![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Is that PSA or SGC ?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Don't think it matters, probably relates to all the longer term TPGs that have seen major changes in the graders and their emphasis over the years. One TPG may be predominantly more modern in what they grade these days than another, and thus may be subject to more modern experience and bias in their graders than another. But overall things seem to be trending in a similar fashion as the modern market takes a larger and larger portion of the hobby every day.
They don't make anymore T206 cards than are already out there, but every single day there are more and more nearly perfect modern cards being sold and put into the hobby. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
From my limited experience with TPG's this one would have been a 4 in SGC holder and a 3 in PSA. If sent in today it is probably a 3 in a SGC holder and a 2.5 or 3 from PSA. When I send in cards now it is usually a mix of my vintage cards and my son's new shinny cards. I simply read through each of the TPG's published grading standards and submit to each of them accordingly. Their scales do not match exactly, so sometimes I will go with SGC, sometimes PSA and I have even tried CSG recently with cards we are grading strictly for our PC. There are certain vintage cards that I will only send to SGC (Exhibit cards). I have noticed that SGC has gotten much stricter on T206 cards over the last 9 months, especially in the 3-5 grades.
Just my opinion the TPG's each have their place right now, but before submitting to any of them, people really need to take the time to read through the TPG's grading standards and make sure their standards meet your own standards, realizing they all have minute differences, especially in the lower graded cards (2-6), meaning what is a 3 under one company's standards is only ever going to be a 1.5 or 2 with another company. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
It’s a beautiful card and I would be proud to have it. I do feel it is overgraded and would put my thoughts in the 2.5 camp.
Does not degrade my like of it one bit.
__________________
- Justin D. Player collecting - Lance Parrish, Jim Davenport, John Norlander. Successful B/S/T with - Highstep74, Northviewcats, pencil1974, T2069bk, tjenkins, wilkiebaby11, baez578, Bocabirdman, maddux31, Leon, Just-Collect, bigfish, quinnsryche...and a whole bunch more, I stopped keeping track, lol. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Overgraded or just me? | Cozumeleno | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 13 | 01-24-2015 03:56 PM |
Overgraded cards | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 36 | 12-26-2005 12:49 PM |
More overgraded cards from Mr. X | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 06-17-2005 10:36 PM |
An Overgraded Reprint ? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 11-22-2003 09:04 PM |
Overgraded SGC Ramly | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 14 | 09-01-2002 08:12 PM |