|
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
I saw this card being discussed in chats for the opposite reasons.
I see the smudged right corner, but is this a 2? ![]()
__________________
- Justin D. Player collecting - Lance Parrish, Jim Davenport, John Norlander. Successful B/S/T with - Highstep74, Northviewcats, pencil1974, T2069bk, tjenkins, wilkiebaby11, baez578, Bocabirdman, maddux31, Leon, Just-Collect, bigfish, quinnsryche...and a whole bunch more, I stopped keeping track, lol. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
I have often thought it would be good to assign a “technical grade” and a “visual appeal” grade. I mean there MUST be something going on with this card that isn’t visible in a 2D scan, right? It’s either that, or, this was an actual error and this card is not actually supposed to be a 2. I feel those are really the only 2 possibilities.
__________________
~20 SUCCESSFUL BST (1 trade) on Net54 Last edited by luciobar1980; 12-06-2023 at 05:23 PM. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
I suspect this one is a 2 because of the V shaped paper loss next to the corner ding on the back. That still feels too harsh though, seems to easily merit the 3 at least on the technical scale.
Cards that look like this are why I can never picture myself going high grade. The tiny visual difference is just not worth it. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
If the Volpe card was a T206, would it be a 2?
Maybe I'm missing it somewhere, but I've not seen written evidence from the TPGs that they grade older cards and newer cards on different scales.
__________________
Working Sets: Baseball- T206 SLers - Virginia League (-1) 1952 Topps - low numbers (-1) 1953 Topps (-54) 1954 Bowman (-2) 1964 Topps Giants auto'd (-2) |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Beckett had a vintage division BVG not sure if they still do. They said they grade vintage(1980 and back) different.
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Compare that 2 to the recent SGC 3 Ruth and tell me how that makes any sense at all.
__________________
Working Sets: Baseball- T206 SLers - Virginia League (-1) 1952 Topps - low numbers (-1) 1953 Topps (-54) 1954 Bowman (-2) 1964 Topps Giants auto'd (-2) |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
I can't. Card grading is so interesting PT Barnum himself wouldn't be able to believe how it actually works.
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
They still do. And that would be quite the understatement. They don’t grade cards within shouting distance of the standards used by PSA and SGC. Most BVG 5’s would be lucky to get a PSA 3. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
__________________
Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Cubs of all eras. Currently working on 1956, '63 and '72 Topps complete sets. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
I’m still convinced that PSA grading varies depending on how many cards you submit/have submitted to them for grading. Just saying…
|
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Uh....hmmm. | Brian Van Horn | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 03-04-2020 12:29 PM |
| Uh, hmmm. I don't know. | Brian Van Horn | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 07-07-2019 02:09 PM |
| Uh. Hmmm...... | Brian Van Horn | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 8 | 09-19-2012 12:44 PM |
| Hmmm..... | Brian Van Horn | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 9 | 03-31-2011 02:00 PM |
| Hmmm. | Brian Van Horn | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 03-05-2010 07:08 PM |