![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The 54 Hank Aaron card has a pen mark on the reverse over the card number. My understanding is that SGC will grade any cards with a mark as a 2. If I submitted this to PSA with the request of no qualifier do you think it would get graded as a 3 or a 4? My understanding is that PSA will drop a card by two grades if a no qualifier is requested. Looking for someone to comment who has experience with PSA grading marked cards. Any guidance will be much appreciated.
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
MK is not one they usually remove. So if PSA thinks it's an Excellent card otherwise, it would still most likely get a 5(MK) despite requesting "no qualifiers". They reserve the right to leave the qualifier on there. Normally NQ is used for things like OC or ST. A 5(MK) would count like a PSA 3 in their registry competition.
If you really don't want to get the MK qualifier, you might need to call PSA. But I've received cards back graded PSA 1(MK) before. And I've also had multiple cards with marks not get graded as MK, probably because the grader missed it somehow. The two cards I'm thinking about were fairly obvious to spot the writing or additional ink. Quote:
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
That card is beautiful and looks well centered. I would guess it would be a 6(mk) unless there is something I can’t see. Take the qualifier.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Last I checked you can’t opt out of the mk qualifier.
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I have a '58 Mantle / Aaron that would otherwise be a 4 or a 5 with what I thought were marks on the back but it may be considered a stain from an album. I saw it and thought it should probably have had the MK qualifier but it was a straight PSA 2.
__________________
Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Cubs of all eras. Currently working on 1956, '63 and '72 Topps complete sets. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I appreciate you all taking the time to answer my question. I now know the qualifier for the pen mark will not be removed by PSA. I do think the card will grade at a minimum as a PSA 5 MK. I just now need to decide if I submit to PSA with the SGC holder or remove the card from the case. Thanks again for your help.
|
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How much does a Qualifier affect the Value of a higher grade card? | Blunder19 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 16 | 02-12-2017 06:15 PM |
Why not a higher grade with a qualifier for tape on back? | Pat R | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 05-26-2012 04:52 PM |
Will this card grade marked, stained or both? | Northviewcats | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 5 | 08-16-2011 03:15 PM |
WTB: Low to mid-grade T206 w/qualifier | freakhappy | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 08-13-2011 11:43 PM |
PSA OC for Lower Grade without Qualifier? | Archive | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 0 | 08-02-2008 10:06 AM |