![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
The Musial could be a reholder of an old grade. I will agree with you this type of thing is very frustrating though.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Prewar Cubs. Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Currently working on 1956, '63 and '72 Topps complete sets. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Nope; graded recently based on Cert number.
__________________
-- 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
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Based on the scans - I would put the Robinson at a 5 - all day - every day
Go Figure - and yet the PSA opinion is still worth 20 bucks a pop?
__________________
Lonnie Nagel T206 : 216/520 : 41.22% |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I would think that they deducted for the erasure mark to the right of Robinson's head, paper loss on left boarder in two spots, and creased in the upper right corner from the edge being dinged up. The back is toned and has some boarder issues.
I do think the grade on the Musial is a bit to high considering the condition.
__________________
Andrew Member since 2009 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Uncovering all of these visible only at the right light/tilt/angle imperfections (while squinting my bifocal eyes through the slab) is aging me even more. I miss simply looking at raw cards 25-30 years ago in high school and just being in the ballpark with something's condition. Anyway... As mentioned above, you knew they had their reasons for not giving it the mid-level grade that it appeared at first glance. And being as rough on it as possible could get you down to a 2 by the time you're done breaking it down. But if you did the same to the Musial, 3.5 seems like a dream, so I still don't agree at all with it being 1.5 higher Last edited by cardsagain74; 01-03-2020 at 12:07 PM. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Despite that this card looks like it should grade higher, how does a card with such a huge pinhole get a "4"??
__________________
... http://imageevent.com/derekgranger Working on the following: HOF "Earliest" Collection (Ideal - Indiv): 250/346 (72.3%) 1914 T330-2 Piedmont Art Stamps......: 116/119 (97.5%) Completed: 1911 T332 Helmar Stamps (180/180) 1923 V100 Willard's Chocolate (180/180) |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Maybe the Slab came from Mexico or the grader just looked at the centering and the corners which would have made it NM. Plus, who did the submission as Im sure that had no bearing.
__________________
Love Ty Cobb rare items and baseball currency from the 19th Century. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SOLD! A TOLSTOI Head over Heels and Hands over head | frankbmd | T206 cards B/S/T | 0 | 10-05-2017 11:56 AM |
2004 NJ Lottery scratchers | Jim65 | Everything Else, Football, Non-Sports etc.. B/S/T | 4 | 08-17-2017 08:26 AM |
Card Grading vs. Autograph Grading | scooter729 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 08-20-2014 12:52 PM |
WTB: Dog's Head | nameless | 19th Century Cards & ALL Baseball Postcards- B/S/T | 0 | 09-28-2013 12:46 PM |
Mint Grading, or is it the grading of mints? | brianp-beme | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 10-30-2010 09:11 AM |