PSA 5 with paper loss?

[novakjr]

I know most of you are distracted by the paper loss, but does anyone else notice the massive stain that engulfs almost half of the back? Why is there no evidence of similar staining on the front? I'm thinking that stain and paperloss aside, this card has probably also been doctored, and therefore should be "AUTH" at best. Chemical cleaning could be an explanation for the bleeding on the bottom border of the front.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by novakjr

I know most of you are distracted by the paper loss, but does anyone else notice the massive stain that engulfs almost half of the back? Why is there no evidence of similar staining on the front? I'm thinking that stain and paperloss aside, this card has probably also been doctored, and therefore should be "AUTH" at best. Unless it's not a stain, and simply a shadow.

The "staining" actually covers about 80% (or more) of the back (top and bottom). It's likely an instance of scrapbook removal and not a doctoring job.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by t206hound

The "staining" actually covers about 80% (or more) of the back (top and bottom). It's likely an instance of scrapbook removal and not a doctoring job.

Exactly - the paper loss at the top and bottom left corners goes along with this perfectly.

Before slabbing, because of the great front, would this be worth the same as a card graded EX by today's standards?

When I first got into T206's, I couldn't understand why anyone even cared about the backs - thought, "WTF - there's no stats!?! Who cares about an ad?"

I still don't care about the vintage stamps, especially the ones that have a 1909-11 date - I think they add to the coolness.