How much does the backs matter to you?

Buccaneer

To me, a card is about eye-appeal, which is why I value centering over corners, wrinkles, etc. But what about the backs? They are correctly taken into consideration when grading (for their centerness, presence of stains, etc.) but as a collector, would you value the eye-appeal of the front much more than the back, or not?

Here's a good example of two cards I just got:

The fronts:



The backs:

RG58

is that a wax stain/ scuff on the dodger card? That would bring the grade down 1- 2 notches. Looks like a PSA 7-8 that would have got a stain qualifier so I guess a 6 is the right grade without a qualifier. ( I personally could give two craps about the back stain considering they hang on my wall and no one ever sees the back)

I do not see any problem with the back of the Berra card except off center (but PSA should let that back centering go into a 9 holder in my experience if the rest of the card is a "9"). Corners look like a 7-8 but I perhaps there is another reason it ended up as a 6

Are you unhappy with the grades because you think PSA was tough on the backs?

mealeworm

I dont really see the problem... the yogi back is fine, OC but psa9 standards allow for 90/10. The staining on the back of the other makes it a 6. I have have horrible luck submitting 57's. I have been told that the off white borders hurt the grade alot. The last group I sent I did get decent grades Bank 7, Aaron 7, and Clemente 8( thought I had a 9 for sure), but they all had similar border color..

Buccaneer

That's the point, I am very happy to have these PSA 6 cards in my set (esp. for the price I got the Dodgers card). I bought these cards because of the fronts and since I display them on my wall too, the backs are hidden. I'm just wondering is how many others would buy cards just for their fronts?

krunchtyme

I feel eye appeal is the most important thing, as well. I own a raw 54' Jackie Robinson, that at first glance I think would be a solid 8, but some goof ball touched up the back with a marker. Still an awesome looking card. Backs don't matter much, but having said that, I still want to see the whole back and don't like cards where the back is extremely miscut.

calleocho

the back its not a big deal to me at all, unless the back itself adds to the value of the card.

When it comes to pre war, a lot of cards will often have some type of back damage due to so many of them being glued to albums .

If you are not picky about the back you can pick up some really good looking cards that have tape and glue residue on the back.

But, a lot of collectors do care quite a lot about backs.

I particulary dont care that much, but i would expect a big discount over a regular card with out back damage.

Axtell

Depends on the card. For higher end cards, I'd gladly have a card that has great eye appeal up front, even if the back is somewhat FUBAR. It's likely these types of conditions would be my only feasible shot at owning them.

If it's a newer card, or a card where the back is very eye-catching, I'd say the back is as important as the front, but I suspect there's a reason why PSA's grading for the back is more lax than the front.

liffeystynx

The back doesn't matter to me at all (except in sets where different backs are at issue - T206). So I get really (mildly, appropriately) irritated when the tiniest pencil notation on the rear of an otherwise appealing card gets me a MK qualifier or where tape residue on a previously mounted autographed card reduces it to a PSA 1.

I know, I know these are the rules ... but it doesn't exactly make my day.

PlayBall

The back means exactly ZERO to me. I have bought several PSA 2's, that had EX/MT-NM fronts, but varying degrees of paper loss on the back. That's good enough for me.

DS1991TOPPSCards

Speaking of the front... How can this card be a 9 with the front of the card OC????

Buccaneer

PSA 9 = Centering must be approximately 60/40 to 65/35 or better on the front

You are no more willing to accept a 9 within this range than I am to accept the upper ranges within the lower grades.

DS1991TOPPSCards

Thanks for the info... I have never seen a 9 that much off center! When does the 9OC come in???

Buccaneer

When it's 65/35 or more (up to the MC point).

TimeMachine

You guys need to put the pipe down... that Desert Shield Hernandez is at the worst 60-40 L-R... yes, even the newer or modern cards get the PSA 9 nod if the surface is clean, the corners are mint, and the centering on the front is 60-40 L-R OR T-B. I would not want to own a post '90 card in PSA 9 that was not close to 50-50-50-50, but that is my own taste and not part of the criteria for a PSA 9 of even the most recent cards.

I have seen PSA 10's with worse centering and so have most folks here ie the '86 Topps traded Barry Bonds RC... so many lousy 60-40 yet unchipped PSA 10's out there.

sjeanblanc2

The cards I like best are all on a shelf facing forward, so the back of the card is immaterial to me so long as its not "Miscut".

Scott J.

gmoneystyles

Never looked at the back as a kid, could care less if its a wax stain on the back. Gum stains bubble though and I wouldnt be happy about that. Or papere loss for that matter.

Davino

<< <i>Speaking of the front... How can this card be a 9 with the front of the card OC????


>>



That card looks fine, there are 10's out ther with such centering.