Prompt Advice Needed!

[robw1959]

I can't speak to the grade for Cy Young, as my opinion on that is a solid 4. However, the Johnson card appears to have some staining/toning on the reverse, and that kept the grade below 4 as it most always does.

Finally, my experience over 20+ years of having cards submitted for grades is that they do not grade more strictly just because a player happens to be a big name Hall of Famer.

[JollyElm]

It's tough to offer an opinion, because many or most of your pre-grading predictions were right in range with what they received, so I see it as the "if you live by the grade, you die by the grade" disappointment we're all subject to. Know what I mean?

Good luck if you decide to resubmit!!

[ASF123]

Honestly, you did better than I thought you would. I predicted 3s on both Young and Johnson, 2.5 on Wagner and under on a few others as well. I share your view that grading has become far too punitive for vintage and especially for prewar (which is why 99% of my cards are raw). Having watched a lot of reveal videos, I think it’s just that you slightly underestimated exactly *how* punitive it’s become.

[Rhotchkiss]

I watched your video. First, its nice to put a face to the posts/avatar.

A few comments: (i) the Waddell is 100% trimmed. Its short and the right corners (top and bottom) indicate trimming (ii) I think the cards are very good looking, making the grades a little less relevant, especially in an SGC flip. SGC has no registry, and I think most people buying cards in SGC flips are more after the appeal than the grade. Thus, I dont think the value between the Young in a 3.5 is much different than the 4, and so I would not resubmit. (iii) I The Young looks a bit undergraded, especially compared to the Walsh, but overall I think the grades are pretty fair. Regarding the Johnson, it looks like it has a slight diamond cut, which could be the reason for the 3.5 instead of a 4+.

I totally agree that graders are much harsher today than years ago. This is annoying, not because of new submissions, but because cards in an old 6 slab would be in a 3-4 slab today. The lack of temporal consistency, across all graders, sucks

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss

I watched your video. First, its nice to put a face to the posts/avatar.

A few comments: (i) the Waddell is 100% trimmed. Its short and the right corners (top and bottom) indicate trimming

I didn't get past the Waddell for the reasons Ryan gave.

[bnorth]

I agree with others that SGC got them correct or at least more correct than your guesses. As collectors we tend to highly over grade our own cards and slightly undergrade other peoples cards.

[rand1com]

Sorry but the cards are within a half grade on all of them and you cannot expect better than that IMO.

Yes, we all think our cards are better than they actually are.

I would not resubmit any of them but if I was going to, I would break them out and submit as a new submission. The chances of them reviewing and raising the grades is zero IMO.

[Andrew1975]

Some very nice cards, and they look great in the tuxes. The grades look more or less correct to me.

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I agree with others that SGC got them correct or at least more correct than your guesses. As collectors we tend to highly over grade our own cards and slightly undergrade other peoples cards.

I agree