![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
You did better on the Christy portrait, for sure! And I think the straight Young portrait SGC 1.5 is a slight improvement on the PSA 2 with the MK qualifier. However, the SGC 1.5 Johnson portrait, I think, was better left alone as a PSA 3(MK). Overall, it appears to be pretty close to a wash on the decision to regrade them. That's my two cents.
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Out of curiosity, what was the total cost of the re-grading?
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Unless the back on Mathewson is torn the hell up, 1 is a harsh initial grade.
I'm a huge fan of the 1.5's in my collection (or 2.5's and under for SGC because they allow marks and noticeable staining up to 2.5). The "eye appeal" on many 1.5's is greater than a slew of 2-4+ I've seen over the years. Yeah, there's generally a major flaw, but a good looking card is a good looking card. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Those are great-looking cards!
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
To answer a couple questions. I paid $85/card for grading plus shipping both ways. Also, I’m attaching a pic here of the backs of cards.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I’d say regardless of grade, those are beautiful cards. The backs look a lot better than what I anticipated off of the grades. The fronts are super sharp as well. Amazing eye appeal on those!
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I like the qualifiers, because it tells you directly what the issue is. For instance, without the 'MK,' someone looking at the card may wonder a couple of things, like, "How much did the mark lower the grade overall? Would it be a 3 without it? A two?" Also, since the mark is so small, it's possible they might even think, "Wait, did they miss seeing the mark when they graded it?"
Having the 'MK' on it eliminates all of that. To me, the original grade tells you exactly what grade they think the card deserves, while specifically pointing out it ALSO has a mark on it. Unfortunately, if you're looking to sell a card, what I said probably won't come into play. So many collectors abhor any and all qualifiers. ![]() They definitely look pretty sweet in the tuxedos!!!
__________________
All the cool kids love my YouTube Channel:
Elm's Adventures in Cardboard Land ![]() https://www.youtube.com/@TheJollyElm Looking to trade? Here's my bucket: https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706 “I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice.” Casey Stengel Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980s. Overpaying yesterday is simply underpaying tomorrow. ![]() |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hopefully you like them better in the new slabs.
Personally, I’m not convinced the juice would be worth the squeeze. But if you’re planning to sell, hopefully the new grades will offset the grading cost, and leave a little extra?
__________________
Trying to wrap up my master mays set, with just a few left: 1968 American Oil left side 1971 Bazooka numbered complete panel |
![]() |
|
|