[barrysloate]

As Leon just posted, the way Old Judges are handled by all the grading companies is a travesty, and it's bothered me for a long time that none of them are willing to listen to collectors. A couple of years ago Leon and I made a trade and I sent him an OJ portrait card. I forget which player, but I'm hoping he saved a scan and can post it. It's the poster boy for what's wrong with the system. This card had a gem photo, 10 out of 10 quality, with virtually square corners and no surface wear whatsoever. It was a visual gem. But it had a spot of paper loss and was graded Poor! And I've seen OJ's with photos that have faded to nothing more than a blur, but because they have square corners and no paper loss, are graded EX-MT! That suggests that the sole criteria for assessing those cards was the amount of paper loss. The photo quality wasn't even a small factor, it was a zero factor.

Collectors of Old Judges hate this grading scale and refuse to accept it. There is no question a card should lose points for paper loss, because a similar example without paper loss will always be more desirable. But the heavy handed way these are handled really show a lack of understanding the issue, and the way the set is collected. And even worse, there is no acknowledgment by the graders that this issue needs to be addressed.

Leon, I hope you saved a scan.

P.S.- I know Kevin Cummings already addressed this early in this thread, but I thought I would chime in too.