Thread: Scg
View Single Post
  #1  
Old 01-11-2020, 12:16 PM
perezfan's Avatar
perezfan perezfan is offline
M@RK ST€!NBERG
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8,150
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jchcollins View Post
PSA has cracked down a bit more since the scandal. For example, card that looks like a 6 or a 7 but has a small hard to find wrinkle might get a 3 or 2.5. I've seen a lot of this. It's not really right, but given that all grading is subjective at some level, I kind of understand what they are doing. If you have something that you think is way undergraded just based on eye-appeal, it's possible you've run afoul of this. All of the big 3 TPG's make mistakes. But at least in my experience, SGC and BVG are more apt to grade a card based on the whole of it's eye appeal than PSA is. At least right now.
I completely agree that SGC has been far more consistent over the years.

But hasn't it always held true that any wrinkle or crease (no matter how small or faint) should keep the card from grading no better than "4"?
Reply With Quote