 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11
09-05-2018, 12:42 PM
|
||||
|
||||
I cannot afford it. I do not know T206s well either so with those disclosures my worthless opinion is that it is not a 10. I see what appears to be a tobacco stain too. My hunch is that if taken out of the holder it would not come back as a 10 the next time. If it were my card however I would not see any of the flaws we have pointed out.
In a perfect world I think I would prefer to buy a card that I feel would grade the same way if submitted again. I know not all collectors, especially those at the top of the food chain, care about that.
__________________
( h @ $ e A n + l e y 
|
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Who is the LEAST deserving player in the HOF in the T206 set | bbcard1 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 31 | 09-12-2016 08:36 PM |
| Why would someone Leave a non deserving Low DSR? | Buythatcard | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 19 | 11-25-2012 04:01 PM |
| The most deserving 19th Century Player not yet enshrined in the HOF | martyogelvie | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 31 | 10-17-2010 07:35 PM |
| Think theres deserving 19th century players not in the HOF | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 36 | 06-06-2005 12:39 PM |
Threaded Mode