T206 Honus Wagner SGC 5 - John D. Wagner Collection

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by G1911

I'm noticing a trend. I call myself a low grade collector, but I'm at least a mid grade collector by SGC's new standards for marquee cards.

To say they stretched on this one would be an understatement. Greg it might be a great time to submit those 2 Balt News Ruths you are hiding from us.

One would think that since a marquee card will garner more attention that they might want to get the grading right. Additionally over by a full grade...or more...equates to enormous amounts of money on cards of this caliber.

Poster child, imo, for Just Saying No To Slabbing.

[drcy]

The problem with the overgrading is the focus will be on the overgrade. As evidenced by this thread.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by drcy

The problem with the overgrading is the focus will be on the overgrade. As evidenced by this thread.

Good point, though I would vary the wording slightly, as follows.

The problem with assigning a numerical grade is that the focus will be on the grade, not the card.

That Wagner is a GORGEOUS Wagner, IMO easily among the top few in the hobby. Yet the focus of this thread is the view it is over graded, and how corrupt SGC is to assign it the grade it did.

Yet if someone was to post a "properly" graded T206 Cobb 8, would there be a single post as to the probability (IMO about 100%) that the card has been worked on? Or how about an "8" that has badly toned borders and poor eye appeal, but "technically" merits an "8"?

I'll repeat a point I have made in the past and believe is worth making again -- The sole function of TPG should be to opine whether a card is genuine or counterfeit, and if genuine if it has been altered in any way. Anything other than that is a subjective assessment, which has no business being treated as some objective statement of condition.

Going back to this Wagner, IMO if we took the universe of slabbed T206s and showed how they really looked before any of the alteration/trimming been performed, I suspect people would not be so quick to opine it does not merit the accolades SGC gives it.

[Oscar_Stanage]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

I'll repeat a point I have made in the past and believe is worth making again -- The sole function of TPG should be to opine whether a card is genuine or counterfeit, and if genuine if it has been altered in any way. Anything other than that is a subjective assessment, which has no business being treated as some objective statement of condition.

There is not a problem with numerical grading on it's own. Being able to categorize card quality/value based on a set of criteria is extremely useful, assuming the standards are consistent over time. The problem is that TPGs have utterly failed to enforce any standard. The fact that a group of collectors can take one look at the Wagner and dismiss it's 'professional' grade is comically sad.

It is either corruption or incompetence by SGC whose sole goal seems to be 'winning' the right to grade marquee cards. I guess they think it is good brand marketing to cater to a dozen people who can afford these cards. I'd argue they should have just invested in a strong registry.

I was talking to another collector at the National while taking a look at the Mantle. He told me that SGC probably paid the owner to grade the card - i had never thought of that , but it makes sense that TPGs would engage in a bidding war for the right to grade these types of cards. if this is truly how it works, that degrades the point of the service.

[luciobar1980]

I admit my first thought was also.. those corners look too worn for a 5. But, they make it sound like the card is damn-near perfect in every other respect. So is it not possible it still warrants the 5?

[Exhibitman]

Buncha grade fluffers over there. Explain to me like a two-year old why that is a 5 and this is a 4:



Or this is a 6:



Does that Wagner seem mid-way between these two cards??

Maybe their new marketing strategy is overgrading the big cards? PSA is regularly slammed for too harsh grading, and CSG is definitely conservative in their assessments, so maybe SGC wants to differentiate itself.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

I admit my first thought was also.. those corners look too worn for a 5. But, they make it sound like the card is damn-near perfect in every other respect. So is it not possible it still warrants the 5?

Bingo!

I have seen 7s with such horrible photo contrast that if it was the last card I needed to complete a set, I would not want to buy it. Or how about an 8 with grossly toned brown borders that make it painful to look at? Yet, it seems nobody takes issue with the correctness of the technical grades assigned to those cards. But show some minor wear on the corners, the card gets downgraded by a degree IMO grossly disproportionate to the attractiveness of the card, which is what I thought TPG is supposed to capture.

