![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
From my experience, SGC is pretty good about answering questions. This card is also a 4 but looks better. The only real problem I saw was a tiny flake of surface off the top left corner. Less than the amount I've seen worn off corners on other 4s.
I asked at the Shriners show a few years ago why it was a 4. It took the guy at the booth very little time to find the tiny wrinkle about halfway up the left side. So small it doesn't quite reach the line around the picture. The other couple grades I asked about were similar, some small hard to see thing I'd missed. Overall, the experience made me better at examining my cards before sending them. "A" isn't always altered. Of the few cards I've had rejected, one had factory but very rough cuts top and bottom, another didn't make the minimum size. With the amount of space between the card and gasket on the Speaker, I'd bet it's undersize. Undersize can be factory, but I don't think any grading company will grade stuff that's undersize with a number. I think that's mostly because most collectors associate undersize with trimmed, and don't understand the difference between a factory cut edge and a trimmed edge. Another of my mistakes was a card trimmed on all four sides, that was full size. I just plain missed the trimming while I was looking for which cards to send in. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
it does appear the newer SGC grades are getting good results at auction (same as what PSA holders seem to be getting).
As far as pinholes A, 1, 1.5...i always thought as those cards all in the work of art category......the grade part doesnt really matter...many As go for more than 1.5s etc....its just how the card looks to you......it doesnt bother me at all if there are different grading criteria with 2 companies on the A-1.5 ... |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
K, spoke to Peter at SGC who spoke to the grader who remembered my T3 Speaker very clearly. He said in the pinholes there is a tiny bit of blue color/paint so this is treated as Altered. I surmise that this was paint transferred from wherever it was pinned up at some point. So no trimming or anything else which would have bothered me much more. Anyways, super happy with this card as I think it's one of the most attractive in the hobby!
As far as the Hack Wilson, he couldn't offer any info. Quote:
Last edited by luciobar1980; 09-10-2018 at 01:13 PM. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Harsh SGC grades | Shankweather | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 47 | 08-22-2019 09:56 AM |
suggested baseball video to watch | larietrope | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 0 | 06-11-2016 11:11 AM |
1905 NY Giants video and 1920s instructional video with Ruth Cobb etc | bravesfan22 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 02-11-2015 10:23 PM |
Balancing card fever with real life | deadballfreaK | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 46 | 04-08-2013 08:41 AM |
SGC grading to harsh | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 38 | 01-12-2006 06:04 PM |