Card(s) in a condition you would not collect

[parkplace33]

I saw a post online recently where a collector was looking for a certain card. His only condition requirement was that it not have “someone’s name written on the front of the card.” That was the only requirement.

Got me thinking, what are some condition requirements (if any) for your collection? Condition examples I can think of are:

Altered (trimmed, recolored, etc)
Pinhole
Tape
Writing on front/back
Staining
Smell of the card
Mildew/mold/water damage
Skinned back/no back/reback
Non legible front/back of the card (number)
Miscut, OC, PD

[slightlyrounded]

I can’t abide OC no matter how many times I’ve tried.

Apparently they call this diagnosis ‘OCD’, which I assume stands for off-centered disgust.

[bobbyw8469]

I have no qualms. I just want them to be real. I love them all.

[Bill77]

I have an Obak that fits half of the list. I ended up sending it to SGC for my protection as the mold/mildew smell almost sent me to the hospital. It is also trimmed and missing more than half of the back. Everything else on the list I have multiple cards to cover those issues as well.

[jchcollins]

I'm mostly a postwar guy, and I'd say the majority of my PC HOF singles are "midgrade" which is kind of broad for me - most being from the 3 range to the 6 range. Centered cards are great, but I'm not a centering freak. 70/30 one way is usually not going to bother me. This is how the cards were made - and no disrespect to the centering folks, but TPG's have basically sold us a bill of goods on what card centering was or was not "supposed to be" back in the day. There is a ton of cognitive bias present in professional grading 30 years into it. I digress...

I don't mind writing / issues on card backs if it can save me a ton of money. For example I have a '58 Mantle / Aaron that looks EX or better on the front, but was graded a PSA 2 due to some light album residue on the back. It looks a ton better than the example of this card I had as a kid that was riddled with print snow on the front, and might have graded a 3 or 4.

[Mark]

If it's a 1960's card, I like it in EX or better, with no defects, but with older cards, it is different. Even since I started collecting E220's I have no major concern for the way that an older card has been cut.

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

I saw a post online recently where a collector was looking for a certain card. His only condition requirement was that it not have “someone’s name written on the front of the card.” That was the only requirement.

Got me thinking, what are some condition requirements (if any) for your collection? Condition examples I can think of are:

Altered (trimmed, recolored, etc)
Pinhole
Tape
Writing on front/back
Staining
Smell of the card
Mildew/mold/water damage
Skinned back/no back/reback
Non legible front/back of the card (number)
Miscut, OC, PD

That is a little bit of a tricky question in the sense is if it is a very rare card, or a card you really want/need to complete a set then you may need to give in a bit on the condition requirements.

But Generally speaking I do not want any of the above issues.
But Eye Appeal is important to many and also the resale/flipping/trade value of a card.
But I will always avoid cards that writing on the front, tape on it (the front).
Staining is almost automatic with some card ie the Cracker Jacks Series of cards. (but if it is water damage/staining) I avoid it.
Pin holes is not an issue for me unless it is on the main part of the card and takes away from the look of the player on it.
Paper Lose on the front is more of a concern because it takes away from the overall eye appeal. Depending on how much paper and where the paper lose is.

Long Answer but to me I look at it and if I like it and can afford it I buy it. IF I look at it and do not like the look I pass.

[SteveS]

When it comes to older cards, I actually prefer the beat-up ones. I want my old cards to look their age. Even if they're graded, there's something just not right about a perfectly pristine T206 or '52 Topps (or whatever). That said, the turn-off for me is if it's been altered or damaged in some way where too much is missing. Beat up or not, I still want the whole card.

[jcmtiger]

I like clear sharp images on my Old Judge cards, backs don’t care except don’t like skinned backs. Thanks

[bnorth]

I am a condition snob. No matter the year or player my cards need to have 4 razor sharp corners. Also if it is not perfectly centered top to bottom and side to side I pass. But the real big thing is registration. If even the slightest bit off just looking at the card will give me a head ache.

This Pristine Gem Mint Hank Aaron is a perfect example of the cards I collect.

[nineunder71]

Same Here, kinda like these

Originally Posted by bnorth

I am a condition snob. No matter the year or player my cards need to have 4 razor sharp corners. Also if it is not perfectly centered top to bottom and side to side I pass. But the real big thing is registration. If even the slightest bit off just looking at the card will give me a head ache.