[Johnny630]

It seems SGC Grades these Key Big Major Cards not based so much on the condition, but based on the totality of the situation/story. Standards seem secondary based the on story and the caliber of the card.

[glynparson]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Bingo!

I have seen 7s with such horrible photo contrast that if it was the last card I needed to complete a set, I would not want to buy it. Or how about an 8 with grossly toned brown borders that make it painful to look at? Yet, it seems nobody takes issue with the correctness of the technical grades assigned to those cards. But show some minor wear on the corners, the card gets downgraded by a degree IMO grossly disproportionate to the attractiveness of the card, which is what I thought TPG is supposed to capture.

The answer is simple technical
Grade isn’t eye appeal. Every flaw isn’t weighted equally come on Corey you know this. You just seem to want to argue on this thread. You almost sound like me. Lol.that said I think this card is a 3.5 but a pretty 3.5

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by Oscar_Stanage

There is not a problem with numerical grading on it's own. Being able to categorize card quality/value based on a set of criteria is extremely useful, assuming the standards are consistent over time. The problem is that TPGs have utterly failed to enforce any standard. The fact that a group of collectors can take one look at the Wagner and dismiss it's 'professional' grade is comically sad.

It is either corruption or incompetence by SGC whose sole goal seems to be 'winning' the right to grade marquee cards. I guess they think it is good brand marketing to cater to a dozen people who can afford these cards. I'd argue they should have just invested in a strong registry.

I was talking to another collector at the National while taking a look at the Mantle. He told me that SGC probably paid the owner to grade the card - i had never thought of that , but it makes sense that TPGs would engage in a bidding war for the right to grade these types of cards. if this is truly how it works, that degrades the point of the service.

I do not know the provenance of this card, but my first thought was that it was submitted with the owner requesting a minimum grade of 5, maybe as a crossover, and that SGC jumped at the chance to have a graded Wagner on display in their holder. Just the cynic in me I guess.

That being said, does it really matter? For that card of that player from that set, is there really going to be a ruckus raised over the numeric grade? Is some registry hound out there thinking he needs to "upgrade" his Wagner to score big points? Another screaming foul because he just got jumped in the standings by an overgraded card? If so it just makes me wonder more about the egos of some people being unhealthily out of whack.

IMHO, the card is simply gorgeous, and should be enjoyed and valued as such. Any numeric grade as an assurance that the card is genuine and unaltered should be enough. The card speaks for itself.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

I do not know the provenance of this card, but my first thought was that it was submitted with the owner requesting a minimum grade of 5, maybe as a crossover, and that SGC jumped at the chance to have a graded Wagner on display in their holder. Just the cynic in me I guess.

That being said, does it really matter? For that card of that player from that set, is there really going to be a ruckus raised over the numeric grade? Is some registry hound out there thinking he needs to "upgrade" his Wagner to score big points? Another screaming foul because he just got jumped in the standings by an overgraded card? If so it just makes me wonder more about the egos of some people being unhealthily out of whack.

IMHO, the card is simply gorgeous, and should be enjoyed and valued as such. Any numeric grade as an assurance that the card is genuine and unaltered should be enough.

It should matter, in a rational world, if value is effectively decided by the grading companies. Blatant corruption should matter. Just giving them a pass for every single fraud, lie and load of bunk doesn’t seem rational, or to promote anything but fraud, lies, and BS in the hobby. That the grade of a card is determined as much by who submits it and how much SGC is either paid off or feels they’ll get in marketing gain from a marquee card should be a cause of concern for people who do graded. If grading is not based on any objective standard but simply politics then the entire exercise is pointless, except for the people using the corrupt system to make money.

[vansaad]

Maybe this one had its corners factory cut to fit in packages of bread since Hans didn't want them going into cigarette packs.

[nolemmings]

I would agree that corruption, if that's what happened here, should in no way be encouraged. What I am suggesting is that with this specific card, the grade is or should be damn near irrelevant, other than again to show that it is authentic and unaltered.

