 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
07-05-2013, 03:50 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Welcome to the board Andy. I would say both companies have similar grading scales, for the most part. They each do things a bit differently but in the end are pretty close. Most of us concentrate more on the cards than the grades on the holders. We have all seen some 1s and 2s that look better than 3s and 4s. Happy collecting!!
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com Last edited by Leon; 07-05-2013 at 03:50 PM. Reason: typo 
|
|
#3
07-05-2013, 07:46 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Agree with the above comments. There are some tendencies of one company to focus on one element (eg corners, centering) vs another (eg paper loss, or surface wrinkles), and there's certainly variation within a particular company's grade. But by and large I find PSA and SGC grades fairly comparable.
Best of luck, and welcome aboard, --S
__________________
collecting primarily T206, 1940 Play Ball, 1947-66 Exhibits, 1952 Bowman, 1964 Topps Giants, Yankees HOFers. E-mails preferred over PM.
|
 |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| New Member Intro | VoodooChild | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 03-28-2013 07:52 PM |
| New member intro | Coninefan | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 02-18-2013 12:45 PM |
| Excited new member - intro + a few questions | Pythonfactory | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 6 | 12-20-2012 02:11 AM |
| New Member Intro | MattyC | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 16 | 11-27-2012 09:32 AM |
| New Member Intro - Jeff P | jefferyepayne | WaterCooler Talk- Off Topics | 5 | 01-07-2012 07:30 AM |
Hybrid Mode
