NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you write anything concerning a person or company your full name needs to be in your post or obtainable from it. . Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
ebay GSB
T206s on Ebay
Babe Ruth Cards
t206 Ty Cobb
Ty Cobb Cards
Lou Gehrig Cards
Baseball T201-T217
Baseball E90-E107
T205 Cards
Vintage Baseball Postcards
Goudey Cards
Vintage Baseball Memorabilia
Baseball Exhibit Cards
Baseball Strip Cards
Baseball Baking Cards
Sporting News Cards
Play Ball Cards
Joe DiMaggio Cards
Mickey Mantle Cards
Bowman 1951-1955
Football Cards

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Main Forum - WWII & Older Baseball Cards > Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 11-03-2021, 09:02 AM
Hankphenom Hankphenom is offline
Hank Thomas
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,653
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhotchkiss View Post
Regarding the value of this card restored vs its original condition, I think it would sell for more in its original condition.
This. And I hope it might serve as a warning.
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 11-03-2021, 10:19 AM
mrreality68's Avatar
mrreality68 mrreality68 is online now
Jeffrey Kuhr
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 1,686
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hankphenom View Post
This. And I hope it might serve as a warning.
+1 I agree with Hank

Hopefully it is a warning/learning for others
__________________
Thanks all

Jeff Kuhr

https://www.flickr.com/photos/144250058@N05/

Kuhr@mac.com

Looking for
1921/22 Ruth Throwing Pose "Babe" and George
1921 Frederick Foto Ruth
1917 Boston Store Babe Ruth
Joe Jackson Cards 1916 Advertising Backs
1910 Old Mills Joe Jackson
1914 Boston Garter Joe Jackson
1914 E & S Publishing Card Joe Jackson
other Joe Jackson playing day cards
1911 M110 Sporting Life Cobb and Wagner Cards
1908 Rose Postcard Ty Cobb
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 11-03-2021, 10:21 AM
benjulmag benjulmag is offline
CoreyRS.hanus
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 693
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattyC View Post
Good Lord that 7 from SCP is really mesmerizing— as someone said it is perhaps the best example of buying the holder in recent memory. I will add my lowly garbage PSA 4 to the list of examples for comparison. The investors out there who only want 7s and up are free to look down their noses at this one... This was actually an SGC 4.5 that I crossed like a moron due to my desire for uniformity in my collection. Should have stayed a 4.5, yet why let the merits of the card get in the way of good ole inter-company politics

Putting aside the issue of (IMO) the utter inability of TPG to detect alterations, what is perhaps sadder is the criteria used to arrive at a grade. Wasn't the whole idea behind TPG to establish an unbiased rating system that reflects how a typical collector would view a card's condition? It would seem to me that paramount among the relevant criteria used to rate the card would be how the card looks. Yet that doesn't seem to matter much at all, which is incredible. Yes, I get it that attempting to rate something based on a subjective criteria such as aesthetic appeal interjects subjectivity into the process. But how can one say subjectivity is not already integral to the process? At the end of day a number appears on the flip, which is supposed to reflect the sum total of all various criteria used to evaluate a card's condition. But when the result is what the current system often churns out -- a much higher grade for the card with the much lower aesthetic appeal, card registry or not, the system is wacko.

Last edited by benjulmag; 11-03-2021 at 10:22 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 11-03-2021, 03:49 PM
BobC BobC is online now
Bob C.
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Parma, Ohio
Posts: 1,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by benjulmag View Post
Putting aside the issue of (IMO) the utter inability of TPG to detect alterations, what is perhaps sadder is the criteria used to arrive at a grade. Wasn't the whole idea behind TPG to establish an unbiased rating system that reflects how a typical collector would view a card's condition? It would seem to me that paramount among the relevant criteria used to rate the card would be how the card looks. Yet that doesn't seem to matter much at all, which is incredible. Yes, I get it that attempting to rate something based on a subjective criteria such as aesthetic appeal interjects subjectivity into the process. But how can one say subjectivity is not already integral to the process? At the end of day a number appears on the flip, which is supposed to reflect the sum total of all various criteria used to evaluate a card's condition. But when the result is what the current system often churns out -- a much higher grade for the card with the much lower aesthetic appeal, card registry or not, the system is wacko.

Agree - plus, we don't even have a single, agreed upon set of grading standards for the hobby as a whole. We've foolishly let the individual TPGs each decide what they think, not what the hobby collectors think, when it comes to grading. And then throw in a registry that one portion of the collecting community appears to downright worship, and you've got a setting for all the perceived negative things that have occured in the hobby since grading began.

One of the main reasons independent card grading was originally started was to counter perceived abuses by sellers allegedly not properly and honestly representing the condition of cards they were selling, if they were altered in some way, or if the cards were even authentic to begin with. Independent grading by TPGs was supposed to counter that. Unfortunately, the old saying can often be true, and sometimes the cure can be worse than the disease......................!
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 11-03-2021, 04:44 PM
bnorth's Avatar
bnorth bnorth is online now
Ben North
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 7,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chadeast View Post
And now I feel the need to once again share my T3 Dahlen that came from Heritage this year as a warning. Heritage listing scan on the left, my scan of the same card after I received it on the right.

