WWG DiMaggios -- are these the same card?

CardPadre · #1 01-26-2025, 09:55 PM

Would anyone agree that if SGC graded that card 10 times (with a fresh look each time, not knowing they had graded it before) you would probably come out with trimmed, min size, VG-3, VG-EX-4, and EX-5 included in those results?

Everyone knows and complains that there is no consistency or reliability in grading and that's why previous grades are not relevant (in my opinion) in selling a graded card.

And "min size" is the most irrelevant assessment since no TPG specifies what constitutes "significantly undersized" and they all are known to have numerically graded a card they had previously min sized. It's so ludicrous, that it just can't be considered relevant.

Snowman · #2 01-26-2025, 11:01 PM

You guys are hilarious.

For the record, "Minimum Size Not Met" means the card DOES NOT bear evidence of trimming. If it did, they would put "Evidence of Trimming" on the label.

I have a NM+ card that I've submitted 5 times and it has gotten 5 different grades: 6.5, 4.5, Authentic, 6, 5. What a card was graded previously is completely irrelevant. Graders get it wrong far too often for that to matter. The idea that a card's previous holder/opinion should be forever attached to it is pretty hilarious. Good luck with that.

Zero chance Goldin takes this down and zero chance PSA decertifies it.

Maybe instead of spending all that energy into crying about someone else profiting from a card you should learn how to grade yourself and then spend that time finding cards that have been assaulted by some new inexperienced grader that had no clue what he was doing when he graded it.

Lorewalker · #3 01-26-2025, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CardPadre

Would anyone agree that if SGC graded that card 10 times (with a fresh look each time, not knowing they had graded it before) you would probably come out with trimmed, min size, VG-3, VG-EX-4, and EX-5 included in those results?

Old Judge would expect disclosure on all those results too. Imagine auction write ups if that ever happens.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CardPadre

Everyone knows and complains that there is no consistency or reliability in grading and that's why previous grades are not relevant (in my opinion) in selling a graded card.

I agree to a certain point. Certainly in the case of this card the previous grade by SGC is not remotely relevant. If I consigned the card in the SGC holder I would be more than upset...with myself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CardPadre

And "min size" is the most irrelevant assessment since no TPG specifies what constitutes "significantly undersized" and they all are known to have numerically graded a card they had previously min sized. It's so ludicrous, that it just can't be considered relevant.

This is 100% correct. And it is a moving target at both PSA and SGC. I would not call 1/32 of an inch significantly undersized for a baseball card until we get to possibly cards the size of T206s.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
SGC DiMaggios	samosa4u	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	5	11-12-2020 12:52 PM
10 DiMaggios	theshleps	Autograph Forum- Primarily Sports	14	06-05-2019 06:27 PM
3 DiMaggios Postcard	Ben Yourg	Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T	0	07-16-2018 08:02 PM
WTB: Pre-War Joe DiMaggios...	davetruth	1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T	3	05-28-2014 07:51 PM
Some more Joe DiMaggios...opinions needed!	Big Six	Autograph Forum- Primarily Sports	6	07-03-2013 09:20 AM