![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Trying to train myself to visually grade cards. I think this would grade as a 4. There are no paper creases, minor rear stain, and corner issues.
Would appreciate any comments. As always, thanks for any help. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I'd say a 4 on it's best day. Wouldn't be surprised if it came down to a 3 - or even a 2 - depending on that stain and whatever is happening above the first D in David. Can't really tell from the pics.
__________________
Items for sale or trade here UPDATED 3-16-18 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
OC top to bottom. I collect T206s in lower grades typically. The best T206s I have a PSA 4 and I think they are comparable to your example. The corners might be a bit too round to pull off a 4 though. 3 or 3.5 maybe?
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
10-15 years ago a 4 all day
Now it's a 3 Maybe 2.5 if there is paper loss or a little crease |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I'm thinking 2.5. PSA isn't going to like that surface wrinkle on the back.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Don't Grade Card is Great the Way it is! We all know its a Vg+ Card
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Not a wrinkle on the back, a defect in the cardboard. And no paper loss that I can see.
Last edited by ocjack; 05-15-2020 at 03:02 PM. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
2.5 or 3
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Looks like a 3 to me.
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
It really makes NO difference unless you are buying or selling - so as to help set a price......... On any given day one can expect to see at least a half grade (or more) difference FROM ONE DAY TO THE NEXT on the same card. Unfortunately - NOT a science. Buy what you like and do it the way you want. In general I don't think it prudent to grade a card that isn't rare or in exceptional condition for the issue. Defect or wrinkle = likely the same result. That said - I DO have a few 19th century sets graded - and not all the cards are mint or rare. In fact, few are :-)
no guarantees whether written or implied. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I would expect a 4 on that card from PSA.
__________________
-- 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. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't understand some estimates of X.5 grades. We note that it is oc top to bottom.
My understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, is that .5 grades are given to well centered cards.
__________________
Successful transactions with: Double-P-Enterprises, Thromdog, DavidBvintage, Desert Ice Sports, Kurtz Kardz, Cooperstown Sportscards, BBT206 and tenorvox! |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Half grades are given to well presented cards. Centering isn't the only factor. I knocked it down due to the surface wrinkle on the back (look at the top of the card), then bumped it up because that is all that is putting it at that low of a grade to begin with.
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Agreed; a 0.5 grade can be given for any feature of the card that is much higher than the technical grade. So if you have a properly registered/sharp image card on something known to normally be printed fuzzy (like 1957 Dodgers Sluggers), it can get a half grade bump for something other than centering. That being said, a very small portion of cards actually do get half points. I know I submitted like 500 hundred T51 colleges, and maybe 50 got a half point bump.
__________________
-- 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. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for clearing that up!
__________________
Successful transactions with: Double-P-Enterprises, Thromdog, DavidBvintage, Desert Ice Sports, Kurtz Kardz, Cooperstown Sportscards, BBT206 and tenorvox! |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
No Wrinkle & No Stain = Probably 3
The wrinkled 2 actually presents better than the 3 and maybe even the 4 (IMO) ![]()
__________________
Lonnie Nagel T206 : 212/520 : 40.6% Last edited by toledo_mudhen; 05-16-2020 at 06:54 AM. |
#17
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
They make up a set of rules, and everyone hypnotically follows along... it's as if Joe Orlando is The Pied Piper.
If slabs were never invented, there's very little chance that 4 would sell for multiple thousands above the other two. The eye appeal is no better than the others. I guess for some reason, they choose not to deduct for color abraisions? |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Question about PSA grading | BlueBlood | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 12-26-2014 11:11 PM |
SGC Grading Question | magic1313 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 29 | 04-01-2010 07:12 AM |
SGC Grading Question | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 04-08-2008 06:43 PM |
Grading question | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 05-02-2007 09:22 AM |
SGC grading question (possible dumb question) | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 09-08-2006 12:36 AM |