Their scan looks way better than yours. Did you photoshop in the creases and dull the color down?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chriskim View Post
oh. my bad! I guess that card was really that bad and not even HA could do anything about it. LOL
You think it looked bad in the pics just imagine what it looks like in hand.
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 11-03-2021, 09:00 PM
chadeast chadeast is offline
Ch@d E.
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: California
Posts: 458
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bnorth View Post
Their scan looks way better than yours. Did you photoshop in the creases and dull the color down?
Funny! The colors on my scan are true to life, if perhaps a touch on the duller side. But the card looks nothing like their scan, for which color saturation was clearly cranked up a ton. As for the creases, well, that's where my warning comes in. There is no scanner setting that makes those go away!
__________________
successful deals with hcv123, rholmes, robw1959, Yankees1964, theuclakid, Brian Van Horn, h2oya311, thecapeleague, Gkoz316, chesbro41, edjs, wazoo, becollie, t206kid, vintageismygame, Neal, bradmar48, iconsportscards, wrapperguy, agrebene, T3fan, ccre, Leon & others

currently working on:
graded 1933 Goudey set (230/239)
T3 set (94/104), ungraded or graded Pr to Vg/Ex, need 18-27-28 (2 team)-35-44-45-86-109-122(NYG)-126
always collecting Walter Johnson
T9 set (26/26)
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 11-04-2021, 01:20 PM
perezfan's Avatar
perezfan perezfan is offline
M@RK ST!NBERG
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 6,434
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chadeast View Post
Funny! The colors on my scan are true to life, if perhaps a touch on the duller side. But the card looks nothing like their scan, for which color saturation was clearly cranked up a ton. As for the creases, well, that's where my warning comes in. There is no scanner setting that makes those go away!
For the last few years, I always make it a habit to ask the seller (ebay or AH) whether the card has a crease/wrinkle. The fact is that very often, a crease or wrinkle will not show up in their scan. Very few sellers bother to disclose this critical info, and (if professionally graded) they simply state the grade # with no other description that would help out a prospective bidder.

When asked, the responses among sellers vary... about 40% will reply back with whether or not the card has a crease. Roughly 50% will simply not reply, or blow off the question (I guess they are too busy?). And the remaining 10% will write back something nasty, as if I had no right to inquire.

Needless to say, I only buy from sellers who find the time to respond.
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 11-04-2021, 01:40 PM
steve B steve B is offline
Steve Birmingham
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: eastern Mass.
Posts: 6,978
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobC View Post
Agree - plus, we don't even have a single, agreed upon set of grading standards for the hobby as a whole. We've foolishly let the individual TPGs each decide what they think, not what the hobby collectors think, when it comes to grading. And then throw in a registry that one portion of the collecting community appears to downright worship, and you've got a setting for all the perceived negative things that have occured in the hobby since grading began.

One of the main reasons independent card grading was originally started was to counter perceived abuses by sellers allegedly not properly and honestly representing the condition of cards they were selling, if they were altered in some way, or if the cards were even authentic to begin with. Independent grading by TPGs was supposed to counter that. Unfortunately, the old saying can often be true, and sometimes the cure can be worse than the disease......................!
Unfortunately, most collectors think what they're told to think.
In this hobby, either by Beckett, or by someone who learned from Beckett.
The grading companies standards are pretty much the same.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 11-04-2021, 02:42 PM
BobC BobC is online now
Bob C.
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Parma, Ohio
Posts: 1,042
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve B View Post
Unfortunately, most collectors think what they're told to think.
In this hobby, either by Beckett, or by someone who learned from Beckett.
The grading companies standards are pretty much the same.
Yes for the most part the standards are somewhat the same, as you say, but there are still perceived and apparently actual differences in how much of an effect and weight one TPG will give to certain card defects and issues versus another. And thus, though these grading standards are sometimes close, they are not all exactly the same. IMO what would be best for the hobby community as a whole would be if the standards were all exactly the same, which they aren't.

Why else would you sometimes see threads on this forum asking for advice on which TPG to send a card to for grading, and different people responding that if it has these types of issues/defects to send it to this TPG, but if it has different issues/defects to send it to a that other TPG, and so forth. And not all the TPGs will even grade certain cards and issues (Fro-Joys, S-74s, etc.), indicating further differences amongst them in how they look to review, authenticate, and grade items.

With the overwhelming effects the pandemic has had on the hobby in general, and specifically on how the TPGs have operated and been affected, you don't currently see threads like that asking about which TPG to send cards to because of the specific issues/defects they have. Now the threads have been focusing on and asking questions like which TPG is even accepting submissions right now where they won't need a second mortgage to pay for the grading fees, and they can actually get their cards back in less than a year. The current focus on the questions now being asked about differences amongst TPGs may have changed for now, but all the differences, including grading standards, are still there.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Restored T206 Wagner? Jobu Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 19 02-10-2020 08:16 AM
H. WAGNER, RESTORED or TAMPERED WITH? pepis Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 5 02-21-2013 01:26 AM
1909-11 T206 Honus Wagner vs. 1911-16 Kotton Honus Wagner: Who Has More? Orioles1954 Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 39 08-29-2010 05:30 PM
Would the Wagner had sold for more had it not been restored? martyogelvie Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 7 06-26-2010 11:10 AM
December auctions - T206 Honus Wagner cards PSA 4 and PSA 1 Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 12 11-17-2004 06:49 PM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:22 AM.


ebay GSB