![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: pete
I recently submitted a Ty Cobb Green Portrait T206 to PSA with a tiny speck of "paperloss" on the front and received it back as a POOR 1. Outside of the speck of paperloss, it would definitely bring in a 3 maybe a 4. My question is..."how did this Ty Cobb on Ebay (item #5188946570) receive a PSA 4 with a "big" spot of paperloss on the front ? (sorry, I dont know how to add a link or scan) could it be a "switch-o-roo" ? the edges of the card holder are hard to see if there is any "frost" from tampering. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: jay behrens
My guess would be that the card was submitted by one of their premier accounts. PSA has been known to give preferential treatment to certain submitters. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: dstudeba
I have an SGC 4 with paperloss right on the player's chin. It has annoyed me ever since I bought it and will probably be replaced by a card of lower grade. I don't mind paper loss on the back, but one the front it can really ruin the eye appeal of the card. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Judge Dred
The seller is SCGAYNOR, I couldn't imagine he'd have anything to do with selling a card in a tampered holder. My guess is that one of those great graders just missed it. Like they say - buy the card not the holder...!!! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Scott Elkins
I bought an already graded PSA 6 Brodleaf 350 T206 and it had OVER a 1 inch CREASE in the center of the card! This didn't really upset THAT much, until I sent PSA a nice T206 Lenox Cobb I bought from a find with a small corner crease and they gave it a PSA PR/FR 1!!!!!!!! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Bruce Babcock
I once received a grade of PSA 8 (!?!) for a card with paper loss on the front - a 1969 Topps Super Mantle. I no longer have the card. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: pete
PSA needs to be a little "more consistent" with their grading, maybe they should put paperloss in their qualifiers grading list. "paperloss drops grade at least 1" or something along those lines. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Mark
That white, circular spot you're referring to is obviously the baseball that Cobb is readying himself to swing at. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barry arnold
Emerson said long ago that consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Zach
Another example of a t206 in a four with paperloss on the front. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: quan
if you look at both serials, it's the 9XXXXXX series. from my understanding isn't each grader assigned a different number? Most of the stuff I send in is graded by 3XXXXXX now, a couple years back it was either the 3XXXXX or the 1xxxxxxxx, like Mike Baker's used to start with 0XXXXXX? Is this making sense? So maybe the 9 grader has a different standard. I try to stay away from PSA cards that start with serial 4XXXXXX. I've found most of the alleged altered and trimmed stuff comes with that serial. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Julie
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: warshawlaw
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Julie
At first, there was NOTHING on the back of this card, and now there's glue residue...the front is about perfect. Who cares about the back of an OJ, unless someione has written something interesting on it? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Judge Dred
Julie, |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Judge Dred
Julie, |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: quan
ok so the photo clarity is excellent, which is what most OJ collectors go after...but unless I'm mistaken that's two huge chunks of paper loss due to album removal. Since the front is so breathtaking I agree with the technical GOOD grade, otherwise I might even call the card fair. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Judge Dred
Without seeing the card in person I am going to go off of the scan. I see a very slight amount of paper loss on the back, left side of the bottom adhesive stain and two overall adhesive stains. I've seen PSA inconsistently grade cards like this. I have OJ cards graded PSA6 that have obvious adhesive staining and I also have a load of cards with adhesive staining graded in the "2" range. In any case the grading companies are very inconsistent. OJ collectors are pretty much in line with trying to get a clear picture first and then scrutinizing the back second. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Darren J. Duet
Barry, |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: barry arnold
I'm even more proud of being part of such a learned group. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Ben
the complete quote is: |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: pete
the seller did confirm those white spots were in fact "paperloss" as opposed to "scan problems"....i still hate PSA |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: BcD
I have a PSA 5 (not 4) N-162 of a non sport pro with letter loss on the back. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS:T205 Ty Cobb, Front is NM/MT, Back From PSA! Good 2 ! Offers? | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 26 | 08-06-2008 11:41 PM |
Does this VG/EX 4 have paperloss on back? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 07-17-2008 07:12 PM |
1933 Blue Bird Babe Ruth Front View PSA 6 (Pictures Uploaded) | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 06-29-2007 07:33 PM |
Paperloss on Front + PSA = 4 | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 39 | 07-17-2006 06:27 PM |
PSA Submissions received back | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 16 | 10-31-2001 08:05 AM |