Quote:
Originally Posted by nolemmings
Can you give us your opinion or guess as to why SGC would have assigned that grade? I tend to agree with others that to be that far off on what appears to a high-graded card usually means the grader saw or thought he saw some flaw that lowers the technical grade regardless of eye appeal. Put differently, it seems unlikely the grader just randomly thought this card graded less than excellent given its appearance in the scan.
|
I've answered this, but again, my assumption is some kid used to grading shiny stuff is not familiar with vintage and mistook some tiny thing that should not be marked down for at all, like a print speck, or something that's a normal feature of the paper stock, as a major problem. If it was one card, I could see your point. It was the whole sub as I have said many times but people just ignore. Like I missed something on 30 consecutive cards? Sorry, no.