One of these days.....Old Judges graded differently

[Leon]

Originally Posted by sreader3

Thanks Leon. Maybe one of you guys who has SGC's ear can suggest it.

I have a half-dozen or so OJs that I would submit for front-only grading.

I will be seeing and chatting with them at the National. Maybe I can persuade them (but don't hold your breath ) ....it really is a good suggestion.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by Leon

I will be seeing and chatting with them at the National. Maybe I can persuade them (but don't hold your breath ) ....it really is a good suggestion.

I had this same discussion with them about five years ago, and they assured me they would be addressing the issue. Assuming they did address it, I guess they decided to leave things just the way they are. It's bad enough that a gem photo gets a low grade because of a little paper loss, I suppose one can just ignore the grade. But when a card with a nearly invisible photo gets a 6 or a 7 because it has sharp corners, that is simply inexcusable.

[barrysloate]

Here are Sloate's New Standards for Grading Old Judges. Hopefully, the TPG's will at least read this and consider.

Let's use the examples of a gem photo with a little paper loss, and a poor quality photo with sharp corners:

If we agree that a card with a superb front should grade at least a 7, but it does have some reverse paper loss, how about a deduction of 3 or 4 grading points to result in a net grade around 3 or 4. I believe most collectors would accept a net grade of VG or VG-EX as these are respectable grades that encompass all the characteristics of the card.

In the case of the light photo, perhaps the actual condition of the card is a 6 or 7, but it would get a deduction of 4 or 5 points for a net grade of 2. I think most collectors would accept a light photo card receiving a grade of Good.

I know this would mean that Old Judges would have their own individual grading standards, but it is time to accept the fact that OJ's are different than any other set. Because the photo quality and eye appeal can vary so drastically, it's imperative to take that into consideration. You cannot ignore the eye appeal of a card when grading it.

[wonkaticket]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

You cannot ignore the eye appeal of a card when grading it.

Barry I agree however it’s been done with grading since day one on all issues not just OJ's.

In terms of the eBay card I think it looks graded correctly have quite a few just like it. As for grading just fronts that seems like a slippery slope where does that line get drawn. If any gorgeous card with a spot of paper loss gets a 2 by most all TPG’s. I don’t see why a N172 should be treated differently just because it’s a photographic issue vs. a lithographic or printed issue.

[barrysloate]

Originally Posted by wonkaticket

Barry I agree however it’s been done with grading since day one on all issues not just OJ's.

In terms of the eBay card I think it looks graded correctly have quite a few just like it. As for grading just fronts that seems like a slippery slope where does that line get drawn. If any gorgeous card with a spot of paper loss gets a 2 by most all TPG’s. I don’t see why a N172 should be treated differently just because it’s a photographic issue vs. a lithographic or printed issue.

Hey John- hope you are well. Have to respectfully disagree with you on this one. You can have slightly different standards for different cards, based on their characteristics. As a coin collector, I can tell you that copper coins are graded a bit differently than gold or silver, because copper tends to corrode easily when it comes into contact with moisture and pollutants in the air. That won't happen with the other two metals, because they are for the most part indestructible.

And it's clear that OJ's are different than most other cards, because the photographic quality can be degraded over time. There is a way to do it and make it work. But there may not be any incentive for the TPG's to change anything.

[wonkaticket]

Barry I can see your point. I just think this can be said for a lot of issues. Examples some issues have notorious printing issues out of focus, washed out color etc. I just think if it goes to down with OJ's you have a lot of folks pointing to nuances of other issues and then it gets hard to keep track of the whole thing.

In the end I don't think the TPG grades hurt the nice OJs or other 19th photo issues. It always seems to be the really nice ones that bring good money regardless of the grade. As for someone buying a washed out PSA 8 N172 I see this as no more silly than a guy buying common graded 10 vs a few grades lower for huge money when to the naked eye one can't tell. Just the slab game....

[barrysloate]

I feel that if something is broken you try to fix it. Yes, there are other sets that have characteristics that make straight line grading a little more difficult. So let them put their collective heads together and try to come up with an improvement. Half grades aren't the answer. That's just a marketing ploy to increase resubmissions. Let them come up with an improvement that customers will embrace. Every company does it, so why can't TPG?