|  | 
| 
 Grading system idea.. Since a lot of prewar cards get assigned the lonely number “1” and as we all know there can be a vast determination by what qualifies for a 1 by both PSA/SGC. What do you guys think if someone implemented a “.5”? I personally think it would help determine values on lower end examples. | 
| 
 only if half the card is missing... | 
| 
 Not necessary. | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 Interesting thought, but isn't that what A is for? | 
| 
 I think that a Poor can be valued by eye appeal.  Seems that thousands of people do it daily.  Not sure why it's so confusing. Here's a really nice PSA 1 1956 Mantle. Looks like an EX-MT 6 except for the pinhole at the top center. Value? I'd say equal to a PSA 2.5. https://img.comc.com/i/Baseball/1956...4505&size=zoom Would AUTH also need a half grade? | 
| 
 I have thought the same thing for years. Some 1s look great and some  look like roadkill. A Pinhole (PH) qualifier would be a nice addition too. Why should a NM-MT card with a pinhole get the same grade as a beater with a pinhole? I would prefer an 8 (PH) over a 1/1.5 | 
| 
 My post was not in reference to swarmee's Mantle.  You got there right before I did | 
| 
 Not my card, just a great looking example for the grade that I noticed on COMC.  If I can save up enough store credit, it might come home with me. | 
| 
 Quote: 
 Agreed. A super nice example with a pinhole should get a qualifier. If I could upload big pictures I would post examples of the lower end examples I was pertaining to. | 
| 
 I don’t prefer my cards to have holes in them so I’m ok with them getting a “1”. * How large can a hole be before it’s not a pinhole?  What if the thumb tack left any indentation marks?  What if paper torn on reverse?  Too many variables to consider for a damaged card. *I do have many cards in my collection that have pinholes. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk | 
| 
 I just hope "Hole" doesn't become a qualifier.  I would hate to see what the flip would show with an Authentic card and a Hole qualifier :D | 
| 
 We really don't need a .5 IMO. I mean where does it end? Then many .5s will look drastically different, etc. Leave the 1, the rest is in the eye of the beholder.  I could see a PH Pinhole designation though as a really nice example of a card with a small pinhole is wayyy preffered (for me) over a beat up 1. PH Qualifier, easy peasy. | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 My Wojo, nice looking card, small pinhole makes it grade a 1. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...a9c161a3b6.jpg Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk | 
| 
 Has Beckett ever give out a 0.5? They give 0.5 on subgrades.  would quad 0.5 subgrades yield a 0.5 or would they just not grade it? I need the answer...It’s gonna bug me until I find out. And yes, a pinhole (PH) would need a clear definition. If the card has any indentations from a thumb tack it would not qualify IMO. And to get super abstract, the “hole” question for an Authentic is a good one. What’s the biggest hole we could put in a card and still get it slabbed authentic. Fun contest coming soon. Lol | 
| 
 This would be a contender, but I'm not paying for it to sit somewhere for a year to find out.  http://www.net54baseball.com/picture...ictureid=25399 | 
| 
 I'm thinking: 1: POOR+ : Poor, complete card but with nice eye appeal 0.5: POOR: Poor, complete card in bad shape Authentic: Card that is missing parts or has alterations Saying that, for the registry, Authentic is already given 0.5 points, so it pretty much rules out the above. | 
| 
 Centering : Quote: 
 ..the front centering is in the "3-ish" area..... "0.5 centering would be more towards 100-0 ?? .. | 
| 
 Quote: 
 Brian | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 I had to go look to see if they grade the Alex Gordon cutout card. They do, so even a rather large hole won't always prevent a number grade.:D | 
| 
 My response to this idea is: Use your eyes. | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 Quote: 
 CGC does have a .5 grade with comics, FWIW. | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 Quote: 
 | 
| 
 .5 grade? It's not really needed but wouldn't harm anything. The lower grade cards have a lot more subjectivity to their aesthetics so a .5 could be lower end poor :). Call it "VP or Very Poor?"  Quote: 
 | 
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:56 PM. |