 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
08-13-2005, 02:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Why would SGC not grade this card?
Posted By: Jeff Lichtman
I don't think anyone disagrees that the card merits a 10 based on the paper loss and glue on the back -- a 10 based on SGC's present grading scale. The point is that if the sides were reversed and the damage was on the front of the card, SGC would still give it a 10 - but these two cards would hardly be equal in the eyes of a collector. In fact, the back rates a 10 and the front probably a 50. 
|
 |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| SOLD - High-Grade 1909 Ramly (T204) - Tim Murnane HOF Rookie Card (SGC 60) | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 0 | 06-30-2008 05:21 PM |
| High Grade Sale '64 SGC 84 Yaz; '68 SGC 86 Seaver; '57 SGC 80 Yanks; '67 SGC 84 BrockFlood | Archive | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 11-23-2007 09:05 AM |
| I thought SGC didn't grade restored card? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 25 | 09-28-2005 12:32 AM |
| Will SGC grade an E103 Williams Caramel card if | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 14 | 12-31-2004 02:16 PM |
| Answer to how little of a card SGC will grade | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 08-08-2002 11:20 AM |
Hybrid Mode
