![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
For the purposes of grading I think paper loss in all forms should result in the lowest grade, either a 1 or a 1.5 at the most.
Even though it seems crazy a blank backed card with paper loss is killed the same way any other card is, I think collecting as a whole should be moving away from number grades anyway. I say only two grade should be given to all cards: Authentic and Altered. Then let bidders decide what makes a card valuable. It will cease to be a number and begin to be eye appeal, which is all cards should be valued on anyway. Altered cards will still be labeled as such and everyone I think benefits, especially when you consider how much card doctoring is going on now. |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
SGC and Back Damage? | timelord | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 18 | 07-22-2011 10:41 AM |
D304 Cobb with back damage on ebay -- back damage not shown | calvindog | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 24 | 11-26-2010 05:51 PM |
Scrapbook damage and grading | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 08-31-2005 05:31 PM |
Grading vintage cards with back damage | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 10-04-2004 07:03 PM |
back damage to a Mayo | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 08-26-2004 07:13 AM |