NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 03-20-2017, 12:25 PM
smellthegum smellthegum is offline
Dave Waugh
member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 51
Default

Anyone else find it odd that some instances of added color only merit note as a (MK) qualifier while others reduce a card to 'A' status -- especially when, on purposely altered cards, the marks are usually less obtrusive than accidental markings? I guess it all depends on where the mark happens to be. If it's strategically placed in a matching color and is hard to see it's bad. If it's occurred randomly and easy to spot it's merely a footnote on the grade.

Not passing judgement of the legitimacy/acceptability of doctored OR marked cards, just that I find it to be sort of a double standard among TPGs that one form is OK while the other doesn't even merit a grade. They're both instances of foreign matter being applied to a card. It's as if the graders are assuming and grading the intent rather than the actual condition.
__________________
In progress
----------------------------------
1952 Topps low 222/310 Need Mays and Pafko!
1967 Topps 251/609
1970 Kellogg's
1954 Bowman
1965 Topps
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-20-2017, 01:37 PM
Timbegs Timbegs is offline
Tim B
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 126
Default

As far as I know, altered cards submitted to SGC can't receive anything better than 'A'. If it's altered in any way (see prior posted link in this thread for the full list of alterations that will get a card rejected) it cannot receive a numerical grade. So at least with SGC, it seems to me that intent is actually not a factor. Altered should mean ungradeable, I'm my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-21-2017, 08:24 AM
Leon's Avatar
Leon Leon is offline
Leon
peasant/forum owner
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: near Dallas
Posts: 23,645
Default

As you said, I think it comes down to motive. If the mark was added to in-color or make a card look better it will get an AUT. IF it is an errant/stray mark it will get an MK or a few grades (or more) lower at SGC. That is my experience. I don't really have a problem with it. Others might...

Quote:
Originally Posted by smellthegum View Post
Anyone else find it odd that some instances of added color only merit note as a (MK) qualifier while others reduce a card to 'A' status -- especially when, on purposely altered cards, the marks are usually less obtrusive than accidental markings? I guess it all depends on where the mark happens to be. If it's strategically placed in a matching color and is hard to see it's bad. If it's occurred randomly and easy to spot it's merely a footnote on the grade.

Not passing judgement of the legitimacy/acceptability of doctored OR marked cards, just that I find it to be sort of a double standard among TPGs that one form is OK while the other doesn't even merit a grade. They're both instances of foreign matter being applied to a card. It's as if the graders are assuming and grading the intent rather than the actual condition.
__________________
Leon Luckey
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-21-2017, 12:57 PM
pokerplyr80's Avatar
pokerplyr80 pokerplyr80 is offline
je.sse @rnot
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: California
Posts: 2,337
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbegs View Post
As far as I know, altered cards submitted to SGC can't receive anything better than 'A'. If it's altered in any way (see prior posted link in this thread for the full list of alterations that will get a card rejected) it cannot receive a numerical grade. So at least with SGC, it seems to me that intent is actually not a factor. Altered should mean ungradeable, I'm my opinion.
I'd have to research to find an example but I believe I have seen a prewar card with a stamp on the back in an SGC holder with a numerical grade. I don't have a problem with this, or in the case of a pen or pencil mark. As Leon mentioned I do see a distinction between a stray mark or stamp and recoloring or trimming to enhance a cards appearance.
__________________
Successful transactions with peter spaeth, don's cards, vwtdi, wolf441, 111gecko, Clydewally, Jim, SPMIDD, MattyC, jmb, botn, E107collector, begsu1013, and a few others.

http://www.collectorfocus.com/collection/pokerplyr80
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-21-2017, 02:02 PM
Timbegs Timbegs is offline
Tim B
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 126
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerplyr80 View Post
I'd have to research to find an example but I believe I have seen a prewar card with a stamp on the back in an SGC holder with a numerical grade. I don't have a problem with this, or in the case of a pen or pencil mark. As Leon mentioned I do see a distinction between a stray mark or stamp and recoloring or trimming to enhance a cards appearance.
I'd love to see it produced. As far as I know, that's not how SGC works.

Sometimes, a card can have a stray mark sneak through - anywhere. In addition, some sets with sloppy production value produce 'marked' cards that often have stray printing marks. Good luck finding a 1969 Topps Super Mays without the print spot. It does happen in other sets too. The printing of the Red Hearts resulted in many speckled cards. Around the name, team and position.

