the new NM standard
cravetopps
Posts: 1,134
Mark B.
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
0
Comments
All 6 of 'em!
Arthur
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
Huh?
Cards in true very good condition are pleasing to the eye. There are dogs in every grade.
Steve
<< <i>there is nothing "very good" about a card in very good condition.
Huh?
Cards in true very good condition are pleasing to the eye. There are dogs in every grade.
Steve >>
There is nothing very good about a card in very good condition. It is a low end grade. Argue all you like. If you collect them, great. My post is what it is. A card in very good condition has been abused--and furthermore, it books at what 15% of the near mint price? Seriously, if you want a reason to fight, look elsewhere, perhaps when you have a leg to stand on!
<< <i>there is nothing "very good" about a card in very good condition.
Huh?
Cards in true very good condition are pleasing to the eye. There are dogs in every grade.
Steve >>
I agree with you Steve, this "Very Good" looking card looks very good to me.
That is a lousy scan. The colors are very vibrant.
MY GOLD TYPE SET https://pcgs.com/setregistry/type-sets/complete-type-sets/gold-type-set-12-piece-circulation-strikes-1839-1933/publishedset/321940
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
<< <i>
<< <i>there is nothing "very good" about a card in very good condition.
Huh?
Cards in true very good condition are pleasing to the eye. There are dogs in every grade.
Steve >>
There is nothing very good about a card in very good condition. It is a low end grade. Argue all you like. If you collect them, great. My post is what it is. A card in very good condition has been abused--and furthermore, it books at what 15% of the near mint price? Seriously, if you want a reason to fight, look elsewhere, perhaps when you have a leg to stand on! >>
That's you opinion, not fact.
Some people exclusively collect low-end grades and you are slapping them in their face.
<< <i>I think we would all agree that the designation "VG" for very good is really a grading term which most non-hobby people would not really appreciate or understand. It's a convention in our hobby. When you think about it, it is probably as much a marketing ploy than anything else. I mean, on a scale of 1-10, when is a 3 considered "Very Good" in anything except card grading? But I would agree that there is a huge difference between the eye appeal of a vintage VG (3) and a modern VG (3). A 53 Mantle VG (3) is going to look a heck of a lot better to me than a 2005 Pujols VG (3). >>
Exactly, and that's what I said in my post. The point of my posts are lost on trolls who do nothing but pick them apart to start flame wars. The grading standard "good, very good, excellent" are misleading to people outside the hobby. They are misleading because if I knew nothing about cards and I saw a "mint" card, I might refer to it as "very good". Yet if I graded a card "very good", people would be expecting a PSA 3, a heavily worn card. It has nothing to do with attacking what people like to collect -- my GOD people are assinine fools. However, if anyone was offended by my post, I'm thrilled. They are the very people that are worth offending. Screw them. This confusion over grading terms (my second point) is a loophole whereby some dealers will describe worn cards as "I don't know much about cards but this is in VERY GOOD CONDITION!!!" (implying something better than the hobby recognized "very good" grade). Meanwhile, people who know nothing about cards are inclined to describe near mint and mint examples as "very good", because those are the APPROPRIATE ADJECTIVES to describe something that is near flawless. In baseball cards, the adjectives used to describe cards do not follow their dictionary meanings. The third point, of course, is that the only two grades that actually follow an understood meaning across the board is "near mint" and "mint". When applied incorrectly, it doesn't matter who is doing it, there is no excuse. Something cannot be "near mint EXCEPT", especially when that exception is a torn off corner.
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
lastly, I do have a leg to stand on as cards that are TRUE to the grade are pleasing to the eye. I do not care if they are valued lower then NM.
So basically you (basestealer) are again FOS. You make blanket statements and have been proved wrong. Admit it and move on.
Steve
You said no such thing. You rambled on about a 65 mustang (that you do not even have)
Steve
Mark
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
<< <i>First off i was not looking for a fight, secondly I am not the troll you are.
lastly, I do have a leg to stand on as cards that are TRUE to the grade are pleasing to the eye. I do not care if they are valued lower then NM.
So basically you (basestealer) are again FOS. You make blanket statements and have been proved wrong. Admit it and move on.
Steve >>
No, nutcase, I will not admit it and move on, because I made no such statement. You are arguing with an invisible man over an invisible issue--I never said anything to spark your retorts, and they are idiotic and absurd. I never stated whether or not a "good" or "very good" condition card was pleasing to the eye or worth collecting. I never commented on it, therefore I won't admit I was wrong about something I didn't comment on, nor will I further expand on an issue that has nothing to do with this thread.
I made 2 posts to this thread, and what I said is there for all to read. I realize you cannot read, much less comprehend, so why not pound sand? Turn red with rage and beat fisticuffs against the wall? I've explained it so well, I've broken it down for a toddler to get, but you still don't understand. There's not much else I'm willing to do to get my point across.
On a 10 point scale, a "2" or "good" is about as low as you can get--it's on the bottom rung of that scale. My POINT (which you miss, intentionally) is that is counter-intuitive to call something "good" when it's not "good", it can't be "good" as the dictionary defines it, because it's a heavily worn card, and 7 levels lower than MINT, which intuitively, is "good". But in this hobby, those are the acceptable words we use to grade cards, whether anyone likes it or not. My POINT (which you miss, intentionally) is that ----SEE ABOVE. I won't rewrite it for a third time. Have a pleasant day, angry boy.
<< <i>Exactly, and that's what I said in my post.
