Anyone else find it odd that some instances of added color only merit note as a (MK) qualifier while others reduce a card to 'A' status -- especially when, on purposely altered cards, the marks are usually less obtrusive than accidental markings? I guess it all depends on where the mark happens to be. If it's strategically placed in a matching color and is hard to see it's bad. If it's occurred randomly and easy to spot it's merely a footnote on the grade.
Not passing judgement of the legitimacy/acceptability of doctored OR marked cards, just that I find it to be sort of a double standard among TPGs that one form is OK while the other doesn't even merit a grade. They're both instances of foreign matter being applied to a card. It's as if the graders are assuming and grading the intent rather than the actual condition.
__________________
Ungraded Topps sets in progress
------------------------
1971 573/752 - 76% - NM+
1975 307/660 - 47% - NMMT
1968 273/598 - 46% - NM+
1969 241/664 - 36% - NM+
1974 235/728 - 32% - NM+
1957 129/411 - 31% - NM
------------------------
All 6 1758/3813 - 46%
Also looking to buy (non-sport) pre-1970 beer cans and pre-1950 beer advertising
|
03-20-2017, 11:25 AM
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode