![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
View Poll Results: Which would you prefer? | |||
PSA 6 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
15 | 40.54% |
PSA 7 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
22 | 59.46% |
Voters: 37. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#19
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Here is your original post (minus the photos): "Hey guys, interested to hear which card people would generally prefer as this is something I struggle with myself. We have a PSA 6 and PSA 7. Here are some various aspects to consider: PSA 6: Color strike and black are super rich A-grade gloss Card has a fresh from pack look, whites are very white Off center top to bottom Very small wrinkle top right corner Card is overall very sharp PSA 7: Better focus/registration A-grade gloss colors and black not as rich/contrasty as the 6 decently sharp but not as sharp as the 6 IMO Nicely centered back is crisper and has a deeper red color I'm torn. I love the contrast and color and freshness of the 6, but the centering bothers me more than i thought it would, in hand. *Some of the above observations are harder to see in the pic." ********* NOWHERE does it say you bought these cards ("blew their hard earned money"), just a vague reference to 'in hand,' and here's (again) what you said: "Hey guys, interested to hear which card people would generally prefer as this is something I struggle with myself. We have a PSA 6 and PSA 7." The PSA 7 card LITERALLY (and I'm not using that word the way a lot of people these days use it, where it means anything but literally) looks trimmed. LITERALLY. You could fit a slice of bacon next to the card and it still wouldn't hit the barrier (yes, that's obviously sarcasm). Yet, when that's pointed out by someone (just what you asked for, input) you act like he insulted your family, and now you're doubling down on it??? And somehow an old video game is introduced into the scenario?? This thread seemed to be about you asking which card would be 'better' to buy. You even said you were torn. By pointing out how short the PSA 7 is side to side, he was trying to give you very valid information to consider...and now he (and I) are the bad guys??? Holy cow, man!!!
__________________
All the cool kids love my YouTube Channel:
Elm's Adventures in Cardboard Land ![]() https://www.youtube.com/@TheJollyElm Looking to trade? Here's my bucket: https://www.flickr.com/photos/152396...57685904801706 “I was such a dangerous hitter I even got intentional walks during batting practice.” Casey Stengel Spelling "Yastrzemski" correctly without needing to look it up since the 1980s. Overpaying yesterday is simply underpaying tomorrow. ![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: 1964 Topps Pete Rose SGC 70 | Nugen | 1960-1979 Baseball Cards B/S/T | 2 | 09-05-2018 08:22 PM |
1964 Topps Pete Rose PSA 7 | Peter_Spaeth | 1960-1979 Baseball Cards B/S/T | 1 | 04-30-2018 04:53 PM |
WTB 1964 Topps Pete Rose | Peter_Spaeth | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 3 | 04-16-2013 06:59 AM |
1964 Topps Pete Rose - $15 | sylbry | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 04-07-2013 02:21 PM |
FS 1964 Topps Pete Rose PSA 7 | Peter_Spaeth | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 12-28-2012 07:49 AM |