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 give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com
ebay GSB
T206s on Ebay
Pre-WWII Cards
Post WWII Cards
Vintage Memorabilia
Babe Ruth Cards
Ty Cobb Cards
Lou Gehrig Cards
Mickey Mantle Cards
Goudey Cards
Bowman Cards
T205s on Ebay
Tobacco "T" Cards
Caramel "E" Cards
Vintage Baseball Postcards
Football Cards on Ebay
Exhibit Cards
Strip Cards
Baking Cards
Sporting News
Playball Cards on Ebay

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
  #1  
Old 06-30-2014, 08:16 AM
GregMitch34's Avatar
GregMitch34 GregMitch34 is offline
Greg Mitchell
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New York City area
Posts: 2,211
Default Back damage--and grading craziness

We tend to focus on odd ways grading companies judge condition--on the front of cards. But at least there are posted standards to refer to and "errors" that seem clear. Yet the back--and wildly different ways they seem to get judged--get little attention. Stains, paper loss, dirt marks etc. all produce varying impact on grades--and equally scare some people off while not bothering many at all. Wonder how others feel and judge them personally--or can describe what you THINK the grading company standards are. Sometimes it seems that almost anything goes for a "4" or under...
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-30-2014, 08:58 AM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is offline
Leon
peasant/forum owner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 27,279
Default

One of the more discouraging issues concerning grading is that there seems to be the same weight put on minor paper loss on a blank back as there is paper loss on an important part of the front of a card. I am not sure there is a solution that is fair. Grading by different graders, even at the same company, is very subjective by (human) nature.
__________________
Leon Luckey
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-30-2014, 09:26 AM
packs packs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5,328
Default

For the purposes of grading I think paper loss in all forms should result in the lowest grade, either a 1 or a 1.5 at the most.

Even though it seems crazy a blank backed card with paper loss is killed the same way any other card is, I think collecting as a whole should be moving away from number grades anyway.

I say only two grade should be given to all cards: Authentic and Altered. Then let bidders decide what makes a card valuable. It will cease to be a number and begin to be eye appeal, which is all cards should be valued on anyway. Altered cards will still be labeled as such and everyone I think benefits, especially when you consider how much card doctoring is going on now.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-30-2014, 09:41 AM
glynparson's Avatar
glynparson glynparson is offline
Glyn Parson
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Blandon PA
Posts: 1,830
Default Only eye appeal?

I could not disagree more. I feel cards value within a grade should be determined by eye appeal. But pretending a card with striking colors and beauty but a major flaw should be valued at more than an uncirculated example with slightly muted colors is laughable. The hobby has never been that way and never should. Value though for a lower technical grade graded card can and sometimes does outsell a higher grade lower eye appeal as it should. But all flaws are relevant to me. Relying strictly on eye appeal is akin to relying strictly on the number grade. Value should be determined by all factors of the card. Under that criteria a pin hole would be almost irrelevant to value if it were tough to see. I find that logic highly flawed.

Last edited by glynparson; 06-30-2014 at 09:45 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-30-2014, 10:00 AM
packs packs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5,328
Default

I don't think it's laughable. How many Old Judges with faded images grade out at a 7 or 8? A LOT. Would you rather have them or a pristine image with some album removal damage? Under my proposition both types would be graded the same: Authentic, and you can decide what they're worth independently of a number.

My main point is that grading should move away from a number game and toward collector driven interest, which I would argue has a lot to do with eye appeal. Right now cards sell because of their grade. Whether or not they deserve that grade is an argument Board members get into all the time. So what's laughable about eliminating that mine field and moving towards collector interest in the card itself?

Last edited by packs; 06-30-2014 at 10:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-30-2014, 10:15 AM
GregMitch34's Avatar
GregMitch34 GregMitch34 is offline
Greg Mitchell
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New York City area
Posts: 2,211
Default

Appreciate replies but remember that this started with focus strictly on backs...

Yes, paper loss on backs--sometimes, but not always--gets treated like on front. But stains? A lot more leeway if just on backs. It seems minor staining on back on a nice card will still allow a "4" easily. If same small stain on front--no way. And so on.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-30-2014, 10:39 AM
Republicaninmass Republicaninmass is offline
T3d $h3rm@n
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 4,805
Default

What about the 'pin hole' 1? I think it is good because it is an undectable flaw, at least in scan or at first glance
__________________
SIGNED 1952 Topps
381/407


"Trolling Ebay right now"
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-30-2014, 10:42 AM
I Only Smoke 4 the Cards's Avatar
I Only Smoke 4 the Cards I Only Smoke 4 the Cards is offline
Alex
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,093
Default

Graders need to keep hammering cards with back damage - that keeps them in my price range.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Tackling the Monster
T206 = 213/524
HOFs = 13/76
SLers = 33/48
Horizontals = 6/6

ALWAYS looking for T206 with back damage.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-01-2014, 11:12 AM
GregMitch34's Avatar
GregMitch34 GregMitch34 is offline
Greg Mitchell
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New York City area
Posts: 2,211
Default

Would still like to get some comments on what graders seem to be considering in judging back stains or damage or flaws. I would think one of most maddening subjects and therefore some informed speculation welcome.

Last edited by GregMitch34; 07-01-2014 at 01:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-01-2014, 01:15 PM
packs packs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5,328
Default

I would think they are considering any and all back damage to mean that a piece of the original card has been removed. In the world of grading as it is this type of damage should result in the lowest grade. You can't grade a card as though it were complete if it is not, no matter how small the loss may be.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-01-2014, 02:03 PM
Exhibitman's Avatar
Exhibitman Exhibitman is offline
Ad@m W@r$h@w
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Beautiful Downtown Burbank
Posts: 7,223
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I Only Smoke 4 the Cards View Post
Graders need to keep hammering cards with back damage - that keeps them in my price range.
Precisely! Esp. the blank backs.
__________________
Please visit my web site: www.americasgreatboxingcards.com
So... move out of your studio apartment! And try speaking to a real live woman, and GROW THE HELL UP! I mean, it's just baseball cards dammit, IT'S JUST BASEBALL CARDS!
10% off any BIN in my eBay store (user name: exhibitman) for N54 members buying direct from me through this site instead, just PM me.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-02-2014, 11:37 AM
packs packs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 5,328
Default

On the subject of paper loss, I just saw this Gehrig PSA 1.5 on eBay:



Paper loss on the front of the card but it is graded 1.5. I'd sent my PSA 1 Gehrig into PSA twice for a regrade and it was refused both times. Nothing against PSA but it's confusing:


Last edited by packs; 07-02-2014 at 11:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-02-2014, 12:33 PM
Clydewally Clydewally is offline
Ken
member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 115
Default

I can't tell how the graders grade, but they seem to put more emphasis on some paper loss or stain on a blank or generic back and on things like corners than on the gloss and eye appeal of the picture. As a collector, I am often willing to trade problems with the back for a glossy front, even if the corners are rounded. Some company used to grade different aspects of the card, corners, front, back, centering etc. and then do an overall grade. While I don't prefer that method, it might lead to more thoughtful grading by the service companies.
__________________
Successful transactions with Rainier2004, Koufax32fan,h2oya311, jimivintage, t206fix,T2069bk, Brian Van Horn, Mattsey9,Wite3, Nate Adams, Chris Buckler,Robextend and many others.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-02-2014, 01:01 PM
GregMitch34's Avatar
GregMitch34 GregMitch34 is offline
Greg Mitchell
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: New York City area
Posts: 2,211
Default

I could be wrong, but it just seems to me that up to VG-Ex the graders let a lot go in terms of a little dirt or stain on the reverse, but from Ex on up much tougher. I have a couple nice card that are easily "5s" but PSA gave them a 4 due to very slight stains. But they probably would not have docked a slightly weaker card.
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
SGC and Back Damage? timelord Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 18 07-22-2011 11:41 AM
D304 Cobb with back damage on ebay -- back damage not shown calvindog Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 24 11-26-2010 06:51 PM
Scrapbook damage and grading Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 4 08-31-2005 06:31 PM
Grading vintage cards with back damage Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 15 10-04-2004 08:03 PM
back damage to a Mayo Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 9 08-26-2004 08:13 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:21 PM.


ebay GSB