First Copeland Collection Pedigree Emerges from the Hobby Shadows

[clamendo]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

One can only speculate how many of Copeland's cards were, like the Wagner, improved.

No one cared about football cards in 1991. In some ways, this submission vindicates Bill Mastro. The grades on the five Jim Brown cards were ‘59 PSA 5, ‘61 PSA 6, ‘’62 PSA 6, ‘63 PSA 5.5 and ‘ 64 PSA 4.5. I thought PSA was pretty conservative on these. 250 cards not a single one came back altered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by clamendo

No one cared about football cards in 1991. In some ways, this submission vindicates Bill Mastro. The grades on the five Jim Brown cards were ‘59 PSA 5, ‘61 PSA 6, ‘’62 PSA 6, ‘63 PSA 5.5 and ‘ 64 PSA 4.5. I thought PSA was pretty conservative on these. 250 cards not a single one came back altered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah those grades sure look harsh. I mean maybe the cards aren't mint as advertised given today's standards, but neither are they as low as PSA graded them.

[clamendo]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Yeah those grades sure look harsh. I mean maybe the cards aren't mint as advertised given today's standards, but neither are they as low as PSA graded them.

I will post my ‘59 Kahn’s Jim Brown PSA-5 and I compared it to the ‘59 Kahn’s Jim Brown PSA-7 that Memory Lane just sold. It looks superior. When you tilt the card there is a very slight scratch barely noticeable. According to PSA standards it should have probably been a PSA-6. I may have it reviewed. Everyone is trying to be the toughest graders. I’ll concur with many of the comments, it does seem like they are being much tougher.

[clamendo]

Originally Posted by clamendo

I will post my ‘59 Kahn’s Jim Brown PSA-5 and I compared it to the ‘59 Kahn’s Jim Brown PSA-7 that Memory Lane just sold. It looks superior. When you tilt the card there is a very slight scratch barely noticeable. According to PSA standards it should have probably been a PSA-6. I may have it reviewed. Everyone is trying to be the toughest graders. I’ll concur with many of the comments, it does seem like they are being much tougher.

Also, Greg Rice made a good point to me. The Kahn’s cards are large cards with a lot of surface area. So, they are very susceptible to a scratch or slight indentation. Corners, creasing, centering notwithstanding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by clamendo

Also, Greg Rice made a good point to me. The Kahn’s cards are large cards with a lot of surface area. So, they are very susceptible to a scratch or slight indentation. Corners, creasing, centering notwithstanding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They are hammering anything and everything these days.

[oldjudge]

Carl--Not sure what the big deal is. I have the 1916 Boston team postcard that was Copelands. It is easy to identify from the message on the back, but I also have the auctual auction tag and bought it from the lot winner in the original auction. I also know the collector who has the Copeland Anson in uniform. Again, easy to identify.

[clamendo]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Carl--Not sure what the big deal is. I have the 1916 Boston team postcard that was Copelands. It is easy to identify from the message on the back, but I also have the auctual auction tag and bought it from the lot winner in the original auction. I also know the collector who has the Copeland Anson in uniform. Again, easy to identify.

Jay - Then it should be easy to get the pedigree? If that interests you. Did they show the back in the catalog or description.

Also, you must have thought it was a big deal or you never would have bought the auction tag, right? You were wise to do that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk