Clarification of auction description

[Rhotchkiss]

Fully agree. I have been looking at this card and have decided to pass because of the paper loss. I believe the AH is saying that the actual grade given is higher than/inconsistent with what other cards with this type of paper loss normally grade out to. I do not think they are intending to say it would grade higher but for the paper loss. Its a cover ass statement and, frankly, a refreshing, honest disclosure

[CardMD]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Fully agree. I have been looking at this card and have decided to pass because of the paper loss. I believe the AH is saying that the actual grade given is higher than/inconsistent with what other cards with this type of paper loss normally grade out to. I do not think they are intending to say it would grade higher but for the paper loss. Its a cover ass statement and, frankly, a refreshing, honest disclosure

That is what I was leaning towards. Sucks because I can't stop looking at the front. Its a beauty.

[oldjudge]

Translation-There are two big ass spots of paper loss on the rear from where it appears to have been glued into a scrapbook. PSA screwed up the grade and it should be much lower.

[CardMD]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Translation-There are two big ass spots of paper loss on the rear from where it appears to have been glued into a scrapbook. PSA screwed up the grade and it should be much lower.

The more I look at it, shouldn't it be a 7 without the paper loss? Does the paper loss drop it more that a OC? I thought the general rule for OC is a 2 point drop to have the OC removed? Does that apply for paper loss?

[irv]

Originally Posted by CardMD

The more I look at it, shouldn't it be a 7 without the paper loss? Does the paper loss drop it more that a OC? I thought the general rule for OC is a 2 point drop to have the OC removed? Does that apply for paper loss?

With the paper loss and staining on the reverse, this card should be a PR-1 as per their own guidelines, if I am not mistaken?

Without seeing the front but going by the description, it has been talked about many times that TPG's should be less critical with back flaws than front ones, but as far as I know, nothing has changed in regards to that.

[pokerplyr80]

Originally Posted by CardMD

The more I look at it, shouldn't it be a 7 without the paper loss? Does the paper loss drop it more that a OC? I thought the general rule for OC is a 2 point drop to have the OC removed? Does that apply for paper loss?

There is no pl qualifier for paper loss. I did not notice this thread until after I started one on the same card. And as others have stated the answer to your first question is they are admitting the card should not be graded a 5 with paper loss.

[PhillipAbbott79]

Originally Posted by CardMD

The more I look at it, shouldn't it be a 7 without the paper loss? Does the paper loss drop it more that a OC? I thought the general rule for OC is a 2 point drop to have the OC removed? Does that apply for paper loss?

Definitely not a 7 by any stretch, not even a 6.

[Steve D]

PSA's rules, I believe, stipulate that the highest grade a card with paper loss can get, is a 2.

Steve

[Yoda]

SGC would crucify this card. A 1.5 at best.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Yoda

SGC would crucify this card. A 1.5 at best.

yeap

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Yoda

SGC would crucify this card. A 1.5 at best.

Totally, and you hit it with "at best".

[Rich Falvo]

"Blame PSA, not us. We didn't give it this grade."

[ullmandds]

love the "classic cobb illustration" verbiage...makes me want to vomit!!!!

[glchen]

Paper loss like that, even with a spectacular front, will usually drop the card's grade to 1.5 or 2.

[PhillipAbbott79]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

Fully agree. I have been looking at this card and have decided to pass because of the paper loss. I believe the AH is saying that the actual grade given is higher than/inconsistent with what other cards with this type of paper loss normally grade out to. I do not think they are intending to say it would grade higher but for the paper loss. Its a cover ass statement and, frankly, a refreshing, honest disclosure

Ditto. Seen it and walked right past it. It would be a 5 if it had the paper. It doesn't, it is not a 5. They are down playing the severity of it. It should be a 2, but it obviously would command more dollars than a 2.

Neither was 'tick mark' in PWCCs auction a few months ago which is their way of saying there is a deep puncture in the card that pulled the paper up and it is almost gone. I am passing also.