1934 Goudey Lou Gehrig SGC 98 on Sports Cards Plus

[thehoodedcoder]

maybe the over saturition is a bad thing and they have it backwards. maybe the one that appears under saturated is really the proper amounts of ink.

what would anyone use to really guage what mixture of ink saturations were intended?

kevin

[wonkaticket]

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by wonkaticket

Well, so much for that hypothesis. The back is beautiful, too. I don't know what allowance they make for centering top to bottom on vintage cards. That would be the only thing I can see that could possibly lower the grade, and even that would be a reach.

I think this card is slightly undergraded.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by thehoodedcoder

maybe the over saturition is a bad thing and they have it backwards. maybe the one that appears under saturated is really the proper amounts of ink.

what would anyone use to really guage what mixture of ink saturations were intended?

kevin

Kevin, that was my thinking originally. After dinner I'm going to look at some more examples on Card Target.

[the 'stache]

Here's an interesting tidbit. When Lou Gehrig won the Triple Crown in 1934, he didn't win the American League MVP. He finished fifth!

[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Here's an interesting tidbit. When Lou Gehrig won the Triple Crown in 1934, he didn't win the American League MVP. He finished fifth!

Keep in mind, though, that the mystique of winning the Triple Crown was no doubt diminished by both leagues having a Triple Crown winner in 1933 -- Jimmie Foxx in the American League and Chuck Klein in the National League. The Triple Crown wasn't nearly the rarity in that time as it is now.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Bored5000

Keep in mind, though, that the mystique of winning the Triple Crown was no doubt diminished by both leagues having a Triple Crown winner in 1933 -- Jimmie Foxx in the American League and Chuck Klein in the National League. The Triple Crown wasn't nearly the rarity in that time as it is now.

This is true, but still--fifth? The Yankees weren't horrible in '34. They finished second to Detroit. And Lou had a much better season than the guy that won it, Mickey Cochrane. If they were going to pick a Tiger to win it, as they were the pennant winners, Charlie Gehringer or Hank Greenberg would have been better choices, imho.

[e107collector]

John,

I'd take your 7.5 over the 10 any day. Save the extra $$ for other card purchases. Your color and registration is equal to the 10, plus your centering is nicer.

Great card!

Tony

[thehoodedcoder]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Kevin, that was my thinking originally. After dinner I'm going to look at some more examples on Card Target.

i think my entire point was missed. my point is that there is no way to know.

the only way to know for sure is to have some sort of documentation about exactly how the card is supposed to look from a non issued card...right?

you can take all of the cards and compare all of them to all others of them and you still won't know what the whole mass of cards were supposed to look like in a perfect state.

kevin

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by thehoodedcoder

i think my entire point was missed. my point is that there is no way to know.

the only way to know for sure is to have some sort of documentation about exactly how the card is supposed to look from a non issued card...right?

you can take all of the cards and compare all of them to all others of them and you still won't know what the whole mass of cards were supposed to look like in a perfect state.

kevin

Ok, I understand now. I'd thought if after comparing several there was a pattern, I could determine if the saturated card was the norm or not. But you're right, the flaw could have been present in the actual printing process, and without seeing the proof, there'd be no way to know that.

[t206fix]

What the difference between these two cards really boils down to is one factor...

Beer!

When grader A evaluated the gem card, he had just returned from a long lunch that included a couple of beers. It is truly a gorgeous card that is almost flawless (centering). It was clearly a gem card (to him at that moment).

Grader B was at that same lunch drinking beer with grader A. He went home & continued drinking long into the night. His wife got pissed at him. He woke the next morning with a raging headache and his wife still nagging. He retuned to work with a raging hangover and the first card on his docket was Wonka's... Another truly flawless card but his head is pounding and he is a little agitated so 8.5 sounds about right...

What does subjectivity mean? If these graders can remember every card they've ever seen and compare and contrast them with every card that every other grader has ever seen, then we can truly rely on these grades. But just like that hot girl I saw in the supermarket last saturday kinda looks like the girl I remember who used to look kinda hot in college 10 years ago...Well...

What does subjectivity mean again?

Ok. I was in college 20 years ago...