|
|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
As for the "rough cut" I've seen some poor factory edges before, but none that rough or wavy...which makes me think it's been hand trimmed. As for paper loss, you can see it on the back at the top, the whole upper rear edge has lost the layer 1 of the paper, as well as the front lower left corner, unless it's a much softer corner than I initially guessed, it looks like there's a layer of paper loss their too. Last edited by phikappapsi; 05-20-2012 at 09:04 AM. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Based on the scan I believe Ted is correct that it's a rough factory cut on the right side. What effect this had on the grade is hard to say. I do think the border chipping and most importantly the scuff across the middle of the front of the card would relegate it to a 30 at best and likely a 20. The TPG may have given it an A based on the rough cut.
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'll guess "Auth" possibly a "1" ? Aloha, dave ps big distraction for me is the front abrasion across the middle front (and the mk ink spot). Also might add that if it was from the D. Young collection it probably graded a 9
Last edited by Cardboard Junkie; 05-20-2012 at 10:42 AM. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
The original numerical grade is irrelevant, as now this piece of vintage cardboard has been forever freed from the evil confines of its plastic tomb, which was bestowed upon us by the evil entity known as..... the TPG!!
![]() ![]()
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
PSA 2 (mk) is what I think it deserves.
|
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
My, oh my.... ....you sure have a suspicios mind ? As many on this forum know, I am no fan of "graded" cards. When I acquire them, I usually separate the cardboard from the plastic. Perhaps, re-grading cards in hopes of a higher grade is your modus operandi ? ? And, that's fine....but, do not judge others as such, when you do not know what they collect or how they collect it. The following scans are samples of how I collect, store and display my sportscards........ ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Hey guys.... I'd say that we've had enough inputs here, so this afternoon I will post the Davy Jones card scan (prior to my extricating it from its rectangular device). I have to go out now and attend to my "honey-do" list TED Z |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Could you also tweet it in case some of us are away from our computers?
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Certainly didn't mean to offend, nor was I judging, and certainly not saying you trimmed the card.
All I was saying was it 'seems' as though it came back with a grade far off from what you agree with (hence starting a thread) I ve never sent a card in for regrade, I generally only buy a graded card if I actually agree with the grade it has, that way I avoid overpaying... Too much risk buying a card you think is under graded, then you find a flaw, and realize you're stuck with something you didn't want. So no, I don't crack slabs. That said, I think the way you present your cards is wonderful! I was simply trying, in my limited estimating skills, to guess an appropriate grade, which I said was either auth if deemed trimmed, or 2 if deemed factory cut |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
![]() I was simply curious if anyone else thought (as I did) that this card deserved a numerical grade ? And, I say this strictly for the following 2 reasons...... Since this T206 has an AMERICAN BEAUTY (AB) back, how can SGC discern that it was trimmed ? Considering the fact that there is no consistency in the dimensions of AB cards. Furthermore, I've seen many, many AB cards in the past 32 years that I've been collecting T206's. Occasionally, some of them do have rough Factory-cuts very similar to this card. Some of these rough-cut cards have been assigned numerical grades by PSA or SGC. Anyhow, you (and a number of responses here) have guessed correctly that it was graded an "A". . .![]() Thanks for everyone's responses. TED Z Last edited by tedzan; 05-21-2012 at 01:25 PM. |
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hey guys
Some here may be annoyed if I prolong this "game"; and then, others here will be happy to continue playing this game. So for the latter, I am posting two more of my AMERICAN BEAUTY's for you to guess their grades (A .... 10 >> 60). ![]() Thanx for your consideration, TED Z |
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I'm going to say PSA 2(mc) on the left, and PSA 1 poor on the right |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
![]() SGC 3 Gandil and SGC 1.5 Chance Last edited by Pup6913; 05-22-2012 at 02:02 PM. |
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
![]() TED Z |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Great cards, Ted.
Looking forward to seeing Gandil get a chance to "breathe." Or has he already been freed? |
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Same grade upgrade | ChiefBenderForever | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 05-19-2011 12:45 PM |
| Strip Card Grading, Authentic vs. Low Grade | abothebear | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 2 | 04-16-2011 08:23 PM |
| Many Graded 1950's-1980's High Grade F/S Final reduction before Ebay... | btcarfagno | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 13 | 07-23-2010 06:55 PM |
| High grade cards are undervalued | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 66 | 08-26-2005 03:37 PM |
| Strongly against the "Authentic" grade | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 02-01-2002 11:30 AM |