Are backs always considered by the grading companies
 

Still can't get a straight answer to this question. Any opinions would be appreciated. Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They are supposed to be. Centering and any damage are factored into the final grade.

Both PSA and SGC have criteria for centering on the back of cards. Any damage or imperfections should / would affect the grading of the card whether on the front or back of the card.

You would figure but it is not always the case. Correct?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The backs should always be considered when grading. There is a good debate on how much they affect the grade, but the simple and correct answer, is that they should always be considered.

Now, as to the weight of the back in determining what the grade will be, is a whole different conversation. Blank backs, imo, should carry less weight but that is not usually the case, from my experiences.

they have to be included....
 

it happens all the time, cards get knocked down because of back flaws...the weight i'm not sure of either....back is 40% overall grade??35 %??:confused:

I think severe back miscuts should up the grade;):)....but that's only in my freak world:D

a beauty....
 

this got a 1.5....but in my world it's a gem mint 10

That back is cool. It came from the factory that way and I am fine with that. I'm talking back damage however slight.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

TPGs kill grades for back damage, even when the back is blank. Old Judges commonly have back damage and are downgraded for it, much to the delight of most OJ collectors as they collect cards and not numbers on plastic. (not that there is anything wrong with collecting numbers on plastic, it's just different)

I think they take the backs into consideration every time, at least with PSA and SGC. It's possible that something might slip by occasionally, but there is no doubt in my mind that the back condition factors into the final grade.

Here are three of my T206 cards. Look at the card, then look at the grades they received:

http://imageshack.us/a/img18/1220/27ud.pnghttp://imageshack.us/a/img837/2146/0byb.pnghttp://imageshack.us/a/img22/6508/56k5.png

If the backs were not considered, these would be undergraded, imo (especially the Tannehill). But when you look at the backs, they are accurately graded because of tape stains, and a small amount of paper loss on the Rucker. I feel the back issues may have lowered the overall grade by a whole point.

http://imageshack.us/a/img801/2756/kfpm.pnghttp://imageshack.us/a/img706/6427/ibp8.pnghttp://imageshack.us/a/img842/7572/5vpl.png

Bill, those are all really nice but that Tannehill is absolutely beautiful! (2.5?!?!)

Id say more than a point. Those cards are beauties.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks, guys. I like them a lot.