This Pristine Gem Mint Hank Aaron is a perfect example of the cards I collect.

[molenick]

I have to be honest, I think of myself as a "true collector" but I have been obsessed by condition before there were even grading services. So, unless we are talking about extreme rarities, I would not want any cards with these features, with the exception of "writing on back" which I don't care about for cabinets, cdvs, postcards and other photographic items I collect because I like the image on the front.

I am sure I do own some altered cards in graded holders and I hate the idea of that. I do my best to avoid them (I check certification numbers on sites that "out" altered cards) but I realize collecting graded cards has that possibility. I am not saying all my cards are super-high grades, I have plenty of mid-grade type cards that I bought because I thought they presented nicely and were a good deal. But I try to avoid all the issues you mentioned for cards in my collection (with the above mentioned exception).

[Vegas Cards]

Always been one of my favorite cards, even with the big crease down the middle.

[Yoda]

I can accept almost all of the defects listed for the right card except alterations of any kind.

[DHogan]

I'm not sure why I keep this one.

[molenick]

To be clear, I do keep some beaters for fun. But they were all either found on the street or behind a wall or otherwise discovered. I guess technically they are in my "collection" because I own them and love them as well. So I guess I am not as much a condition snob as I thought.

[Exhibitman]

For the right price I am good with most anything except writing or 'art work' on the card, especially if it is rare or high value

[nat]

Tape is the only deal breaker. The other things I dislike but am willing to tolerate. But I won't buy a card with tape residue under pretty much any circumstances.

Strangely, glue residue doesn't have the same effect on me. I've got plenty of cards that were removed from scrapbooks, and I don't care about that. But my interest in a card drops to zero when I see tape marks.

[iwantitiwinit]

I would not collect anything that is ungraded. That's just me.

[brianp-beme]

Here is my Diamond Stars Rogers Hornsby. I have condition conditions, but I still haven't figured out what they are.

Brian

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by iwantitiwinit

I would not collect anything that is ungraded. That's just me.

I am almost the opposite. I buy slabbed because that's really what's out there a lot of the time, but I'd rather hand-cull raw cards for my collection if possible. Actually touching 1933 Goudeys at the last National I attended instead of a plastic case was strangely satisfying...

[hcv123]

Cards that are rare or obscure, I am a lot more forgiving/tolerant of a whole range of condition flaws.

Now if we are talking cards that are readily available - Centering and surface are my top 2 "demands" Clean crease free surface, good photo registration and great centering. I'll take touched even lightly worn corners all day.

[SteveS]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Here is my Diamond Stars Rogers Hornsby. I have condition conditions, but I still haven't figured out what they are.

Brian

I think that's the very rare card of the Ghost of Rogers Hornsby.

[SteveS]

Originally Posted by bnorth

This Pristine Gem Mint Hank Aaron is a perfect example of the cards I collect.

This is entitled "Hank Aaron from Dock Ellis' Point of View."

[egri]

I've posted this one here before, but this card is more oval-shaped than rectangular. When I sent it in to Mr. Porter, he sent it back with a signed custom card and a note saying he felt so bad about how damaged it was that he was enclosing the custom to make up for it.

JW Porter, on Flickr

[egri]

Originally Posted by SteveS

This is entitled "Hank Aaron from Dock Ellis' Point of View."

I was going to say, I thought acid was later in the 1960s/early 1970s.

[G1911]

I don’t collect cards with sharp corners, perfect centering, or without creases.

All damage is acceptable, if the price is commensurate, or the card is one where they are too rare to care about damage. To be a condition snob means one can only cards from a relatively small number of sets that have large surviving populations allowing a collector to be picky. I simply would not be able to own many of my cards at all if I wanted only high grade copies, no matter how much money I spend.

[Rhotchkiss]

Generally, I want a numerical grade and nothing on the front that would give rise to an old fashioned qualifier on a flip. That said, some cards are just so damn rare that I will take what I can get. At the same time, there are certain cards that only come in A, especially hand cut ones, like T206 Brown Old Mills, t215 Pirates and 1910 Orange Borders, so I am weary of those in numerical grades. So, it depends on the cards

[cardsagain74]

Badly diamond cut is way up there for me.

