I guess i am "new" to the hobby, I have never seen this Wagner!!!

[chriskim]

Wow... i guess i am "new" to the hobby, this is the first time I have seen this t206 Wagner in the past 30+ yrs of collecting. It is in fairly "good" condition, it should get a 0.5 grade instead of "A".



https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1...umbnail-071515

[investinrookies]

already over half a million, Wagners continue to soar rapidly everytime one comes up for sale. Makes the Doyle and plank look cheap in comparison, not to mention some other rare prewar cards.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by chriskim

Wow... i guess i am "new" to the hobby, this is the first time I have seen this t206 Wagner in the past 30+ yrs of collecting. It is in fairly "good" condition, it should get a 0.5 grade instead of "A".



https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1...umbnail-071515

Apparently the A grade is due to the size requirement (not the card's overall condition). Taken from Hertitage's description...

"The "Authentic" designation from SGC relates to the card's failure to meet minimum size requirements."

[68Hawk]

Originally Posted by chriskim

Wow... i guess i am "new" to the hobby, this is the first time I have seen this t206 Wagner in the past 30+ yrs of collecting. It is in fairly "good" condition, it should get a 0.5 grade instead of "A".



https://sports.ha.com/itm/baseball/1...umbnail-071515

It's short at the bottom, thus the Auth designation.

[ullmandds]

I think it’s a beautiful example and will do especially well with the joe g provenance.

[Bpm0014]

Seems like a good candidate for a soaking

[irv]

Originally Posted by perezfan

Apparently the A grade is due to the size requirement (not the card's overall condition). Taken from Hertitage's description...

"The "Authentic" designation from SGC relates to the card's failure to meet minimum size requirements."

Originally Posted by 68Hawk

It's short at the bottom, thus the Auth designation.

Regardless of the length/shortness, would it not have received an "A" anyways due to the paper loss on the back?

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by irv

Regardless of the length/shortness, would it not have received an "A" anyways due to the paper loss on the back?

Probably, but falling short of the min size criteria (as stated in the description) conclusively dispels the OP's perception that a number grade might have been warranted.

I do agree with you that the paper loss is significant enough that it would likely grade "A" even if full-sized.

[Jay Wolt]

Originally Posted by chriskim

It is in fairly "good" condition, it should get a 0.5 grade instead of "A".

SGC doesn't offer a grade of "0.5"
after "Authentic" it goes up to "1"

[jcmtiger]

Joe G’s son used to attend the Plymouth Michigan shows. Was collecting Press Pins at that time.

[swarmee]

So the discussion kind of went sideways. Was this a "known" Wagner that is one of the 60-ish currently tracked, or it is a "new to the hobby" find? I think that was the gist of the original post.

[jcmtiger]

Don’t think it is a new card. Joe G’s son has been collecting for at least 25 years.

[Howe’s Hunter]

Don’t remember the date, but there was an article in SCD with Joe, believe he had a “complete” T206 set. Mentioned he just liked taking them out and looking at them for hours on end.