T206 Honus Wagner SGC 5 - John D. Wagner Collection

[Lorewalker]

Does not appear to be EX to me. That is some heavy corner wear. Not shocked by the grade however. I would not expect to get anything better than a 4 from them if I submitted a T206 McBride that had corners like that.

[jingram058]

Beautiful card, and nice display frame/box too...all unobtanium.

[Bridwell]

It would be lucky to get a PSA 4, because of the corner wear. Also we can't see the back to see any possible flaws there.

[mrreality68]

I agree I do not think it is a 5. But it is a beautiful looking card (back unseen) and it would easily go for over 18 Million Dollars

[refz]

Perhaps in this case, the centering trumps corner wear? I agree with all of you on this matter. Maybe sgc is going to the next level on such an iconic card or do 3rd party graders do favors for higher end clients? Just my thoughts, on such an awesome card!!

[robertsmithnocure]

Nice looking card, but not a 5 IMHO.

[Republicaninmass]

Not a t206 expert

That t/b centering is 50/50?

[Lorewalker]

Hammer the average submitter and then it is ok when you toss a high profile client an over grade of 1 full grade point their high profile card. Love what they are doing over there.

If they had graded the card right as a 4 (based on the image of the front) it still would still be a killer card. The politics of grading.

[BobC]

I don't know about the rest of you, but that is a VG 3, maybe a VG+ 3.5 card, at best, all day long and twice on Sundays. Don't get me wrong, it is still a great card, and presents well, but all four corners show wear and obvious rounding, and it looks like there may be some surface/coloration issues. Like the print mark/dot that seems to be above Wagner's head to the viewer's right.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Does not appear to be EX to me. That is some heavy corner wear. Not shocked by the grade however. I would not expect to get anything better than a 4 from them if I submitted a T206 McBride that had corners like that.

I'm noticing a trend. I call myself a low grade collector, but I'm at least a mid grade collector by SGC's new standards for marquee cards.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by G1911

I'm noticing a trend. I call myself a low grade collector, but I'm at least a mid grade collector by SGC's new standards for marquee cards.

To say they stretched on this one would be an understatement. Greg it might be a great time to submit those 2 Balt News Ruths you are hiding from us.

One would think that since a marquee card will garner more attention that they might want to get the grading right. Additionally over by a full grade...or more...equates to enormous amounts of money on cards of this caliber.

Poster child, imo, for Just Saying No To Slabbing.

[drcy]

The problem with the overgrading is the focus will be on the overgrade. As evidenced by this thread.

[benjulmag]

Originally Posted by drcy

The problem with the overgrading is the focus will be on the overgrade. As evidenced by this thread.

Good point, though I would vary the wording slightly, as follows.

The problem with assigning a numerical grade is that the focus will be on the grade, not the card.

That Wagner is a GORGEOUS Wagner, IMO easily among the top few in the hobby. Yet the focus of this thread is the view it is over graded, and how corrupt SGC is to assign it the grade it did.

Yet if someone was to post a "properly" graded T206 Cobb 8, would there be a single post as to the probability (IMO about 100%) that the card has been worked on? Or how about an "8" that has badly toned borders and poor eye appeal, but "technically" merits an "8"?

I'll repeat a point I have made in the past and believe is worth making again -- The sole function of TPG should be to opine whether a card is genuine or counterfeit, and if genuine if it has been altered in any way. Anything other than that is a subjective assessment, which has no business being treated as some objective statement of condition.

Going back to this Wagner, IMO if we took the universe of slabbed T206s and showed how they really looked before any of the alteration/trimming been performed, I suspect people would not be so quick to opine it does not merit the accolades SGC gives it.

[Oscar_Stanage]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

I'll repeat a point I have made in the past and believe is worth making again -- The sole function of TPG should be to opine whether a card is genuine or counterfeit, and if genuine if it has been altered in any way. Anything other than that is a subjective assessment, which has no business being treated as some objective statement of condition.

There is not a problem with numerical grading on it's own. Being able to categorize card quality/value based on a set of criteria is extremely useful, assuming the standards are consistent over time. The problem is that TPGs have utterly failed to enforce any standard. The fact that a group of collectors can take one look at the Wagner and dismiss it's 'professional' grade is comically sad.

It is either corruption or incompetence by SGC whose sole goal seems to be 'winning' the right to grade marquee cards. I guess they think it is good brand marketing to cater to a dozen people who can afford these cards. I'd argue they should have just invested in a strong registry.

I was talking to another collector at the National while taking a look at the Mantle. He told me that SGC probably paid the owner to grade the card - i had never thought of that , but it makes sense that TPGs would engage in a bidding war for the right to grade these types of cards. if this is truly how it works, that degrades the point of the service.

[luciobar1980]

I admit my first thought was also.. those corners look too worn for a 5. But, they make it sound like the card is damn-near perfect in every other respect. So is it not possible it still warrants the 5?

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by Oscar_Stanage

There is not a problem with numerical grading on it's own. Being able to categorize card quality/value based on a set of criteria is extremely useful, assuming the standards are consistent over time. The problem is that TPGs have utterly failed to enforce any standard. The fact that a group of collectors can take one look at the Wagner and dismiss it's 'professional' grade is comically sad.

It is either corruption or incompetence by SGC whose sole goal seems to be 'winning' the right to grade marquee cards. I guess they think it is good brand marketing to cater to a dozen people who can afford these cards. I'd argue they should have just invested in a strong registry.

I was talking to another collector at the National while taking a look at the Mantle. He told me that SGC probably paid the owner to grade the card - i had never thought of that , but it makes sense that TPGs would engage in a bidding war for the right to grade these types of cards. if this is truly how it works, that degrades the point of the service.