I'll never get why TPGs are so lenient about it (relative to how warped it makes the card look)

[jcmtiger]

Don’t like tape on the left side, but would probably cause more damage trying to remove the tape. Poor photo because framed under glass. But, it is Ty Cobb.

[JustinD]

As long as the image is visible I can enjoy a card and a damaged back is just fine. I once passed on a Aquilitas Mendez rookie for a tiny fraction of its price as the front image was just barely visible, I knew I would get little enjoyment from owning it. That proved to me my line in the sand, lol.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

Badly diamond cut is way up there for me.

I'll never get why TPGs are so lenient about it (relative to how warped it makes the card look)

TPG's have pushed a worldview on us where in some cases diamond cuts or extreme tilt is more acceptable than 75/25 centering. That's just dumb. I've also never understood why a card with a barely perceptible wrinkle gets a 3, but a card with a badly OF image that is noticeable from several feet away can get a 5. Professional grading is supposed to equate technical metrics to wear and defects based on how they affect eye appeal - but in some cases the standard is just in fairly poor touch with reality.

[Frankish]

Originally Posted by hcv123

Cards that are rare or obscure, I am a lot more forgiving/tolerant of a whole range of condition flaws.

Now if we are talking cards that are readily available - Centering and surface are my top 2 "demands" Clean crease free surface, good photo registration and great centering. I'll take touched even lightly worn corners all day.

This. 100%. I'll even take heavily and honestly worn corners or edges over poor registration any day of the week.

My collecting focus has moved from 1940-60s US cards to Japanese cards from the same era and 1910-1930s US baseball type 1 photos. Admittedly, this might be a very poor financial choice, but I very much enjoy the collecting aspect of it, especially as these are often unique photos or cards with less than 20 known specimens. Regardless, I really enjoy the chase and condition is much less important. In fact, for many cards, condition is hardly important.

All of that said, I prefer no writing on the front of the card or skinned backs...but make exceptions for very rare cards.

[Vintagecatcher]

I have always preferred cards without any creases.

I can live with writing on the backs or minimal paper loss on the backs as well.

Rodent bites are a absolute deal breaker!

Patrick

[53toppscollector]

I've always assumed that the things that jump out to me the most are just the way my brain is wired (and possibly the result of a serious concussion I got 20 years ago playing pickup basketball in college)

My brain instantly notices diamond cut cards or cards tilted at all, and it is very distracting to me. I've had to sort of work past that as I've gotten into pre-war collecting, but anything from the 50s Topps Run I am working on, I just don't want to have diamond cut cards. For 50s and newer, I also avoid cards with marks, simply because there is more supply in most cases and it is okay to be a bit pickier. I'm pretty fanatical about centering, because my brain is just really sensitive when looking at a card, and if its off center, I do struggle with it.

For pre-war, basically the only thing I avoid is total paper loss on the back, an entire corner clipped off the card, or writing on the front of the card. I can live with marks on the back, light stains, pinholes, etc. I try to avoid cards that have been knowingly trimmed or recolored, because it just feels off to me, but I'm trying to embrace that too. Less supply = I have to be less picky.

[brianp-beme]

I am willing to tolerate cards where the player shown is in less than top notch condition, such as this T203 card that depicts the player seeing stars as a result of a blow to the head.

Brian

[JollyElm]

If a card can still be lit on fire with a match, it has a welcome place in my collection.

[bmattioli]

Nothing bothers me..

[brianp-beme]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

I am willing to tolerate cards where the player shown is in less than top notch condition, such as this T203 card that depicts the player seeing stars as a result of a blow to the head.

Brian

Another card in my collection where the condition of the player is a little questionable.

Brian

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by molenick

I have to be honest, I think of myself as a "true collector" but I have been obsessed by condition before there were even grading services.

Me too, but my obsession has more to do with the technical nuances of grading, over and above having to have cards in any certain condition. I might buy vintage 5's or 3's from different graders to compare and contrast from different slab generations / eras. I think the history of grading itself is fascinating, and consider grading almost a sub-hobby of mine.

