SGC is, with their new labels, balancing valuation with PSA. HARSH. Watch Video...

[Pat R]

FWIW it looks like Beckett gave the Wilson a 4 in a raw review before
it was "cleaned up" a little.

Wilson Beckett 4.jpg

Wilson Goudey.jpgWilson Beckett Goudey.jpg

Wilson Goudey Back.jpgWilson Beckett Goudey Back.jpg

Wilson Goudey - Pair.jpg

Wilson Goudey Back - Copy.jpg

[luciobar1980]

Oh wow! How do you know this/how did you find that out? I mean that's definitely the card.

Originally Posted by Pat R

FWIW it looks like Beckett gave the Wilson a 4 in a raw review before
it was "cleaned up" a little.

Attachment 328148

Attachment 328141Attachment 328142

Attachment 328143Attachment 328144

Attachment 328145

Attachment 328146

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

Oh wow! How do you know this/how did you find that out? I mean that's definitely the card.

Just 10-15 minutes of research.

[luciobar1980]

Can someone else comment on the Tris Speaker? The seller was bbcemporium and it was part of what they called the "Delaware Find", which was an original owner collection. For that reason I really can't believe it was trimmed. Furthermore, when I submitted, I said "NO", please do not slab any cards deemed "A". It's crazy that I still don't understand this. Do they this card is altered? It does have small pinhole if that makes a difference. In the auction listing they said:

"Since the card has pinholes, it will receive an automatic grade of 1 from all major third party authenticators. For this reason, we are not having these cabinet cards graded and will offer them ungraded. We stand 100% behind their authenticity and will provide a full refund if a PSA or SGC deems otherwise."

[luciobar1980]

Would you mind posting a link as I cannot find the thread or posting this all came from.

Originally Posted by Pat R

Just 10-15 minutes of research.

[luciobar1980]

SO.. you guys would not be perturbed in my shoes? Probstein calls it a 6.0 when it was previously a 4.0 raw reviewed Beckett, I get it graded by SGC and it comes back a 4. It's all on me huh?

[PiratesWS1979]

You said in your video the Speaker would be a "1" or Authentic because of the pin holes. Are you disappointed in the grade or the fact they encased it, because a screwdriver will solve the case real fast.

On the Wilson, if it came back a "5" would you still be mad? If you think it's high just crack and resubmit it.

The '33 Hack Wilson is notoriously off centered and this one is near perfect...JUST ENJOY IT!!

[luciobar1980]

Well, if you read it carefully they say it would come back a 1, and that they stand behind it behind authentic, not that it would come back authentic. But that's not a big deal. I'm more just confused WHY this came back as A and not a 1, and always have been confused about this.

Does the A mean they think it is altered as in Trimmed/Recolored or would the pinholes themselves be considered an Alteration??

Originally Posted by PiratesWS1979

You said in your video the Speaker would be a "1" or Authentic because of the pin holes. Are you disappointed in the grade or the fact they encased it, because a screwdriver will solve the case real fast.

On the Wilson, if it came back a "5" would you still be mad? If you think it's high just crack and resubmit it.

The '33 Hack Wilson is notoriously off centered and this one is near perfect...JUST ENJOY IT!!

[luciobar1980]

I will! It's a beautiful card, no matter the technical grade.

Originally Posted by PiratesWS1979

You said in your video the Speaker would be a "1" or Authentic because of the pin holes. Are you disappointed in the grade or the fact they encased it, because a screwdriver will solve the case real fast.

On the Wilson, if it came back a "5" would you still be mad? If you think it's high just crack and resubmit it.

The '33 Hack Wilson is notoriously off centered and this one is near perfect...JUST ENJOY IT!!

[bensie]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

SO.. you guys would not be perturbed in my shoes? Probstein calls it a 6.0 when it was previously a 4.0 raw reviewed Beckett, I get it graded by SGC and it comes back a 4. It's all on me huh?

uh, yes, it's all on you. You got greedy and took a gamble, hoping to flip a card and make some extra cash. Who knows where probstein got that card. How are they supposed to know it was raw card reviewed?

It's like they say, you can't cheat an honest man. You made a bad purchase here. Caveat emptor, chalk this up as a lesson and move on.

[luciobar1980]

Ok, touche'. It's possible (and probably likely) Probstein had no idea. Saying I got "greedy" and assuming I was going to flip the card? That's all on you bud and what you are bringing to the conversation.

