![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I'm hoping this brick was not recessed. Otherwise that could put surface impressions in your card. I would kind of expect a 92 SGC 8.5 for this card, if the top right corner has the feathering it sort of looks like to me, and the nick on the top left side is just a scratch on the screwdown.
__________________
-- PWCC: The Fish Stinks From the Head PSA: Regularly Get Cheated BGS: Can't detect trimming on modern SGC: Closed auto authentication business JSA: Approved same T206 Autos before SGC Oh, what a difference a year makes. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
You might get one (92) but odds aren't in your favor. Cross your fingers.
![]()
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com Last edited by Leon; 04-11-2017 at 10:22 AM. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'm hoping you're wrong but I'm sure you are more experienced with grading than I am so you're probably right. I do think the card looks sharper and better in person than what shows on the scan though.
Last edited by TobaccoKing4; 04-11-2017 at 01:13 PM. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Let us know, it should be interesting. I am hoping you are correct. They do give out high grades but they seem to be to others and not me!!
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
In the future, STAY AWAY FROM BRICKS!!! I understand you want to keep the card protected, but they make Card Savers in all various sizes.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ended up only getting a 60. While I'm not surprised that it didn't get a 92, I do think it was graded a bit on the low side. There is a little ink mark on the back of the card so maybe that dragged it down?
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
A 5 coming back from SGC on an otherwise great card is almost always due to a wrinkle or crease. Even those you cant see with naked eye - been there several times and if you look hard enough (magnify) you should find it.
80/20 or better centering, minor rounding or fuzzing of corners, roughness or chipping along edge (no layering), one VERY slight surface or "spider" crease may exist on one side of the card, gloss may be lost from surface with some scratching that does not detract from the aesthetics of the card. Ink/Pencil usually drops the card lower than 60.
__________________
My Monster Progess Complete Set......: 238 / 520 : 45% HOF Cards..........: 009 / 076 : 12% Southern League.: 000 / 048 : 00% Minor League......: 055 / 086 : 41% Portrait Cards......: 077 / 180 : 43% Horizontal Cards.: 000 / 006 : 00% |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
If you are curious, most of the time the guys at SGC will walk you through their explanation of the grade if you call. The flaws they identified and the rationale behind it. Beautiful card; enjoy it... |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Not surprised. I have been disappointed more times than happy. Maybe our expectations are too high? I guess that is what makes the true high grade cards so valuable. But it can still suck hoping for a 7-8.5 and getting a 5. Been there done that, more than once.
__________________
Leon Luckey www.luckeycards.com |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Vintage and PSA's grading consistency over time | the 'stache | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 14 | 04-18-2016 08:47 PM |
How on-time are grading companies? | granite75 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 15 | 10-04-2014 07:39 AM |
First time SGC submitter question. | Mrvintage | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 03-17-2013 08:24 PM |
SGC grading question (possible dumb question) | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 09-08-2006 12:36 AM |
first time I have seen this grading company | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 6 | 06-07-2003 08:20 PM |