![]() |
What would it grade today?
4 Attachment(s)
In this episode of "what would it grade today"...an e95 honus wagner currently in REA. PSA 3...rounded corners, multiple creases...paper loss? An abomination of a vg 3.
What would this beautiful candy Wagner grade today...from PSA? |
IMO depends who the submitter is, but I'm expecting a 1 if that's my raw sub
|
No option for PSA 1.5?!
|
Quote:
|
My smartass answer is it depends who submitted it.
|
Psa 2, Sgc 1.5
|
I would say it is still a 3 now depending on who submitted it and how many times they are willing to resubmit it.
|
Nice card and would probably grade a 2 perhaps a 1.5(but no option to vote)
Regardless someone will be happy to have it |
Quote:
|
How in the world can that card grade anything but a '1'? Prolly 5% of the card is missing via the rounded corners.
Serious question here - is there a different grading scale for Pre-war cards vs newer ones? Because if a 1971 Topps was in that condition, does anyone think it would grade better than a '1'? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
There is a modicum of painful truth in your smartass statement. |
Looks very good + to me.
|
Quote:
:) |
No chance is 5 percent of that card missing.
|
1 Attachment(s)
PSA's incredibly variable grading criteria over the years aside...this should never have been/be a vg 3...imho of course!
|
A 3 if it’s a favored auction house or one of the homies. A 2 for a big submitter. A 1.5 for most of us. A 1 for me.
|
Looks like a 1 to me.
|
1.5
other
|
no way that cards a 3 today if submitted raw...no way Joses!
|
Definitely would not fetch this price at a 1 or a 2...
|
Quote:
|
Not sure about today, and I had to look to see just how old this one was, but at least up until 2014 yeah a 3.
I've always considered the grade on the Young to be very generous, I was expecting a 2. I do think that cards of the bigger stars get a bump because of who is on the card. https://www.net54baseball.com/pictur...ictureid=13911 |
2.5
|
Usually PSA allows one crease on the card for a 2 or sometimes even a 3 if the crease doesn't affect the player. The second one on the lower part of the card may be considered more of a surface wrinkle than a crease. Saying that, I think the corners are too rounded for a 3. I'd give the card a solid 2. It has too much eye appeal for a 1.
|
Quote:
I voted 2 after looking at the back and it was fairly clean. However, I can think of a few submitters that may still get that 3. If I was to send, I would assume a 1.5 and take a 2 as a win. Sadly after seeing a bunch of hyperbolic reaction posts and youtube reactions, I can also believe that many people would send assuming a 4 or 5. :( |
2.5
|
Wagner
1.5 from PSA. 2 from SGC.
|
PSA would give me a 1.5 on this probably 85% of the time, a 1 maybe 10% of the time, and a 2 about 5% of the time.
|
1 Attachment(s)
Not to hijack this thread, but this 3 is probably one of the most baffling I've seen...
|
Quote:
|
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
1 Attachment(s)
A new-label 3...
|
Wow, it seems I have been under grading my T206's. Maybe I should start sending them in.
|
I went with the majority opinion, but if I sent it in, definitely a 1.5
. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
1 Attachment(s)
Your results may vary.............No back damage and no wrinkles.
This is what I got back recently, the 4's and 5's were also well undergraded. |
Maybe the grader's eyes are so used to looking at ultra-modern that when vintage comes in they’re just as critical of them as they are the ultra-modern.
It would be cool if there were specific card grader grading divisions based on the submission era. |
2 Attachment(s)
1957 Topps Mantle - the PSA 6 is an old old slab, I bought it on ebay a few years ago and when I got it, it didn't look right. So sent it to PSA for a review and they re-slabbed it.
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:37 AM. |