Grading Question

[Andrew1975]

I picked up this 1939 Play Ball Ted Williams at the National this year. I had been looking for one for a while, aiming for a lower numeric grade example with good eye appeal. I was pretty happy to find this one, and feel that I got a pretty good deal on it (well below VCP). The card has some scuffing (for lack of a better term) on the back, in the space under the writing (and above "PLAY BALL - America"). Upon first glance, I thought that possibly the card had previously been glued into a book, or otherwise attached to something with adhesive (and then carefully removed), but I'm not really sure that the damage is consistent with that. It isn't really like the paper loss that you would normally see in such instances. Further, the area doesn't have any staining, just the scratching/scuffing that you can see in the attached photos (sorry for the poor images taken with cell phone - need to invest in a scanner).

I am curious to hear opinions on the grade that the card received. Does that degree of scratching/scuffing automatically reduce the grade to a 2 (or lower), despite the condition of the rest of the card, or is it subjective? Do you think this card might receive a higher grade if resubmitted? In my opinion, this card looks better (overall) than other PSA 2's I have seen. For all intents and purposes, the grade doesn't really matter, as I have no intention on selling the card. Really, just want to learn more about what is considered during the grading process. Thanks in advance, and I hope everyone has a Merry Christmas and Happy Hannukah.

Andrew

[bnorth]

Looks like it could have been writing that someone erased. Congrats on an awesome looking card.

[BBB]

Not sure on what it is...but man, that is an amazing looking 2! I got a 3 that looks waaaaay worse .


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HRBAKER]

You have a beautiful 2 there.
It appears to be a card with paper loss on the back which in many,many cases lowers the grade to a 1 best case - most days.
It appears to me the overall appeal of the card was taken into account IMO.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Looks like it could have been writing that someone erased. Congrats on an awesome looking card.

Agreed. My money is on erased writing. It will never grade better than a 2, but its a damn nice 2. Nice find.

[JustinD]

Simple answer...yes.

To be honest a 2 is a decent grade for a card with surface damage like that. I doubt any grader will go over that and as the others mentioned, it's a generous grade.

The good news is that many collectors (myself included) will definitely pay a premium for a card with such excellent display qualities. I am often less concerned about the reverse.

So is it a two? Yep.
Is it worth more than than the average two? To the right collector...yep.

[mechanicalman]

I thought erased writing yielded an Altered/Authentic, so my money's on scuffing. Tough grade, but a great card regardless.

[conor912]

I suppose it could be a removed sticker or tape of some kind, but it appears there are two distinct lines which make me think erased writing. I think some graders grade erased writing the same as writing itself, with the argument being that removing something that shouldn't have been there in the first place shouldn't constitute as an "altered" assessment.

[Andrew1975]

Thank you for all the responses. I appreciate the info. Looks like it is pretty well agreed upon that 2 is the correct grade (regardless of what caused the damage). I guess in this case it worked out in my favor. Probably wouldn't have been able to afford it if it was graded higher.