Does rubbed answer on '60s Phila. affect value?

Ripken

Wondering if the fact that the answers to the questions in the boxes on back of the '60s Phila. Football cards affects PSA's grading...and by how much?

wolfbear

PSA has no clear guidelines on this.
I remember a thread about 4 years ago and it seems that the consensus was an 8 max with a back rubbed off.

With some issues, parts of the backs start to show through whether they've been rubbed or not.
How about 'hit and miss' as a definitive answer ...

jaxxr

58 Topps FB same deal, quiz / question in box on back, must rub off wax to see answer.

I guess it really matters on how "clear" the answer eventually comes out. One with uneven lines or scratches very visible, probably does detract. A sharp revealed picture / cartoon should not greatly harm the visual appeal.

When those cards were issued, was it not the intent of the company to induce the buyer to remove the coating and reveal the entire card in full ? I know it's a stretch...but with the picture still covered isn't it a little like a wax stain which hides some of the original printing ?

As mentioned, PSA has no absolute policy on this, possibly that's good because if a very nice and gentle job was done in rubbing, and the uncovered picture is sharp, why would it lessen the eye appeal as opposed to a blank wax-like substance hiding some of the original printing ? It might be best for each card to be judged / graded separately on the rubbing's true effect on the way the back of the specific card looks.

Fuzz

As Wolfbear eludes, I have seen as many different answers as I have posters.
When you figure it out, PLEASE let us know.
Fuzz

Aaronman

Aaronman

Although there is no stated policy at PSA that I can find, here's what I have found to be true (and fairly consistent). The hidden picture or text can be visible. Some of the pictures show over time without being rubbed. Whether the picture shows or not does not seem to impact the card. What does is how hard it's rubbed. If there is evidence of rubbing (i.e. impressions on the front of the card from rubbing the back, scratches or scuffs from rubbing too hard on the back) the card ends up a 6. I have had several 58, 60, Philly FB, Parkhurst hockey come back as 6's. The cards resemble NM-MT but after further inspection I found that the cards had been rubbed with the side of a coin. In my opinion PSA has been pretty consistent about 6'ing these cards. By the same toke I can't say that I check every 8 that I get back to see if the back was rubbed and it slipped through.

Doug

Mantlefan

I have some PSA 10's with the back "Rubbed".

stevek

<< <i>I have some PSA 10's with the back "Rubbed". >>



I never have seen that but I'll take your word for it. But a rubbed card shouldn't get a 10. The surface has to be "altered" usually done with a coin edge, to get the image to appear and that really should downgrade a card because that card for sure is no longer a mint card. Personally, I will not buy a high grade card that has been rubbed. In my opinion a rub should automatically knock a card down to about a 5, just like a slight wrinkle does.

WinPitcher

1964 topps baseball is another issue that had an area for an answer to be rubbed off.

IMO a card could still be considered 'mint' with the area rubbed. gem mint is a stretch though.

Steve

Mantlefan

Agree Steve. I had a PSA 10 1964 Topps Bill Stafford with a rubbed back. It was a 1 of 1 so I couldn't return it, but I was disappointed in PSA.

WinPitcher

Frank

I can see that a card could get the gem designation even with the area rubbed. The card is perfect in every other area, centering etc. and the rub is not scratched off but gently rubbed. i see no problem with cards getting a 10. My use of the word 'stretch' was prolly not a great one to use.

Steve

jaxxr

Is it not possible some of the coverings or wax-like coatings on the quiz, will perhaps decompose by natural means,.. evaporation, dissipation, drying, or magic even ??

Some are over 40 years old, produced with a technology of the past, maybe the coating will just wear off by itself as time goes by, therefore no rubbing whatsoever was involved.

Regardless, it seems the quality of the revealed picture ( and it's surface around it ) shoud be of the utmost importance, not merely if it is present and visible, or if it is unviewable and still covered by wax.