Quote:
Originally Posted by brianp-beme
There appears to be a horizontal wrinkle at the top of the card just above the 'Cracker Jack'. Perhaps this was enough to lower the boom on the grade for this boomtastic card.
Brian
|
Not a wrinkle, just a PD that Ken Kendrick's PSA 8 has as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth
The card may not look like that in hand. People just assume it will, but ain't necessarily so. Scans, especially at the settings auction houses use, can mask defects. Not saying it's intentional.
|
Card is just as nice in hand. There is a slight bend near the bottom left corner and a slight wrinkle that I can't always even find that is just to the left halfway up the bat to near the edge. Aside from the slightly rounded corners and those two flaws, I cannot find any others.
That said, I am sure there is something else wrong with it to justify the 1.5 by PSA and the 2.5 by SGC but I can't see them so the card presents like a 5+ to me and I'm extremely happy with the price I paid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan
I don't think that's a crease. Looks to be some missing red ink during printing process. I think someone found other JJ's with similar marks. Either way, PSA has thoroughly screwed CJ grading from past grades to today's. It's completely F'd comps. This card would have received an easy 5+ if graded 10 years ago (hence price paid).
|
Hard to disagree with this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stampsfan
A buddy won that. While I've not seen it, he said there is a slight wrinkle where some of you have identified.
|
Actually that is not where I said the slight wrinkle is Bob, but I certainly see how you'd assume that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChasingPaper
I have some recently graded CJ that look near mint front and back but got 2's and a 2.5
I have scanned them in 1200dpi and looked them over with a magnifying glass and see no issues at all. Makes no sense.
|
Basically my situation exactly with this card. I've examined it with a 30x loupe and no mas.