1934 Goudey Lou Gehrig SGC 98 on Sports Cards Plus

[wonkaticket]

There is no wrinkle on the card; there are no hidden flaws. The card is accurately graded and could go either way half a grade. The point of showing the card was not to have the card “re-graded” from cyberspace or to beat up on SGC.

The whole point was to say that for me as a collector the price difference between strong NM card and Gem cards is a tough pill to swallow. Even if one had unlimited funds I think the value proposition short of bragging rights is very slim between many cards.I also think the grading science becomes even less of a science and more personal preference, timing and dash of religion between many of these higher grades.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Please John, no religion. Your Gehrig is a stunning "pack fresh", (as they say) example. Dave.

Originally Posted by wonkaticket

There is no wrinkle on the card; there are no hidden flaws. The card is accurately graded and could go either way half a grade. The point of showing the card was not to have the card “re-graded” from cyberspace or to beat up on SGC.

The whole point was to say that for me as a collector the price difference between strong NM card and Gem cards is a tough pill to swallow. Even if one had unlimited funds I think the value proposition short of bragging rights is very slim between many cards.I also think the grading science becomes even less of a science and more personal preference, timing and dash of religion between many of these higher grades.

No doubt. It's pretty much inconceivable to believe there's enough margin between the two cards, aesthetically speaking, to explain a 2.5 difference in technical grade and the cash that may/should or may/should not go along with it. To a lesser extent it reminds me of my 1951 Bowman Willie Mays in PSA 6 that is currently being offered for sale

[Iron Horse]

If indeed there is a wrinkle which i can not see, then i think based on their standard the card was over graded (ONLY if there is a wrinkle). The only way i can see the 7.5 is that they felt the card was a 9.5 and the wrinkle brought it down to a 7.5.
I do like the color on the 10 assuming it is not over saturated by the scan.
I would love to buy 7.5 cards that look like that any day of the week. Saves me $$$$ & the card looks just as good.
Buy the card and not the grade. That is my rule when purchasing cards.
Again, i am jealous and if you ever grow tired of the card drop me a line

[wonkaticket]

Ruben, will do.

Once again for all reading I can 100% assure everyone there is no wrinkle. Starting to feel like Schwarzenegger in Kindergarten Cop..."It's not a tumor!"

[E93]

John,
I don't know how you can stand looking at that card or your face in the mirror knowing what shwag copy of the '34 Gerhig you have.
JimB

[drcy]

Looks more like a crease.

[Cardboard Junkie]

Maybe it was torn there slightly and has been expertly repaired.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by wonkaticket

There is no wrinkle on the card; there are no hidden flaws. The card is accurately graded and could go either way half a grade. The point of showing the card was not to have the card “re-graded” from cyberspace or to beat up on SGC.

The whole point was to say that for me as a collector the price difference between strong NM card and Gem cards is a tough pill to swallow. Even if one had unlimited funds I think the value proposition short of bragging rights is very slim between many cards.I also think the grading science becomes even less of a science and more personal preference, timing and dash of religion between many of these higher grades.

I wasn't regrading, sorry if it seemed that way.

Your point is a good one. There are differences, but are those differences a nice cars worth, or assuming it gets crazy, a cheap house? I just don't see that.

Steve B

[Peter_Spaeth]

Back scan from the original auction -- the little mark on the right border doesn't appear to go through to the back.