You be the judge OC or not?
slatsme
Posts: 193
This is my first time trying to post an image - if it does not work I am sorry, but you can tell me how to do it for the next time.
Thanks
Carpe Diem
0
Comments
I'd pass on that example. or if needed, I'd buy it at a greatly reduced price.
Steve
Before you post your scan, reduce the image size and that should clear up the cross-hatch patterns.
1977 Topps Star Wars - "Space Swashbucklers"
-- Yogi Berra
This was a rather large submission - either the guy got crosseyed looking at them or somewhere is a perfectly good 8 that has an OC?
mike
Steve
SD
The biggest argument in support of that position may be this:
There is not one person on this board, who would bat an eye, or raise a question,
if they saw that card for sale with an (OC) on the flip. The reason for that is that the
card appears to DESERVE the qualifier.
Not a totally ugly card, though. The OCs do not bother me much, but I want to
pay the "correct" price for the item.
("65/35 to 70/30 or better on the front," says PSA grading standard.)
I do not see the 30. Looks less than 25.
I do not feel like counting dots, but maybe somebody should. It might
have barely made it, appearance notwithstanding. But, my eye tells me "no."
storm
(Maybe it was not "a break.")
PSA might do well to consider dumping the weasel word "approximately,"
when they spell out the standards. "Approxiamtely 75/25," does not
really explain what the "standard" is. Does it mean 80/20? 78/22?
I dunno.
storm
<< <i>Stone; How do you know it was a large submission? Can you tell by the serial numbers? >>
I have had some "issues" with the 814/815... submissions numbers. It is a rather inexperienced grader (assumedly) that does grade large BULK submissions (fact).
In short, when you see 814/815, it suggests a bulk submission.....
I was wondering why my '33 Ruth with rounded corners and a wrinkle got an 8. It must've been a mix-up. Sorry man.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25