![]() |
Card Grading defects
I’m always perplexed at some of the grading on cards from third parties. I can’t figure out what is the worst defect to devalue a card?
Stain? Paper loss? Markings? Trimming? Major creasing? Thanks. |
Amongst your list, trimming is easily the worst. It's a figurative felony, while the others are misdemeanours. Trimming means it can't get a number grade.
|
After alterations (trimming, recoloring, rebuilding, etc), cards with pinholes will get a Poor 1 from PSA if the card wasn't designed to be stapled onto something (like matchbooks, carton cards).
|
Quote:
The Gretzky Wagner T206 was graded PSA 7 but was trimmed. Does PSA ever re-grade cards after more info available? |
Quote:
|
The Wagner shouldn't/shouldn't have received a number grade.
|
Altered cards should nor get a number grade
As previously stated after alterations which are supposed to prevent a card from getting a number grade the next worst flaw is a hole of any type pin, nail, staple, whole punch, etc, automatic 1 or 1.5 depending on company.
|
Quote:
There were threads here in the last week about a wrongly labeled T206 and a Bench rookie labeled Venezuelan that was not. PSA is fixing the Bench because the auction house sent it back to them. |
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Correct
but then it doesn't even get a number so i disqualified it from the discussion. :D
|
3 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
Ultimately, it’s sort of arbitrary. To me, a card being very off center or having poor registration/focus is worse than a speck of paper loss on the reverse or rounding of the corners. But the latter lower the grade much more than the former.
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:08 AM. |