Is a missing chunk not an automatic 1 or "authentic"?

[BioCRN]

As someone who has plenty of lower-graded cards in my collection, with SGC you have to really inspect any SGC card below a 3.

Marks and various other things some would expect would bring a 1-grade can get up to a 2.5 with SGC.

Parts of cards missing is pretty much a 1 grade, but even passable centering can get a 1.5 from SGC as long as there's not other glaring "automatic 1" problems with the card.

[Brent G.]

Apparently this fits the letter of the law. I guess "small portion" is subjective.

[Brent G.]

This card of mine was given a 1 for the tear to the edge. I don't think there's much doubt which is closer to a 1.5.

[refz]

I feel sgc will throw a bone in this case if the eye appeal & centering is there.

[notfast]

I have a PSA 1.5 that has a similar corner missing. Slabbed in last 10 years.

[brianp-beme]

I think Beckett's old BCCG division accurately graded this McGraw as a 5.

Of course, a 5 grade in their 'just slightly different' grading scale system was not Excellent, but instead Poor or Better. Being the owner of this McGraw I would like to believe it is not Poor, but should be classified in the Better range, perhaps even close to Excellent.


Brian

[raulus]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

I think Beckett's old BCCG division accurately graded this McGraw as a 5.

Of course, a 5 grade in their 'just slightly different' grading scale system was not Excellent, but instead Poor or Better. Being the owner of this McGraw I would like to believe it is not Poor, but should be classified in the Better range, perhaps even close to Excellent.


Brian

Got to love that old BCCG grading scale. It's like the only reason for having such a bizarre scale is to take advantage of people who don't look closely enough at the card or at the text on the slab, and just glance at the number and bid accordingly.

[Brent G.]

Originally Posted by brianp-beme

I think Beckett's old BCCG division accurately graded this McGraw as a 5.

Of course, a 5 grade in their 'just slightly different' grading scale system was not Excellent, but instead Poor or Better. Being the owner of this McGraw I would like to believe it is not Poor, but should be classified in the Better range, perhaps even close to Excellent.


Brian

Wow — that’s an incredible 5!