Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowman
Perhaps the Mantle wasn't a 9.5, but it was certainly better than all of the PSA 9s I've seen and two of the PSA 10s. Ultimately, this is what mattered, and this is why they put it in an SGC 9.5 holder. It was a matter of hierarchy, not accuracy. And given the significance of these cards, I think it was the right move to make. The goalposts never should have been moved on us, but they have. The only 52 Mantle that could give it a run for its money is the sheet cut PSA 10.
I haven't seen all the other BN Ruths, but I suspect this decision was similar. Placed on the old grading scale. Had it gone to PSA, it probably gets a 1 despite being nicer than one already slabbed as a 2.
|
Yes, I’m sure it was the “right to move make” for the mone, that is the point.. Corruption is a feature, not a problem. It’s blatantly dishonest. A card with staining like that has never before been considered to be in 9.5 or in 9 condition. If I submitted a Dale Coogan in the same condition I would not get a 9 or a 9.5. If I submitted a common T206 in the same exact condition as this Ruth it would not get a 3. I would be lucky to get a 1.5. This whole show is a farce, grading is not to produce an accurate grade it’s to suit the market interests of a select group.