How many times have we claimed that a card "presents better"? And that the market will ignore a technical grade in view of a card's appearance? To me this is the poster child for such a position. We can all see the condition of the corners, which appears to be the card's flaw, and bid accordingly. It might be different if there are wrinkles, indentations, etc that cannot be seen and which would/should give notice to the bidder that something is amiss. Otherwise, the number is much ado about nothing, IMO. It would be interesting to ask the bidders who make a play for this card as to how much the number affected what they are willing to pay. I suspect very little, but of course I could be wrong.

I don't disagree with anyone saying this card is overgraded and making the usual gripes about how some submitters get favors. It just seems to me you should pick your battles with those arguments, and that they are insignificant here as a practical matter.

[steve B]

To me it's a classic VG. No better.
If it was a common it would get that grade, but something I've noticed for years is that Wagners almost always get a grade that's better than they are.

And that's going back before grading companies.

The one I saw auctioned in CT was p-f, and resold a few times over the next couple years via ads in SCD. Each time it was offered it got "better" ending up vg-ex despite creases and writing on the back.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Good point, though I would vary the wording slightly, as follows.

The problem with assigning a numerical grade is that the focus will be on the grade, not the card.

That Wagner is a GORGEOUS Wagner, IMO easily among the top few in the hobby. Yet the focus of this thread is the view it is over graded, and how corrupt SGC is to assign it the grade it did.

Yet if someone was to post a "properly" graded T206 Cobb 8, would there be a single post as to the probability (IMO about 100%) that the card has been worked on? Or how about an "8" that has badly toned borders and poor eye appeal, but "technically" merits an "8"?

I'll repeat a point I have made in the past and believe is worth making again -- The sole function of TPG should be to opine whether a card is genuine or counterfeit, and if genuine if it has been altered in any way. Anything other than that is a subjective assessment, which has no business being treated as some objective statement of condition.

Going back to this Wagner, IMO if we took the universe of slabbed T206s and showed how they really looked before any of the alteration/trimming been performed, I suspect people would not be so quick to opine it does not merit the accolades SGC gives it.

As nice of a card as it is the accolades SGC used to describe it only felt like a way to justify the over grade. And while it might be nicer and more genuine than many of the graded T206 Wagners that in no way should be the basis for the over grade. Had this card, like the 52 Mantle in the 9.5, been graded accurately, there would be fewer of us who would be focusing on the disappointment in SGC and more on the card. PSA is just as guilty of this BS but it makes a mockery of TPG, imo and Greg certainly illustrates the many reasons grading cannot be taken too seriously.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

To say they stretched on this one would be an understatement. Greg it might be a great time to submit those 2 Balt News Ruths you are hiding from us.

One would think that since a marquee card will garner more attention that they might want to get the grading right. Additionally over by a full grade...or more...equates to enormous amounts of money on cards of this caliber.

Poster child, imo, for Just Saying No To Slabbing.

I was thinking, if they’re just giving +2 for marquee cards without even being bribed, I might be able to get a 6 on one and a 7 on the other Ruth after bribing them. Guess I’m jumping on the SGC bandwagon!

This garbage is one of many reasons my cards stay raw and I crack the slabbed ones I buy. It’s a blatantly corrupt and dishonest process that isn’t about the cards at all but making money out of nothing out of an ‘opinion’ that is often bought and paid for, or abused for marketing and promotion at best. People with money invested into it or who think they could invest into it and join the pump for a profit will defend the graders no matter how many scandals (where do we even begin?), shady deals (like their big submitters getting to negotiate grades behind closed doors at their special events), altered cards (PWCC’s fraud ring just to start), fakes (from Connie Mack’s to SGC autographs), different standards for big submitters or friends of the graders (like that former Beckett grader who gets an absurd % of all black labels) and clearly dishonest grades (like this one) there are. Briefly discussed but ultimately ignored, as long as there’s profit in it.