Opinion on this grade please.

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

Is this card worthy of a 3 with the paperloss on back?

http://www.mastronet.com/index.cfm?action=DisplayContent&ContentName=Lot%20Information&LotIndex=43194

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

PSA isn't clear in its standards as to what amount of paper loss means what.

But I don't find it too distracting - and I don't think the grade is largely inappropriate. I think disclosure of the paper loss is key. Or, as Mastro calls it "superficial mounting-point separation"

It isn't extensive paper loss on the back - and it doesn't affect the "primary" areas of the reverse. I guess it is all a matter of opinion and preference.

What does look interesting to me is that this card seems to be undersized for what I would expect - but I have seen variances in size on the Magie card in graded holders for a while now - so maybe it is something Magie-specific...

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

Cool thanks, I appreciate the input. As for the size, that is ok and not trimmed, I have owned 4 Magie cards and 2 were sized small. So are several other T206s in my set that was mostly assembled in the early 1970s. Dan

[Archive]

Posted By: Marc S.

Just noting that it was undersized.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Now to my way of thinking, no card with paper loss on the back grades better than vg and it better be really nice otherwise, too.

I also have a PSA 5 T206 Chance batting with virtually no upper border. Does that merit an excellent grade?

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

..from the cert. number, that this card was graded
a few,4,5 years ago. So I guess it would still get a GAI 3 today ...I know that if I submitted that to SGC today it would be a 2 at best.