Results 1 to 10 of 14
-
05-09-2005, 07:27 PM #1
Grade Of, The Real One.
Hello and thanks again for your grading!
Here the Real grade and another by PSA with the same grade. Now you can see what is "Well rounded corners" and soft corner....:)
I like this Grading test.....If you have one with an over grading or under grading, I'm ready to "BE A GRADER". Thanks all.
-
-
05-09-2005, 07:40 PM #2
There has to be surface irregularities on that card. Based on corners, edges, centering alone, that is not a 4. Is that a small surface wrinkle/crease at the top middle ? And by the way, that 4 on the right, looks extremely generous to me. I'd leave that one in teh holder, but I'd crack that SGC 50 in a second assuming there is no surface problems, but I'm convinced there has to be.
-
05-09-2005, 08:02 PM #3
...... I said 4 and you were offended.......
-
-
05-09-2005, 08:22 PM #4
Originally Posted by envoy98
The card is clearly a low grade, Id be happy with the 50 and not crack it. The card on the right PSA was generous with though.
-
05-09-2005, 09:00 PM #5
Offended ?..no. This was a question for why do you put a 4 on it :)
-
-
05-09-2005, 09:16 PM #6
Originally Posted by BamaFan
I agree the card on the right got a very generous grade. It should be a 3 or maybe even a 2.
Why a 4? Well, 4 soft corners to start with. It also appears, unless this guy has a huge mole on his face, that there is a color blemish on his cheek of some sort.
-
05-09-2005, 09:21 PM #7
"Is that a small surface wrinkle/crease at the top middle ?" No. This is the a tiny scratch in the holder (If you need a larger scan let me know).
First of, this card has 4 toutched corners (Nothing very dramatic). Golssy & color are beautiful - No out of focus - centering at 60-40 left to right ???? - Up and down dead at 50/50 - and this card is UNDER graded....but I like it. I agree with many in this forum that the SGC holder are simply beautiful for vintage cards. I like the green label with the black border....PSA looks k-mart with the red & white label and no black back! (My opinion). I found this one with another World wide gum 1933 but with another player and with a grad of 5 from the same seller. I collect the 1950 Bowman baseball set and I look for some cards for my collection Graded or raw but with a minimum of EX+. I have some Older to trade, too. Willing to pay if you send me a clear scan of the back and front.
AGAIN...THANK ALL!!
-
-
05-09-2005, 09:59 PM #8
Ok, then why did you ask if you already know it's undergraded? The card is graded just right imo.
But whatever helps you sleep at night.
-
05-09-2005, 10:50 PM #9
That's what I noticed..Goudey's are(or seem to be) graded lenient.
As they say "Buy the Card" ...Not the holder.
-
05-09-2005, 10:54 PM #10
If that is indeed a sufrace blemish and not a mole (which is what I assumed it was) then a 4 is more appropriate as that is about the top grade SGC allows for that. The corners do show some wear, nothing terrible for a card that's 72 years old, but they do have wear. The edges are very good and probably warrant a NM grade. The corners are 3.5-6 IMO, and the centering is 7.5-8. Overall though, the eye appeal is terrific, and it's weird how good the centering actually is LR but how much it looks way off center. If you measure it out it's actually right about 61/39 but it looks worse than that which is why I would have allowed for the 1/2 grade deduction overall. The back centering is very good as well. So, like I said in my original post, if that is a surface blemish, or if there is a surface wrinkle we can't see (which never show up in scans) then a 4 is probably fair. If however thats a mole and the surface and gloss are good then I think it's undergraded. Either way, I think it's a great looking card.
-
