![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Let me preface this by saying that I know nothing about grading cards. That being said I just got my submission back from SGC. The Cy Young card came back as an A. I realize that there is a mark in the lower left corner and the back has stains and the dye from the album that the card was once glued into, so I know it wouldn't get a high number, but to me, and judging from grades on my other submissions this should have gotten a number grade. There were a few cards that made me scratch my head. Please let me know if I am wrong and why this card should be graded as an A. I always love to learn from the experts. Sorry for the poor photos. If better ones are needed let me know and I will see what I can do.
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I looks slightly trimmed on the left border, from the front. Other than that, it is a fine example.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I believe at some point these cards where glued into at least 2 albums so it is possible it was trimmed but I find it odd that only one card out of 330+ was trimmed and the rest were not.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I see the same thing - left side appears trimmed. Width didn't match up to the SGC holder. Tough call...
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I don't have the card in the holder scanned yet, but I submitted this E121-80 with paste / glue on the back and it was graded as a 20 - Fair by SGC. There must be something else, maybe the mentioned trimming on your card.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cool. Like I said it is possible and I know nothing about grading so I myself wouldn't be able to detect the trimming. Maybe the others are trimmed as well. I have about a dozen examples that are head scratchers including some boxing cards that just don't make sense to me, especially when compared with other cards of the same series that received a number grade. I also have 100's of t206 cards that have that same gap on the left that received number grades.
Last edited by magic1313; 03-30-2010 at 07:08 PM. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have never seen so much top border on a T206 card before. Is that card very oversized?
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The top border is larger than any other t206 that I have and the bottom is not smaller which might indicate a miscut.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
What was the reason for the "A"? SGC usually gives a reason. If they didn't, call them and I'm sure you will find the answer. They are very easily the best in customer service.
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
.
__________________
T206Resource.com Last edited by cfc1909; 03-30-2010 at 07:47 PM. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
__________________
T206Resource.com |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
No reason was given. Their Customer Service has been great so far.
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Unfortunately we don't keep records as to why a card receives an Authentic grade, but as has been mentioned here, it is likely due to trimming, a miscut that was too severe for a numerical grade, or a deviation from the size requirement that was too much for a numerical grade.
You can send the card back to us with your next order or send it in solo for an explanation. Please call or e-mail to arrange that if interested. Thanks, Brian 1-800-742-9212 x114 |
#14
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
It looks really oddly shaped. It looks too tall (possible miscut?) and is also curved along the bottom (possible trim). But its hard to tell with the picture, the lens of a camera can distort a card. A scan would tell a better story.
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Funny back in the day oversized T206's were quite common now you hardly ever see them...wonder why that is?
![]() ![]() |
#16
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Wow John-I think that's about the nicest Walter Johnson T206 I've ever seen!!
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
back in the day a certain collector was paying 100 for mint examples of 206s, when 206s were a fraction of the cost. The over sized 206s magicly disappeared...
![]()
__________________
T206Resource.com |
#18
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
the above Jackson came in my first group of 206s-a ex bat on cobb, vg young,white cap Matty-e91 examples of Speaker and Johnson and a group of the 9 Baltimore players-also there was a #92 Goudey Gehrig.
Needless to say , that group got me hooked on vintage cards. Started going to the Philly show and slowly building my set. This was all before ebay-now you can build it sitting at your computor.
__________________
T206Resource.com |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Are all of the Mint Harris Collection cards trimmed?
|
#20
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Pretty easy to see that the border on the lower left front/right back has been cut.
__________________
Galleries and Articles about T206 Player Autographs www.SignedT206.com www.instagram.com/signedT206/ @SignedT206 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The camera did distort the image a little. The borders are not concave as the image projects. I don't have a scanner so I cannot do scans. Also just want to make clear that I am not trying to bash SGC, so far I have been very pleased with the services I received. It is just to me, an amateur at best, the card looks like it should get a number, I am just trying to gain knowledge for my future endeavers as to why a number grade wasn't achieved. If someone would like to help me out privately with some other cards that would be appreciated as well.
Last edited by magic1313; 03-31-2010 at 10:21 AM. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
From a prior thread...
http://www.net54baseball.com/showthr...ris+Collection Many of the Harris cards came from the Copeland collection. Its a commonly discussed topic that many dealers trimmed cards to sell to Jim Copeland. Jim was one of the first big wallets in the hobby and had a passion for stellar cards and would pay top dollar. Unfortunately many dealer and sellers took advantage of this trimming cards to sell to him. IMO the PSA 7 Plank from the Copeland collection is trimmed along with many others, the bad thing is because of this even legitimate high grade cards from that collection now carry a question of doubt due to these past issues or rumors. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The card is slightly trimmed, but to a collector, it's a nice looking card.
As you handle more, and more cards, you'll be able to spot trim jobs. My question to you is: Now that you know that it is trimmed ... is your concern now that of a collector, or an investor? ![]() |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yup - looks trimmed to me...but the image posted does look a bit distorted.
__________________
My Collection (in progress) at: http://www.collectorfocus.com/collection/BosoxBlair |
#25
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I echo the statements made above. You did used to see large bordered T206s selling raw 15 years or so ago as I know I have a number in my collection but the exacto knives and later laser cutters trimmed many down and made them appear like 7s, 8s and 9s. It appears that with this card (and nice card by the way regardless) that the borders were oversized and in an attempt to make the card appear "sharper," a little trimming took place most noticeably on the left side.
Still a very nice card. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Potomac,
As much as I would like to keep the cards I would have to say that my interest was as an investor. I might decide to keep the HOF's for a little while but will most likely will have to sell off the remainder of the cards. I just remembered that my all in one printer has a scanner and hopefully it is the type that produces good card scans. I am going to try to scan in every card I have a create a database. I will try to get a scan of this card posted tonight. Last edited by magic1313; 03-31-2010 at 12:35 PM. |
#27
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Before reading your post I looked at the scans and thought to myself, "I am surprised SGC graded that; it looks trimmed." Then I saw that they graded it "authentic". Seems right. My guess is that card was hand-cut off of a sheet, accounting both for the oversize and the irregularities.
JimB |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Here are the scans of the card. I think I can see the trim in the lower left corner. Would people mind if I posted a few more that I have questions about. They would be as replies within this post.
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Not yet to busy buying other stuff and too lazy to drive to NJ...LOL
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SGC Grading question | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 10-27-2008 08:30 AM |
SGC is grading onsite in the Corporate area of the National. | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 08-01-2008 11:19 AM |
T-206 and SGC grading questions | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 09-07-2007 05:52 AM |
SGC grading question (possible dumb question) | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 09-08-2006 12:36 AM |
Question about submitting N172 Old Judges to SGC | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 09-27-2003 10:06 PM |