The Grading Pyramid

[T206Collector]

As I've explained on here a few times, grading is a pyramid. At the top, you have the 10s. 10 means perfection and thus all 10s will be identical. As you go down the pyramid, grades are set for a variety of reasons -- 9s almost all look the same, but 3s, 2s and 1s have a huge number of potential flaws, including paper loss on reverse, creasing, corner wear, etc. What makes a card an SGC 30 could be a variety of factors that tell you nothing about the eye appeal of the card without looking at it.

Professional grading is not designed to reflect eye appeal. It is designed to point out flaws, often hard to see or hidden, in a piece of card board. When you see a clean-looking SGC 30, you actually know there are a lot of hard to see flaws. When you see a badgered up SGC 30, what you see is what you get. But not all SGC 30s will look alike -- in fact, at that level of the "pyramid" you will have a lot of different looking cards.

This becomes problematic when sellers try to sell a PSA 2 for what a previous PSA 2 sold for. Without comparing both cards, going by the number alone gets you nowhere because what you don't know about the previous card is whether the damage was similar or whether the eye-appeal was comparable. Sometimes you can get a pretty good deal on a nice looking 2 when a seller is willing to use a previous ugly 2 as a comparable. This is why they say, "Buy the card, not the holder."

[Cardboard Junkie]

Good Job explaining that!! It's always been about eye appeal to me, as long as a card hasn't been altered. I will typically buy a 3 or lower as long as it is nice looking at arms length. (Then of course if they are graded I bust em out). Aloha, David.

[GasHouseGang]

As I get older, everything has to be held at "arms length" if I want to be able to focus on it.

[barrysloate]

David- I found a solution to that problem: bifocals.

[iggyman]

Hear him, hear him!

Lovely Day...

[rdixon1208]

This is a really good thread. I'm a low grade collector myself, and when I first started collecting I would use VCP to tell me what a T206 McGraw in a SGC 20 holder should cost. While I'm not knocking the service (I think it's great actually), you really lose accuracy with lower grade cards using average prices or lowest prices paid.

In fact, in my first year or so of collecting, I had a collection of cards (all lower grade) that I had really gotten a great deal on. I had gotten almost all of them for less than the average price paid for the same card/grade. One day I was looking through my collection and I realized that most of my cards were also in less than average condition for the grade.

I guess that's when I realized that all SGC 20's weren't the same. The cool thing is...what bothers me may not bother you and vice versa (sp?). I don't like creases on the face for the most part, but I don't mind paper loss on the front or back of a card if it's in a part of the card that I don't feel like matters as much.

These days I try to really just buy the cards that I like regardless of the grade. That being said, since I don't generally want to spend the money to buy a higher graded card, I just take my time and find a lower graded one that I'm cool with.

[Jewish-collector]

Great thread, Paul !!! I always thought all the grading companies could grade each component separately: corners, surface, centering, back of card, etc,... Then you might be able to compare two different grade 2's.

[dabigyankeeman]

Originally Posted by Cardboard Junkie

It's always been about eye appeal to me, as long as a card hasn't been altered. I will typically buy a 3 or lower as long as it is nice looking at arms length. (Then of course if they are graded I bust em out). Aloha, David.

Me too. I just bought 3 Brooklyn Dodger Bowmans that grade a 3 and i cant for the life of me see why they didnt get a much higher grade, really much higher. I love when i can find what i feel are under-graded cards since they are lower in cost and still have that great eye-appeal.

[bbcard1]

rdixon, you are right on. I actually am working on a t206 set that is best charactarized as 1s. There are 1s that look good and 1s that look bad...and they are worth a different amount of money, in my opinion.

[christopher.herman]

Having dealt and traded with Paul, I can tell you that he has a sharp eye when it comes to a card's aesthetic merits. His insight and explanation here is valuable to both the rookie and veteran collector. Well done, Paul.

[frankbmd]

My Grading Contest may have inspired this thread, as the point is to demonstrate the lack of correlation between the esthetics and the grade.
I too am happy to find lower graded examples that look good, because they generally cost less. I buy BVG cards as well, because their grading is tough and because there is often price break between comparably graded (PSA,SGC) and BVG cards.

I may be sorry when it comes to selling my collection as PSA and SGC are the major players in the graded vintage card market. I have never cracked a slab or submitted a crossover, so that is not my motivation. I just want the best cards for the money.

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

My Grading Contest may have inspired this thread, as the point is to demonstrate the lack of correlation between the esthetics and the grade.

[2dueces]

I absolutely love low grade cards with great eye appeal. All I can say to all TPGers, keep grading them low for us arm pit collectors.

[2dueces]

Not prewar but beauties non the less.

[atx840]

I don't get the grade on this one?

[4815162342]

Chris, that's the "Micro Cumulonimbus" variation.