![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
So, I got these two cards recently. Both were obviously in the same submission. They do have back stamps, but the grades shouldn't be affected by the MK designation, you wouldn't think.
I can't think of any reason for these grades unless the grader just mixed the two cards up. I'm sure it happens sometimes. I wonder how often. Lindaman is closer to a 4 than a 2 imo. And I can't see how Oldring is a 3, even on the best day. I'm just posting this for fun, and maybe to some good stories. But what do you guys think? |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Those are the correct grades Psa will generally always note the mk.
Last edited by glynparson; 07-12-2015 at 08:20 PM. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
They may be the correct grades, but it is extremely hard to tell why. Lindaman has zero creases and Oldring has a bunch. Both are pretty clean otherwise. The grader would have a hard time convincing me that he had a solid reason for grading Oldring higher.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Lindaman is pretty badly off-center, if that costs points then maybe because they couldnt give it OC and MK they gave it the MK and hit the grade for the OC because they couldnt include it as a quialifier?
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Isn't PSA more strict on centering and a bit more lenient on light creases even in groups?
That might explain it. Personally I'd have given them both 2s, I always understood a creased card as no better than G unless the rest was amazing. I've sort of benefitted from SGC giving one card of mine that I thought should be a 30 a 40 so I can't complain too much. (Sort of since it's an expensive card I'm not selling so no real benefit yet) Steve B |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
429/524 Off of the monster 81% 49/76 HOF's 64% 18/20 Overlooked by Cooperstown 90% 22/39 Unique Backs 56% 80/86 Minors 93% 25/48 Southern Leaguers 52% 6/10 Billy Sullivan back run 60% 237PSA / 94 SGC / 98 RAW Excel spreadsheets only $5 T3, T201, T202, T204, T205, T206, T207, 1914 CJ, 1915 CJ, Topps 1952-1979, and more!!!! Checklists sold (20) T205 8/208 3.8% |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Ah that's a good point Bryan. Centering top-to-bottom doesn't bother me at all and I didn't even notice. You really don't see any OC qualifiers for a t206 that looks like Lindaman though do you? I've seen plenty of MC, but it usually is because the text is cut off at the bottom.
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I would consider the Oldring a low end 3 at best and maybe the Lindaman a solid 3 (whats the spot on his left cheek ?)
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
IDK Luke the only thing I could think of is the Numerical stand point the top of the Vive looks about the only thing you can gripe about but otherwise the surface/spider wrinkles on the Oldring are the only thing. I would have give 3's to both.
__________________
429/524 Off of the monster 81% 49/76 HOF's 64% 18/20 Overlooked by Cooperstown 90% 22/39 Unique Backs 56% 80/86 Minors 93% 25/48 Southern Leaguers 52% 6/10 Billy Sullivan back run 60% 237PSA / 94 SGC / 98 RAW Excel spreadsheets only $5 T3, T201, T202, T204, T205, T206, T207, 1914 CJ, 1915 CJ, Topps 1952-1979, and more!!!! Checklists sold (20) T205 8/208 3.8% Last edited by Joshchisox08; 07-12-2015 at 08:24 PM. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
No longer needed -- (re: 2 cards to complete PSA voucher submission | T206.org | T206 cards B/S/T | 0 | 04-27-2015 09:30 AM |
1973 Topps PSA lot, 4 cards, grades 6.5-7.5 | geor952 | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 3 | 01-31-2014 12:23 PM |
T 206 Low grades nce cards | piedmont150 | T206 cards B/S/T | 4 | 07-21-2013 05:09 PM |
Show Grades vs Mail Grades | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 04-16-2008 08:34 PM |
Grades of Stained Cards | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 04-26-2003 01:44 PM |