 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2
07-06-2017, 03:38 PM
|
||||
|
||||
It's possible that it was judged a 5(MK) that was requested "No Qualifiers"; PSA reserves the right to leave qualifiers if they are egregious. However, we have had cases where pencil written numbers were still on the back of Mickey Mantle cards with no MK designation, and recently I graded a 1968 Topps card with obvious marker on the front and it got no MK designation, just a straight PSA 5.
It should have. The other thought I had on this would have been a wet sheet transfer, but based on the gallery on oldcardboard.com, no other card in the set has a similar A. It does have the look of a stamp (because of the red color to the top left that resembles the corner of a stamp block). However, the placement of the stamp to me is just so good, that either the kid who owned it wanted to show he was on the Athletics, or it is a super-rare variation that will be worth thousands now that it's been found.
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. 
|
|
#3
07-06-2017, 03:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Personally, I think it would be quite interesting to examine it under a 16X loupe to see if the "A" is consistent with the card's other printed characteristics (the glass is half-full?).
Just sayin'. Best wishes, Larry
|
|
#4
07-06-2017, 04:45 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I always thought this would have graded higher but whomever submitted it (before I got it) chose not to have the MK hence the 2.5. The little check mark on the back, near the bottom right side, is hard to miss?
 
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com Last edited by Leon; 07-06-2017 at 04:45 PM.
|
|
#6
07-06-2017, 07:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nice card, Leon.
The big difference, Leon, is that I WOULD buy your card with a mark (and a LOWER grade than the aforementioned Plank card in the original post), if it were for sale, but I would not buy the altered Plank that received a higher grade. Just sayin'...
|
|
#7
07-06-2017, 08:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
There is still some confusion about requesting no qualifiers. Please read post #29. It is a screen shot from PSAs website, "there are certain qualifiers that PSA will not remove such as MK."
It's right there in black and white. You cannot request no qualifiers when the card has a mark. If you see a card that has a mark but has no MK qualifier, PSA simply overlooked the mark. Nice card, Leon. PSA missed the check mark. As for the card itself, it has several minor creases to warrant the grade of 2.5. The proper grade would have been PSA 2.5 MK
|
 |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| PWCC Plank currently on eBay PSA 2 | Topps206 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 61 | 09-10-2016 03:18 PM |
| Recent PWCC Auction | Snapolit1 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 09-08-2016 12:50 PM |
| PWCC Auction Yet Again | Yoda | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 101 | 07-20-2016 11:02 AM |
| PWCC Auction | Yoda | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 98 | 02-13-2016 05:12 PM |
| Auction house Plank vs Ebay Plank PSA 5 | Leon | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 28 | 01-04-2013 12:35 AM |
Hybrid Mode