I do not know the provenance of this card, but my first thought was that it was submitted with the owner requesting a minimum grade of 5, maybe as a crossover, and that SGC jumped at the chance to have a graded Wagner on display in their holder. Just the cynic in me I guess.

That being said, does it really matter? For that card of that player from that set, is there really going to be a ruckus raised over the numeric grade? Is some registry hound out there thinking he needs to "upgrade" his Wagner to score big points? Another screaming foul because he just got jumped in the standings by an overgraded card? If so it just makes me wonder more about the egos of some people being unhealthily out of whack.

IMHO, the card is simply gorgeous, and should be enjoyed and valued as such. Any numeric grade as an assurance that the card is genuine and unaltered should be enough. The card speaks for itself.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by benjulmag

Good point, though I would vary the wording slightly, as follows.

The problem with assigning a numerical grade is that the focus will be on the grade, not the card.

That Wagner is a GORGEOUS Wagner, IMO easily among the top few in the hobby. Yet the focus of this thread is the view it is over graded, and how corrupt SGC is to assign it the grade it did.

Yet if someone was to post a "properly" graded T206 Cobb 8, would there be a single post as to the probability (IMO about 100%) that the card has been worked on? Or how about an "8" that has badly toned borders and poor eye appeal, but "technically" merits an "8"?

I'll repeat a point I have made in the past and believe is worth making again -- The sole function of TPG should be to opine whether a card is genuine or counterfeit, and if genuine if it has been altered in any way. Anything other than that is a subjective assessment, which has no business being treated as some objective statement of condition.

Going back to this Wagner, IMO if we took the universe of slabbed T206s and showed how they really looked before any of the alteration/trimming been performed, I suspect people would not be so quick to opine it does not merit the accolades SGC gives it.

As nice of a card as it is the accolades SGC used to describe it only felt like a way to justify the over grade. And while it might be nicer and more genuine than many of the graded T206 Wagners that in no way should be the basis for the over grade. Had this card, like the 52 Mantle in the 9.5, been graded accurately, there would be fewer of us who would be focusing on the disappointment in SGC and more on the card. PSA is just as guilty of this BS but it makes a mockery of TPG, imo and Greg certainly illustrates the many reasons grading cannot be taken too seriously.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

To say they stretched on this one would be an understatement. Greg it might be a great time to submit those 2 Balt News Ruths you are hiding from us.

One would think that since a marquee card will garner more attention that they might want to get the grading right. Additionally over by a full grade...or more...equates to enormous amounts of money on cards of this caliber.

Poster child, imo, for Just Saying No To Slabbing.

I was thinking, if they’re just giving +2 for marquee cards without even being bribed, I might be able to get a 6 on one and a 7 on the other Ruth after bribing them. Guess I’m jumping on the SGC bandwagon!

This garbage is one of many reasons my cards stay raw and I crack the slabbed ones I buy. It’s a blatantly corrupt and dishonest process that isn’t about the cards at all but making money out of nothing out of an ‘opinion’ that is often bought and paid for, or abused for marketing and promotion at best. People with money invested into it or who think they could invest into it and join the pump for a profit will defend the graders no matter how many scandals (where do we even begin?), shady deals (like their big submitters getting to negotiate grades behind closed doors at their special events), altered cards (PWCC’s fraud ring just to start), fakes (from Connie Mack’s to SGC autographs), different standards for big submitters or friends of the graders (like that former Beckett grader who gets an absurd % of all black labels) and clearly dishonest grades (like this one) there are. Briefly discussed but ultimately ignored, as long as there’s profit in it.

[jcmtiger]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Does not appear to be EX to me. That is some heavy corner wear. Not shocked by the grade however. I would not expect to get anything better than a 4 from them if I submitted a T206 McBride that had corners like that.

Agree.

[T206Collector]

Very proud to have a signed T206 card from this collection!

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by T206Collector

Very proud to have a signed T206 card from this collection!

Very interesting! John D. Wagner clearly had a very impressive collection. Cool that you snagged something from it.

[Leon]

Some more of John D Wagner's papers. These were mostly to Jefferson Burdick. I would imagine a few members haven't seen them. They have been shown several times but still relevant.. I know he talks about T206 Wagner's in one or more of them.

https://www.net54baseball.com/showth...ht=john+wagner

[rand1com]

The card is a 5 only in SGC's dreams.

It is a nice looking Wagner and may be the best one discounting the trimmed PSA 8 but the card would get a 3,3.5, or maybe a 4 on a good day for a regular collector.

The corner wear is even but unfortunately way too severe to warrant a 5.

[Dead-Ball-Hitter]

This is way too high profile a card to grade it so favorably. Its unquestionably a 3.5 by their standards. An obvious attempt to create some buzz and or do a high profile client a solid. I'm a big SGC guy and am truly disappointed.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Dead-Ball-Hitter

This is way too high profile a card to grade it so favorably. Its unquestionably a 3.5 by their standards. An obvious attempt to create some buzz and or do a high profile client a solid. I'm a big SGC guy and am truly disappointed.

+1

[drcy]

Originally Posted by Dead-Ball-Hitter

This is way too high profile a card to grade it so favorably. Its unquestionably a 3.5 by their standards. An obvious attempt to create some buzz and or do a high profile client a solid. I'm a big SGC guy and am truly disappointed.

The #1 issue is it shows that they can be dishonest. I don't know how this particular grading could not be described as an example of corruption.

[CurtisFlood]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Does not appear to be EX to me. That is some heavy corner wear. Not shocked by the grade however. I would not expect to get anything better than a 4 from them if I submitted a T206 McBride that had corners like that.

Based on recent items I have submitted to SGC it would be a three. Tyey are not easy on your cards.