Originally Posted by bensie

uh, yes, it's all on you. You got greedy and took a gamble, hoping to flip a card and make some extra cash. Who knows where probstein got that card. How are they supposed to know it was raw card reviewed?

It's like they say, you can't cheat an honest man. You made a bad purchase here. Caveat emptor, chalk this up as a lesson and move on.

[ronniehatesjazz]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

SO.. you guys would not be perturbed in my shoes? Probstein calls it a 6.0 when it was previously a 4.0 raw reviewed Beckett, I get it graded by SGC and it comes back a 4. It's all on me huh?

You’re acting outrageous man. You bought a raw card and it graded lower than expected. Disappointing but not really a big deal. As for the A vs 1, I’m surprised you don’t know that any alteration, including pinholes, should get an A and not a numerical grade. I believe this is the policy for both psa and sgc. And going off on people who are calling you out on your nonsense is ridiculous.

[swarmee]

Actually, a single pinhole at SGC would normally grade a 1.5 Fair. PSA has it as a 1 Poor.

My guess is that there was some filling of the holes, which would then be an alteration. You should be able to get the new grader's notes or call them and ask. You seem to think everyone on this board knows exactly what you and SGC are both thinking at the same time. We don't. Call SGC and find out.

If you wrote, "Don't slab unless numerical graded" then SGC should not have slabbed your card, but still charged you the fee. Maybe you wrote it wrong or they read it wrong. People make mistakes. As was said, it costs the same either way. If you don't like them in the slabs, they're easy to remove.

And yes, you're flipping out for no reason. Most eBay sellers will consider someone asking for a partial refund a scammer. That's why I recommended that you don't do that. You should calm down. This isn't the US Open Center Court and I did not penalize you for a game and a point.

[Republicaninmass]

Could be a filled pinhole


Any raw card, or graded card purchase is a roll of the dice. I've had graded cards come back as trim, trimmed cards come back graded

[luciobar1980]

Man, people really channeling their own stuff into my words. Can you point out to me where i acted outrageous? Some people take any opportunity to get on their high horse.

Originally Posted by ronniehatesjazz

You’re acting outrageous man. You bought a raw card and it graded lower than expected. Disappointing but not really a big deal. As for the A vs 1, I’m surprised you don’t know that any alteration, including pinholes, should get an A and not a numerical grade. I believe this is the policy for both psa and sgc. And going off on people who are calling you out on your nonsense is ridiculous.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by ronniehatesjazz

You’re acting outrageous man. You bought a raw card and it graded lower than expected. Disappointing but not really a big deal. As for the A vs 1, I’m surprised you don’t know that any alteration, including pinholes, should get an A and not a numerical grade. I believe this is the policy for both psa and sgc. And going off on people who are calling you out on your nonsense is ridiculous.

I would argue if he had gotten it in hand and disagreed with the grade then yes a refund would be in order. But to get it in hand, like the card and submit it pretty much puts the onus on him, not Probstein.

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

Would you mind posting a link as I cannot find the thread or posting this all came from.

It wasn't in a thread or post just some old fashion card research.

I should add that I was being facetious about it getting cleaned
up a little as it looks like it had a serious cleaning and was
possibly bleached after the Beckett review.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I just got back a small group of nonsports. I thought the grading was harsh, but very consistent in that their ranking of the cards matched mine very closely. It is what it is and I am fine with it as these are just for my collection anyhow.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Another nice thing about SGC on the NS side is that they are willing to do the research to grade cards PSA would just kick back as not already in their database.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Just 10-15 minutes of research.

False modesty. I have never seen someone as adept at tracking down a card's history as Pat.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Buy raw with caution especially from graded card sellers. It's as simple as that.

[The Nasty Nati]

Originally Posted by Pat R

FWIW it looks like Beckett gave the Wilson a 4 in a raw review before
it was "cleaned up" a little.

Attachment 328148

Attachment 328141Attachment 328142

Attachment 328143Attachment 328144

Attachment 328145

Attachment 328146

From these photos there appears to be a small chunk missing in the white border of the card on the right side. A few inches above the Goudey copyright. That along with the corners being a little soft, make this card in my opinion a 4. Nothing wrong with a 4 though. Solid grade for a Goudey, especially a nice centered one.