :)

I lean to the camp of preferring not having a hole or pinhole, if possible. And I will wait and/or pay substantially more for one without those issues. On very rare cards, I take what I can first and worry later :). On most of the cards shown in this thread, with small pinholes, I barely see the holes at all. Some really great looking cards there...

Mark, I've always held small caliber gunshot wounds into consideration -- it's how to account for the burn marks. However, there are no pinholes for which they would have been mounted. And the Cobb, with all the paper loss surrounding the hole it looks like it was yanked off something :confused:

I purchased a 1910 PC796 (I believe that's the Burdick designation--its the only card in the set I have, and I don't have it in front of me) Walter Johnson from REA several years ago, which was accurately described as having a near-microscopic pinhole. The card had been in an album, and also had slight pressure indentations near two of the corners. SGC had graded it "fair." However, it presented to the naked eye as near mint, and I was delighted to acquire it. I imagine Jeff felt exactly the same re the Max Stein Cobb (beautiful card, Jeff!). Personally, to me, a small pinhole involves far less material loss than well-worn corners, and a card with the former is consequently more desirable than the latter (although eye appeal does vary with the card--I have a '35 Diamond Stars "Greenburg" error variation with worn corners, but is also perfectly centered and has no other defects, thereby affording it very nice eye appeal to this board member). Bottom line: a matter of individual taste.

Thought-provoking post.

Larry

Pin holes add personality to a card. That Jackson is beautiful, and the pinhole tells me that somebody proudly displayed and loved the card.

"Mint" is nice, but after a while, when fretting over the semantics of "mint", "near-mint", "pristine", etc, the reason behind collecting them in the first place gets lost. Baseball cards are meant to be handled, and enjoyed. And how much are we really enjoying them behind plastic slabs, and stuck away in a bank vault?

I've been seriously rethinking this whole graded card thing.

Amen! Having the same thoughts.

This is more or less how i have come to see it. If someone 100 years thought something was cool enough to tack to their wall, then I am proud to own it.

This, too.

The pinhole doesn't bother me on this one.

http://photos.imageevent.com/ltsgall...0%20Wagner.jpg

Wouldn't me either Brian, or on this one.
http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f9...psc89b01d5.jpghttp://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f9...psa32f44df.jpg

I agree with this completely.

A small pin hole, especially on cabinet size cards does not bother me in the least.

I'm not sure where I saw someone say it. It might have been on this forum. They said "I'd rather have a hole in some of my cards. Than a hole in my collection." Me too ! :)

I used to disagree with this statement...but when I realized how tough some cards that I wanted are...I changed my tune! You can aleways upgrade if a better one comes along!

No longer owned by me, but if I could get all my cards like this one with a minimal hole in them I would take them everytime. I forgot this card had a hole when I sent it off to grading and was surprised until I got it back and remembered the hole.

http://i1118.photobucket.com/albums/...anColemanF.jpghttp://i1118.photobucket.com/albums/...oendienstB.jpg

What's a pinhole anyway in the cabinet border when my socks have already been blown across the room due to the BLAZING colors? :D

SWEET cards!

i really like that bescher, super small pin hole

with pinhole 1x cost....without pinhole 2x-4x of that. Gimme the pinhole!!

Great looking card my friend.

One best not be choosy when one has the opportunity to obtain a scarce type card, especially one of a player on Washington's 1924 World Series Championship team, which is another one of my collecting focuses.
Val

http://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/02/20/7ane7yma.jpg These are more of hole punches. but I dont think it takes too much away from the portrait, good enough for me atleast.

It's cool to see your Washington collection Val. Thanks for posting. Makes me wish my city (Seattle) had a longer history of big league ball.

Luke, thanks for the kind words. Yes, Washington has a relatively long, albeit not very successful, history of MLB. But, during the prime years of my life, we were without a team - oh, how that hurt! Try as I might during those empty years to embrace the Balmer Orioles, I just couldn't, especially because the O's owner seemed to be doing all that he could behind the scene to keep Washington from getting another team.
Val