Seeking perspectives on an SGC grade
Fellow Collectors, I'd welcome your perspectives on the 1.5 grade SGC recently assigned to this T206 Walter Johnson I submitted. While having super front-side eye-appeal, the card does have some issues -- most notable is some ink on the back. The lower left front corner also has some wear but still a good corner for a 115 year old card. Excellent centering, no creases, and no major staining.
I knew the ink and corner would be detractions so considered a 2 to be the upper-end for a grade. SGC defines a 2 as: Centered 90/10 or better. This card usually exhibits one or more of these characteristics: heavy print spots, heavy crease(s), pinhole(s), color or focus imperfections or discoloration, surface scuffing or tear, rounded and/or fraying corners, ink or pencil marking(s), and lack of all or some original gloss.
I also felt good about it grading a 2 as I had seen a similar WaJo with distracting ink on the back, well-rounded corners, significant staining, and a crease that had previously been graded a 1.5 by SGC.
As you can see from the pic, my submission was graded a 1.5 defined as: Centered 90/10 or better. This card usually exhibits several of these characteristics: heavy print spots, heavy crease(s), pinhole(s), color or focus imperfections or discoloration, surface scuffing or tears, rounded and/or fraying corners, ink or pencil marking(s), and lack of all or some original gloss, a small portion of the card may be missing.
I'd appreciate your thoughts on whether SGC got it right? Or whether it really even matters with front-side eye-appeal outweighing the ink on the reverse?
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
|
11-17-2024, 02:33 PM
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode