Thread: SGC question...
View Single Post
  #11  
Old 03-20-2017, 10:25 AM
smellthegum's Avatar
smellthegum smellthegum is offline
D@v3 W@u9h
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 315
Default

Anyone else find it odd that some instances of added color only merit note as a (MK) qualifier while others reduce a card to 'A' status -- especially when, on purposely altered cards, the marks are usually less obtrusive than accidental markings? I guess it all depends on where the mark happens to be. If it's strategically placed in a matching color and is hard to see it's bad. If it's occurred randomly and easy to spot it's merely a footnote on the grade.

Not passing judgement of the legitimacy/acceptability of doctored OR marked cards, just that I find it to be sort of a double standard among TPGs that one form is OK while the other doesn't even merit a grade. They're both instances of foreign matter being applied to a card. It's as if the graders are assuming and grading the intent rather than the actual condition.
__________________
In progress
--------------------------
1970K NMMT 56/75 (75%)
1971T NM+ 498/752 (66%)
1954B EXMT+ 82/225 (36%)
1968T NM 173/598 (29%)
1975T NMMT 186/660 (28%)
1969T NM 125/664 (19%)
1971OPC NM 108/752 (14%)
Reply With Quote