Options
Question on BGS Grading
Doublestriker
Posts: 547 ✭✭
Is the final grade on a BGS Slab the average of all the subs?
0
Doublestriker
Posts: 547 ✭✭
Doublestriker
Posts: 547 ✭✭
Doublestriker
Posts: 547 ✭✭
Doublestriker
Posts: 547 ✭✭
Comments
It's not a average of the subgrades since centering and corners are weighted more than surface, They call it a algorithm
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
WTB: PSA 1 - PSA 3 Centered, High Eye Appeal 1950's Mantle
Star Jordan
That seems like a lot to me.
<< <i>That seller has 8 BGS graded Star Jordan's for sale.
That seems like a lot to me. >>
His rant at the bottom was interesting, I am not sure why he felt the need:
Disclaimer: I am only listing this as Jordan's XRC because that is what the sports card industry technically considers it. It is not the seller's position that this card is an XRC nor do I believe that anyone with common sense respectively should take that position. This card was always considered Jordan's rookie card prior to the release of the 1986 Fleer card. Star Co. had an exclusive contract with the NBA for three years and the cards were distributed nationally. Certain cards were part of regular sets (three regular sets were issued from 1983-1986) and certain cards were part of subsets (i.e. Gatorade, Crunch, Lite, etc). The only explanation I have received thus far has been the Star Co. cards are designated as XRC’s for various players because the cards were not distributed in packs, but in set form, and analogized the Star cards to Topps Traded and Fleer Update sets. The statement that the Star Co. basketball cards were only distributed in set form, while incorrect, is meaningless. Other explanations have stated that the cards were not sold in packs in retail stores. Whether the cards were issued in packs, team bags or shot out of a cannonball is irrelevant because only Star Co. had a license with the NBA at the time.
The question is not if the Star cards are rookies, it is how they could not be considered rookies. An NBA rookie card is a player’s first appearance on a regular issue card from one of the major card producing companies that has a license with the NBA. If it is the position that these cards fit the definition of XRC and not rookie, then perhaps the definitions of XRC and/or rookie are wrong, or the industry’s interpretation is wrong. Star cards were not produced in set form. The regular issued sets were issued in team bags. It is not for us to say how the Star Co. should or should not have issued their cards, but certainly issuing cards in team bags is closer to the definition of issuing cards in packs than sets. How a team bag is analogous to a Topps Traded set which existed primarily for baseball players called up at the end of the season is known only to those who refuse to recognize a true rookie card. Topps also had a separate regular issued set when it issued Traded sets. It does not take a genius to know that Barry Bonds' 1986 Topps Traded card is his XRC and his 1987 Topps card is his rookie card.
The card listed is Star Co. 1984-85 #101 Michael Jordan that was part of Star’s regular issued second year set. This should be considered Jordan’s rookie card, but it is inexplicably labeled as an XRC. Michael Jordan had a second year Star Co. card, 1985-86 # 117, that was part of Star Co.’s regular issued third year set. The logic of how the card was released means that if Star had changed how it distributed its cards and his 1985-86 #117 card was released in “packs” and/or in a retail store, the Jordan second year Star Card (1985-86 #117) would actually be his rookie card and the Star Co. would have released his XRC (1984-85 #101) and his rookie card – his XRC being released for his rookie season and his rookie card being released for his sophomore year. Does that defy common sense? Would that have been the industry's determination?
Successful card BST transactions with cbcnow, brogurt, gstarling, Bravesfan 007, and rajah 424.