thoughts on this grade?

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott 

This seems like a pretty liberal "good", but keep in mind that I am very supportive of SGC and don't beat me too hard for my comments

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2718705631&category=31718

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I was going thru some of the set registry. Check out the Goodwin Champions registered set. There are some cards there that will make you shake your head as why they got such a generous grade. Hope this isn't what is coming out of SGC since the departure of Derek Grady.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: Albie O'Hanian

I put in a couple of bids on the card and it never crossed my mind that it was a "generous" good. I suppose it could have been graded lower but it is not that bad a card. I do not think it would have sold for any less had it been graded one grade (or one half grade) lower.

[Archive]

Posted By: petecld

Jay,

I sent in over 60 cards to SGC after Derek left and compared to ones that were graded when Derek worked there I will say that the term "generous grade" hasn't been added to their mission statement. I found they were graded as they were when Derek was there.

As for the N300 on ebay - I would say it's maybe one grade high but it still isn't a horrible card.

BTW - going by the number on the N300 holder that is an old SGC grade.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Pete, good to hear. As much I want my cards to get a high grade, I don't want it becuase the graders are getting lax. I didn't look that close at the labels on teh Goodwins, but they did seem older, but not really old labels that are obviously differnt.

The Mayo is that bad off on grade. I've attached one that is grossly overgraded.



Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: leonl

In my amateur opinion this is not overgraded unless there is a crease I can't see or back damage. I would say with the corners rounded and no creases and a clean back....then a 40-50 is correct....maybe I am too lenient?.....just my 1/2 cent worth

[Archive]

Posted By: runscott

but the Mayo looked fairly trashed in my opinion - bad crease, tape on back, major scuffing and staining.

[Archive]

Posted By: Keith O'Leary

I need to add my 2 cents here. The N43 in question was submitted to SGC by me and I'm also assuming Jay is talking about my non baseball N162s in the registry.

All the Goodwins and the N43 Kerrigan were graded under the Derek Grady "tenure". If memory serves me correctly, the N43 has a nice clean back, no creases, with the only detrement being the corners.

Unfortunately, scans of the backs of these cards are not shown although they are considered when a card is graded. In fact, many attributes and detrements are considered as a whole before assigning a grade along with the black and white issues such as creasing.

Take a look at my N162 Glasscock. This is an absolutely beautiful card that has some very very minor "wrinkling" in the top surface of paper on the front. It has a super clean back, but because of the wrinkling (probably can't even be seen in the scan), it got a 40. As said many times over here on the board, "buy the card, not the holder".

Take a look at the N2 Indians I have registered if you want to see how "lenient" has become. ALL these cards were graded under the Scott and Bob regime (none of these have any back problems to speak of incidently).

My cards will continue to go to SGC.

[Archive]

Posted By: petecld

Jay,

I don't think this card is graded that off. Assuming there aren't any craeses we can't see I would have given this card a 40 and that's only because the centering is off the card.

With 70/30 or 60/40 centering I would say this card is a 50.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

the 50 was generous due to centering. I'd have said 40 on it.

As far as grading goes lately, I think SGC's standards are about the same. They beat the heck out of me on a decent N29 with a couple of creases in it (I saw it as a good card, they said fair). My first batch of cross-overs (1948 Leaf boxing, PSA to SGC) were appropriately graded. Most of the PSA 7's I had were really nice 7's, and they drew 86's from SGC. They only rejected two cards as over graded (I told them not to bust 'em out if the SGC grades were lower than the PSA grades), both by one grade. I will probably resubmit them raw and see what they receive. The real test will be the N43 I just got. It is really solid ex to ex+ at least; let's see what they think.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

problems with this card; a diamond cut and no right boarder to speak of. To be generous, you can claim 90/10 centering becuase of the diamond cut, but even then, it shouldn't grade any better than 40 by SGc guidelines.

I geuss my basis for comparision is this card:



It has a slightly more pronounced diamond cut, corners that show the slightest wear and no problems with the back or any staining of any type.

I look at the cards I have had graded as a base. Either I had most of my cards graded really harsh, or others have caught SGC on a good day. I have one card that totally baffles me as to why it was downgraded so much. That, or SGC hates non-sports cards and automatically downgrades them a grade or two on principle :-p

This also points out why grading companies need to ahve a greater differntiation of grades at lower levels for vintage cards. Most modern cards ar NM/Mt and need the multiple grades in that area, but most vintage cards exist in the VG range, and much large seperation of grades is needed for vintage cards. This also bares out the point, buy the card, not the holder, as I doubt many here would say the N43 is the same grade as the Roosevelt.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I should correct myself, the N43 doesn't have a diamond cut, the print is skewed a bit. The left hand side is slightly higher than the left.

