PSA & SGC label errors (T206)

[Pat R]

Most of the errors on PSA & SGC labels are just typos like we all make and they don't really pose a problem for people that are keeping lists for the front/back combos but there are some that do and one of them that has caused an issue in the past and was just brought up again in another thread is a Murray (portrait) that is a Piedmont 350-460 factory 25 that PSA incorrectly labeled a Piedmont factory 42.

[IMG][/IMG]


Here are A list of some of the errors in the PSA & SGC pop reports, the ones in red are those that have caused issues in the past or could cause issues for people following the front/back combos.

[IMG][/IMG]

Here's an image of the label error on the Spencer

[IMG][/IMG]

[BobbyStrawberry]

Collectors are able to tell the difference of course, but I wish PSA would start labeling Old Judge cards with the correct year, instead of using "1887" for all of them.

[Rhotchkiss]

Here is one- this card is 100% brown, not black.

Putting another brown Lenox (a tinker bat off), which psa got correct, for comparison. Also included is a black Lenox (a chance portrait), for comparison purposes

[53toppscollector]

This is a very timely and useful thread.

Pat, do you know if the checklists at T206resource are being actively updated?

The Murray Portrait still shows up as a confirmed Piedmont 42 back (which I think is why I had it in my spreadsheet as well)

That checklist has 76 total subjects, and based on what you/Ted said in my other thread, it should only be 72 subjects.

It would be super helpful if each of the checklists on T206resource had a "Last updated" date included....

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by 53toppscollector

This is a very timely and useful thread.

Pat, do you know if the checklists at T206resource are being actively updated?

The Murray Portrait still shows up as a confirmed Piedmont 42 back (which I think is why I had it in my spreadsheet as well)

That checklist has 76 total subjects, and based on what you/Ted said in my other thread, it should only be 72 subjects.

It would be super helpful if each of the checklists on T206resource had a "Last updated" date included....

Hi James, it is but not as often as some of us would like. There is a list of several changes that are supposed to be made I believe that the Murray is one of them but I will check on that.

[Pat R]

This is probably the strangest error(s) in either of the pop reports.
There are 4 Harry Steinfeldt portraits with cap Polar Bears in the SGC pop reports.

[53toppscollector]

This thread, and my SweetCap census, are really making me want to start a population report independent from PSA and SGC's shenanigans.

[stutor]

This one isn’t significant to the front/back combos like the ones above, but it gives me a chuckle. They got the series and factory right...just not the advertising brand. Oddly enough, I think I like the card more because of this.

[Sean]

IMG_1907.jpg

[Kidnapped18]

SGC is showing a Doyle Broad Leaf 460 as being graded an SGC 1

[53toppscollector]

I'm 50/50 on cases like that. Doyle With Bat should exist in a BL 460. SGC shows 1 graded. As far as I can tell, its never been sold, so we don't see a scan of it anywhere, but if someone picked it up raw in a collection and had it graded but kept it, its possible it exists.

I really wish SGC would scan their cards they grade. All grading companies should do it, from a quality control perspective.

[atx840]

Not necessarily an error but SGC used to grade blanks numerically.

[Pat R]

A couple more Label errors

SGC has one Del Howard Old Mill in their pop reports, that combo is unconfirmed and a probable no print.

The other error is a PSA error on a low pop card a Neal Ball NY listed as Cleveland on the label

0 Ball.jpg

There's also at least one Ball NY old Mill in one of the old flips that don't list the backs.

01 Ball.jpg