[tjv815]

I have no requirements. In fact, I am working on a beater 1978 set where I am always looking to downgrade. I am trying to get cards that have significant creasing, rounded and fuzzy corners and surface wear and attempting to have the whole card. But I don't turn any away. I also collect 78's with writing on front, writing on the back and miscuts. It has been a fun way to collect the 1978's, my first year collecting.

TJ

[ZenPop]

Beauty!!

Originally Posted by Vegas Cards

Always been one of my favorite cards, even with the big crease down the middle.

[ZenPop]

That's amazing!!
I tip my hat, Sir!

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

Here is my Diamond Stars Rogers Hornsby. I have condition conditions, but I still haven't figured out what they are.

Brian

[ZenPop]

I do not own these two cards, (I do not own ANY Mantle cards) but I would LOVE to own these two cards...

The first reminds me of some sort of religious relic.
The second reminds me of the childhood joy of collecting cards.
(I've kept the pics to remind me how cool they are... and to get them if I ever see them available)...

Maybe some day...

[todeen]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I am a condition snob. No matter the year or player my cards need to have 4 razor sharp corners. Also if it is not perfectly centered top to bottom and side to side I pass. But the real big thing is registration. If even the slightest bit off just looking at the card will give me a head ache.



This Pristine Gem Mint Hank Aaron is a perfect example of the cards I collect.

I hope you put together a coffee table book someday. Your collection brings me so much joy.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[todeen]

The CJ Speaker was the first card I bought with writing on the front. At least they didn't try to erase Boston. The Cobb has a pinhole, which for some reason did not bother me at all. I like the whole card to be present. I dislike noticeable paper loss, but I will tolerate a little; I bought a 21 Exhibit Cobb with paper loss. I have contemplated buying graded altered, but haven't yet. Dog ears are fine; like someone said previously it's okay for old cards to have characteristics of old cards. However, I cannot deal with a crease through the face. That's a deal breaker. The Gehrig is the infamous Kevin Mize card that got him kicked off the forum. I haven't sold it, but it has slightly changed my thoughts about card conditions I'm willing to purchase. A year ago someone asked my opinion about why it came back Altered. My gut tells me the top edge is trimmed.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[ValKehl]

For the master Sam Rice card collection I am working on, I'll gladly accept any card I don't have in any condition, no matter how flawed. For rare/scarce cards for my other collecting focuses, I abhor paper loss that affects the player's image or the advertising on the back. So, I'm thrilled to have this scarce SP T222 of WaJo with a sizeable corner piece missing, because this flaw affects neither WaJo's image nor the ad on the back.

For those of you who are okay with writing on the front of a somewhat scarce card, my 1954 Bowman of Teddy Ball Game is in the current Sterling auction. Leon, I apologize for this bit of shameless promotion. https://www.sterlingsportsauctions.c...-LOT65020.aspx

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by ValKehl

For the master Sam Rice card collection I am working on, I'll gladly accept any card I don't have in any condition, no matter how flawed. For rare/scarce cards for my other collecting focuses, I abhor paper loss that affects the player's image or the advertising on the back. So, I'm thrilled to have this scarce SP T222 of WaJo with a sizeable corner piece missing, because this flaw affects neither WaJo's image nor the ad on the back.

For those of you who are okay with writing on the front of a somewhat scarce card, my 1954 Bowman of Teddy Ball Game is in the current Sterling auction. Leon, I apologize for this bit of shameless promotion. https://www.sterlingsportsauctions.c...-LOT65020.aspx

Great Johnson Card
I agree the paper loss does not take away from the card because it is away from the player

[darwinbulldog]

There are some cards I'm looking for that I'd be happy to pick up even if they had every one of the listed flaws. For cards that are easy to find I'll pass if I detect any "alterations", significant paper loss, missing pieces, or (usually) writing. All of that is with the caveat that I pass because other people value them more than I do, not because I value them at $0. If someone wanted to sell me a legitimate T206 Cobb or '33 Goudey Ruth for $100 I'd be pretty flexible with my usual rules.

[CobbSpikedMe]

This should give a good idea of my condition requirements. One of my favorite cards in my collection and it was given to me by a fellow OBCer.

And a prewar beater that I love since it once belonged to Lionel Carter.



.