Jay

[Archive]

Posted By: scott brockelman

I SENT IN A GROUP OF CARDS SEVERAL WEEKS AGO, AND RECEIVED THEM BACK A FEW DAYS AGO, LONG AFTER THE PREDICTED DATE AND TO MY AMAZEMENT(OR DISBELIEF) FOUND THEY DID NOT GRADE SEVERAL OF THE M116'S, CLAIMING THEY WERE TRIMMED!, THESE WERE FULL SIZE, EVEN OVER SIZE CARDS, ALL FROM AN ORIGINAL GROUP I PURCHASED A FEW YEARS AGO, NOW BEFORE YOU JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS, 2 WERE GRADED! AN 84 AND AND 80. THE REST WERE REJECTED, MY POINT IS THIS, ALL CARDS ARE TRIMMED, EITHER MECHANICALLY BY CUTTING BLADES OR SCISSORS AT THE TIME OF PRODUCTION. OR, TRIMMED POST PRODUCTION TO IMPROVE THEIR VALUE. IT IS NOT THAT DIFFICULT TO ASCERTAIN THE STATUS OF EITHER "IF" YOU COLLECT THAT PARTICULAR SET OR KNOW CARDS. THESE WERE NOT TRIMMED! I KNOW THE DIFFERENCE! THE PEOPLE AT SGC AND PSA AND THE REST OF THE LOT, DO NOT COLLECT SQUAT, OTHER THAN A BIWEEKLY PAY CHECK. <P>
IF YOU COLLECT AND EXAMINE A SET WITH ANY REVERENCE AT ALL YOU LEARN THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SET AND EACH AND EVERY CARD. I CAN, & SEVERAL OTHERS ON THIS BOARD CAN, ENLIGHTEN A PERSON ON EACH & EVERY CARD IN THE SET THAT THEY SPECIALIZE IN OR COLLECT. WHY WOULD ANYONE PUT THEIR FAITH IN A PERSON THAT DOES NOT HAVE HANDS ON KNOWLEDGE WITH THE SUBJECT AT HAND?

JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT. MY POSITION ON GRADING HAS NOT CHANGED, IF YOU ARE SELLING GREAT, IF BUYING, CAVEAT EMPTOR.

SCOTT

[Archive]

Posted By: scott brockelman

i believe the person who bought it may have paid a small premium based on the fact that it was a baltimore player, which always seem to bring a premium.

despite the technical grade, which was a bit overgraded in my amateurish opinion, i think they would say they got a "deal". as you will find in collecting to each his own, i have paid "way more than book" for something i wanted and was happy as bill clinton at a wet t-shirt contest.



scott

[Archive]

Posted By: Bill Cornell

I just got back a lot of 36 T205's and T207's from SGC, 12 of which got knocked down as "trimmed" (one is "recolored"). The grades were also well below where I expected them to be. If this was my first submission to SGC, I would merely be very disappointed, but I have submitted many cards from both of these sets to them before and I cannot believe that I was wrong about the integrity of 36% of them. Also, the graded cards do not match up at all with others I have.

I think the regime change in grading there has imposed a new standard on cards that is not just harsh, but also wrong. I truly wish that this was not the case, but I am not submitting any cards to them again. Which means, I guess, that I'm not submitting any cards at all.

Bill

[Archive]

Posted By: Brian H.

As to the card at issue I guess I would give it a "20/1.5" (I think that's really just a half grade lower in PSA lingo anyway.) The price seems OK. After all this card is not exactly popping up every day on Ebay; the grading suggests (or even dictates to many) that it is legit; the player is a HOFer and part of that "Old Orioles" crew to boot. Frankly I might have paid as much although I would probably rather have one graded down for scrapbook removal than for all that image wear on the front.

I've gotten back a few post "Regime Change" cards -- T205s and T202s -- and for the most part I would say that they graded about 1 notch lower than I expected based on past SGC experience. (Using the phrase Regime Change makes me feel real important, like Donald Rumsfeld or something) These newly graded T205s will be making it up on Ebay in the next few days in case your curious. (a very sneaky plug!) I also have about 12 more coming back in the next few days and fear more slightly lower grades.

I also recently submitted a bunch to PSA (at the show in Chicago) and I'll recap that experience when I get them back. Part of the submission was to see how PSA did with T205s and T202s and another part was two complete sets I wanted graded.

[Archive]

Posted By: Keith O'Leary

I agree with Jay, SGC seems to be tougher on non baseball cards, but heres a comparison. Top is new regime, bottom is old.

[Archive]

Posted By: david

i would say the robinson mayo is not as bad as other mayos i have seen graded by sgc. not to pick on mw but i think the delehanty, and the ward he has on ebay now, are overgraded. personally for either of those two cards to argue over a grade or half a grade is moot since they rarely come up for auction.

[Archive]

Posted By: MW

Delehanty? Ward?

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

I sent in one with a near mint front but a back stain and got a 4. Mine looks a heck of a lot nicer than this one (no offense) What the ????