![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: JimB
There is no doubt that SGC is amazingly consistent. But I do not always agree with their standards. For example, I think they are overly harsh on chipping. The card below has a clean back and not the slightest wrinkle of any sort. The only flaw other than the nm / nm-mt corners is the chip in the white boarder on the left. T205s and T210s are granted tremendous leeway on chipping and chipping is much more offensive on those issues than on cards with white boarders like the E94 Young below. If condition does not reflect the appeal of the card, then what do we grade cards for anyway? |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
WTB T206 Common PSA 7 or SGC 84 | Archive | Tobacco (T) cards, except T206 B/S/T | 1 | 04-22-2009 04:09 PM |
WTT/ My E92 SGC 40 Common for like E90-1 | Archive | Pre-WWII cards (E, D, M, etc..) B/S/T | 0 | 08-13-2008 03:20 PM |
controversial caramel card common value question | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 08-04-2005 08:29 AM |
Derek Grady's /SGC response to Dell Football | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 09-27-2002 03:55 PM |
Just spoke with Derek Grady-SGC | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 23 | 01-31-2002 10:41 AM |