Net54baseball.com Forums

Net54baseball.com Forums (http://www.net54baseball.com/index.php)
-   Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions (http://www.net54baseball.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   REA 1934 Goudey Gehrigs (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=253849)

ruth-gehrig 04-15-2018 11:44 AM

REA 1934 Goudey Gehrigs
 
2 Attachment(s)
Lot 988 and 989
Does the SGC card look extremely short?

T205 GB 04-16-2018 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ruth-gehrig (Post 1767648)
Lot 988 and 989
Does the SGC card look extremely short?

Yes it does. I thought the exact same thing when I first seen it. I compared several Goudeys side by side with it. SGC needs to make that one right.

WWG 04-16-2018 05:56 AM

I think they need to flip the flips, the SGC is the one that looks altered.

Batpig 04-16-2018 05:56 AM

That's not even close.

T205 GB 04-16-2018 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WWG (Post 1767862)
I think they need to flip the flips, the SGC is the one that looks altered.


+1

PiratesWS1979 04-16-2018 08:44 AM

My prediction is the PSA is the next Candiman headliner...or their next scam site.

Anish 04-16-2018 01:10 PM

I don't know how much variation is present in this set, but that looks bad.

It's amazing how grading companies will mark cards that are not obviously trimmed as altered yet completely overlook the issue on cards that stand out as narrow or short.

Stampsfan 04-16-2018 02:46 PM

Maybe the altered one has cardboard added to it.

;)

Mdmtx 04-16-2018 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stampsfan (Post 1768037)
Maybe the altered one has cardboard added to it.

;)

I literally lol'ed.

ruth-gehrig 04-19-2018 06:09 AM

REA doesn't question it as they have for prior graded cards that they believed could still possibly be trimmed

T205 GB 04-19-2018 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stampsfan (Post 1768037)
Maybe the altered one has cardboard added to it.

;)

Almost as funny as when Bruce threatened to sue "Archive" and then found out it was himself.

spacktrack 04-19-2018 07:03 AM

We are comfortable with the assigned grade on the SGC card, and SGC has reviewed the card recently, affirming it meets their standards. We are never shy about disclosing instances where we feel differently about a grade.

Brian

WWG 04-19-2018 08:22 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Just added.

bobbyw8469 04-19-2018 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacktrack (Post 1768751)
We are comfortable with the assigned grade on the SGC card, and SGC has reviewed the card recently, affirming it meets their standards. We are never shy about disclosing instances where we feel differently about a grade.

Brian

Brian, I have the utmost respect for Rob and you and REA, but to put it bluntly, you kicked the pooch on that one. That card obviously is short, and SGC missed it.

Peter_Spaeth 04-19-2018 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469 (Post 1768773)
Brian, I have the utmost respect for Rob and you and REA, but to put it bluntly, you kicked the pooch on that one. That card obviously is short, and SGC missed it.

It is short, but there are size variances in Goudeys. As the edges have fairly distinctive cuts, it could be legit.

http://net54baseball.com/forum/content/goudey.html

Snapolit1 04-19-2018 10:37 AM

SGC had probably graded > 5,000 Goudeys. If there is some natural variance and this falls within those parameters (certainly not hard to determine) I guess this is legit. We are all so suspicious because of all the doctoring in the hobby. Seems to me many of these issues were pretty crudely manufactured. Why would you expect them to be uniform?

Snapolit1 04-19-2018 10:40 AM

SGC had graded > 25,000 33 and 34 Goudeys. If there is some natural variance and this falls within those parameters (certainly not hard to determine) I guess this is legit. We are all so suspicious because of all the doctoring in the hobby. Seems to me many of these issues were pretty crudely manufactured.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:47 PM.