![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I think they take the backs into consideration every time, at least with PSA and SGC. It's possible that something might slip by occasionally, but there is no doubt in my mind that the back condition factors into the final grade.
Here are three of my T206 cards. Look at the card, then look at the grades they received: ![]() ![]() ![]() If the backs were not considered, these would be undergraded, imo (especially the Tannehill). But when you look at the backs, they are accurately graded because of tape stains, and a small amount of paper loss on the Rucker. I feel the back issues may have lowered the overall grade by a whole point. ![]() ![]() ![]()
__________________
Building these sets: T206, 1953 Bowman Color, 1975 Topps. Great transactions with: piedmont150, Cardboard Junkie, z28jd, t206blogcom, tinkertoeverstochance, trobba, Texxxx, marcdelpercio, t206hound, zachs, tolstoi, IronHorse 2130, AndyG09, BBT206, jtschantz, lug-nut, leaflover, Abravefan11, mpemulis, btcarfagno, BlueSky, and Frankbmd. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Bill, those are all really nice but that Tannehill is absolutely beautiful! (2.5?!?!)
|
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Grading Companies | EvilKing00 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 11-29-2012 08:07 AM |
Grading Companies | Ben Yourg | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 13 | 02-04-2010 10:38 AM |
What if grading companies could do this??????? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 16 | 11-20-2007 09:17 PM |
What Grading Companies are the Best? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 03-14-2007 01:40 PM |
Grading Companies 1-10 | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 13 | 11-19-2003 11:37 AM |