As for the stamp, I know some 'sets' were created by collectors, in a way. There's a guy on here who is pursuing a T206 set that has been hit with a personalized stamp on the back by their original owner (pretty darn good thread). He's got a bunch and wants them all. A set within the set, in a way. As such, perhaps PSA or SGC would be willing to work with a collector in that way. I'm not entirely sure.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-21-2017, 02:51 PM
smellthegum smellthegum is offline
Dave Waugh
member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 51
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Timbegs View Post
I'd love to see it produced. As far as I know, that's not how SGC works.
Here are a few examples, but maybe they've changed their policies. I don't know how old these are:
T212 Obak with stamp
36 Diamond Stars (this is alleged to be printer's ink, but could be anything)
59 Topps with pen
71 OPC with pen
__________________
In progress
----------------------------------
1952 Topps low 222/310 Need Mays and Pafko!
1967 Topps 251/609
1970 Kellogg's
1954 Bowman
1965 Topps

Last edited by smellthegum; 03-21-2017 at 02:52 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-21-2017, 03:06 PM
nat's Avatar
nat nat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 323
Default

How would the guy on the phone know why your card got an A? Do they keep records of all the cards that they grade? (And if so, why not send it along with the card when they return it?) I mean, there's no way this guy remembers grading this card. He must grade a thousand cards a day. Or maybe when you spend your day peering through the glare off of Kris Bryant and Mike Trout cards you actually do remember grading a 1953 Mantle?
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-21-2017, 04:17 PM
Timbegs Timbegs is offline
Tim B
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 126
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nat View Post
How would the guy on the phone know why your card got an A? Do they keep records of all the cards that they grade? (And if so, why not send it along with the card when they return it?) I mean, there's no way this guy remembers grading this card. He must grade a thousand cards a day. Or maybe when you spend your day peering through the glare off of Kris Bryant and Mike Trout cards you actually do remember grading a 1953 Mantle?
I'm going to assume an electronic record of some kind is kept. He described the damage like he had the card in front of him. I was also briefly placed on hold while he 'retrieved his records.'

I can also say that when I went in person the first, they had 2 of the ten I had submitted not slabbed and had a printed flip with the reason for defect (I had a 69 Topps Mantle that was trimmed and a 62 Topps that had color added. They told me it would only take a minute to slab them. Which I had them do since I like the look, though I have since upgraded.

Last edited by Timbegs; 03-21-2017 at 04:21 PM. Reason: Posted to quick...
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-21-2017, 04:39 PM
Timbegs Timbegs is offline
Tim B
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 126
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smellthegum View Post
Here are a few examples, but maybe they've changed their policies. I don't know how old these are:
T212 Obak with stamp
36 Diamond Stars (this is alleged to be printer's ink, but could be anything)
59 Topps with pen
71 OPC with pen
You learn something new every day. Perhaps they just slipped thru? None of them seem high grade to begin with so perhaps it was done quickly and overlooked? I have always wondered exactly how much time is spent on a card. I'd imagine more on a high value card than a post 1970s card. Tobacco cards seem to have the craziest variations (stamps, ghost images, crazy miscuts, color fade; to name a few) so maybe the stamp is explainable, just not by me. The Robinson has me stumped - that's a bad slip. That Mantle couldn't grade better than Poor so maybe the grader just casually flipped it and holstered it. The blurry picture and unattractive nature makes it hard to see but somethings up. Interesting and makes me wonder how the process al works. In my head it's like NASA but it could be a guy in a dark room with a flashlight for all I know. I wanted to ask if I could have a tour when they were in NJ but felt like that probably crossed a line...

That said, I appreciate the info and the work you did. Information is king. I'll be more careful when looking fat graded cards for sure.

This turned into a decent little thread, huh?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-21-2017, 04:46 PM
mickey7mantle7's Avatar
mickey7mantle7 mickey7mantle7 is offline
David (30%) Hall
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: TX
Posts: 250
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nat View Post
How would the guy on the phone know why your card got an A? Do they keep records of all the cards that they grade? (And if so, why not send it along with the card when they return it?) I mean, there's no way this guy remembers grading this card. He must grade a thousand cards a day. Or maybe when you spend your day peering through the glare off of Kris Bryant and Mike Trout cards you actually do remember grading a 1953 Mantle?


Card grades and notes are documented and kept on record via the serial number on the flip.

Some companies like CGC (comic grading) charges extra for the grading notes like said example ^ if you want them.
__________________
**Mainly collecting anything Mickey Mantle**
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hobby question bowman and topps question 1950 to 1953 Bigdah Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 9 12-20-2016 08:55 PM
1955 Topps Trivia Question - Updated with Question #2 toppcat Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) 9 01-03-2012 09:51 PM
SGC grading question (possible dumb question) Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 6 09-08-2006 02:36 AM
Player question & a set question Archive Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions 4 11-13-2004 08:41 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:33 AM.


ebay GSB