You said no such thing. You rambled on about a 65 mustang (that you do not even have)
Steve >>
It's pathetic that you would say such a thing, since it's a lie, and my full post clearly agreed, albeit with more words and analogy (things your education level forbids you to grasp). Here it is again since scrolling up might also be a handicap for you:
Dealers should use industry-standard terms when describing the condition of their cards, period. I've seen plenty of people selling horribly worn cards describing them as "VERY GOOD CONDITION!!!!", the exclamation points suggesting that the "very good" is an adjective to describe a superior card, when in fact there is nothing "very good" about a card in very good condition. And while there is obvious confusion and the the opportunity for double speak in mid and lower grade terminology (good, very good, excellent, etc), there is absolutely no wiggle room when referring to a card as mint or near mint. It either is or it isn't, and if you don't know, don't advertise it as such. "This a near mint card, with near mint corners, except one corner is completely TORN OFF!". Come on. My '65 mustange is a mint condition car too, except that doesn't run. But everything else is cherry. The body isn't rusted, because it has no body. In fact, I don't even have a '65 mustang. What sort of logic is this, and why would anyone attempt to use it? At least with this auction the picture clearly shows the card is in POOR condition with an entire corner ripped off--thus, "near mint" certainly isn't going to deceive anyone except the blind who can't look at the picture. And its going to turn off experienced collectors. Furthermore, the other 3 corners are NOT "near mint". They are very good-excellent at best. I'd tend to think the seller of this card knew nothing about them, if not for the user's ID which has "PSA" in it.
show me exactly where you said the above?
where you compared a VG vitage with a VG modern?
where you stated it was a marketing ploy?
Listen, no one was offended by what you said. You made a statement and I tried to respectfully (at first) reply. You of course have to take everything said as a challange.
in closing i will say again, TRUE VG CARDS can be pleasing to the eye.
what is so hard for you to grasp? Not all vg cards are dogs. People that know the hobby know what VG means. Those that don't will find out.
Steve
(where have I sen you before)?
first it was: there is nothing VG about a vg card.
now you say: you see so many people claiming cards are VG when they are ripped etc.
NO CRAP
stick to one thing basestealer.
Yes I agree, I too, see many people claiming cards are VG when in fact they should be called poor.
how does that translate that there is nothing very good about a very good card?
Steve
funnier
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
<< <i>LOL you keep changing what you say.
(where have I sen you before)?
first it was: there is nothing VG about a vg card.
now you say: you see so many people claiming cards are VG when they are ripped etc.
NO CRAP
stick to one thing basestealer.
Yes I agree, I too, see many people claiming cards are VG when in fact they should be called poor.
how does that translate that there is nothing very good about a very good card?
Steve >>
You continue to miss my point, entirely. You're obsessed with what I think or don't think about the eye appeal of a VG card, when I have not and continue to avoid making any statement about the matter. I said, and I've said this 4 times now, that the connotative meanings of the grades we apply to baseball cards, using the industry standard, do not agree with the dictionary definitions of those same terms. This is a fact, and this is all that I have said, that you keep harping on.
Here's an example for you to put into perspective.
The dictionary defines "good" as:
"of high quality; excellent"
Sports card grading standards define "good" as:
"Good 2 card's corners show accelerated rounding and surface wear is starting to become obvious. A good card may have scratching, scuffing, light staining, or chipping of enamel on obverse. There may be several creases. Original gloss may be completely absent. Card may show considerable discoloration."
I said: "there is nothing very good (dictionary defined adjectives) about a very good card". You can clearly see that the dictionary's definition of something "very good" does not equal what the hobby labels a "very good" card. I've wasted more time on this (Just like everything common sense I have to defend in this miserable hellhole) subject than was ever worthy.
You said that there is nothing Very good about a very good card!
I replied to that.
you then went on 13 different tangents.
No, I did not miss your point.
you missed mine.
I said: "there is nothing very good (dictionary defined adjectives) about a very good card".
LOL you did? You may have said that now, but YOU DID NOT say that then. Stop twisting.
Steve
Steve
<< <i>Listen
You said that there is nothing Very good about a very good card!
I replied to that.
you then went on 13 different tangents.
No, I did not miss your point.
you missed mine.
I said: "there is nothing very good (dictionary defined adjectives) about a very good card".
LOL you did? You may have said that now, but YOU DID NOT say that then. Stop twisting.
Steve >>
Do you have trouble following articles in magazines, newspapers, and books? Writing is a skill that assumes the audience can follow. I twisted nothing. From the very start I was discussing the industry terms versus the dictionary terms. It was assumed and implied that "there is nothing very good about a very good card" meant that there is nothing very good (dictionary defined adjective) about a very good condition card (heavily worn card, low-end PSA scale) because it was IN CONTEXT. If you cannot comprehend context, then nothing I ever say will ever make sense to you. And I believe I requested you ignore me before--but you can't seem to do that. Taking my sentence out of context changes the meaning, which is what you did, and you either did it maliciously or because you didn't get it to begin with. If I give you the benefit of the doubt and go with the latter, it still doesn't make posting with you any less frustrating.
I guess I must have <eyeroll> missed that part about the dictionary and all of your latest crapola that you now claim you said.
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/
Steve
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
You made a statement (i did not take it out of context) i quoted you word for word. I disagreed with you and you blew a gasket. the only one here that seems to be not getting it is you.
the truth of the matter is that TRUE VERY GOOD CARDS can be graded properly? Not everyone claims trash is very good, some of us (that have brains) can differentiate between true VG and crap.
I hope this penetrates that thick skull of yours.
Steve
No. and I do not have trouble following the nonsense that you spew.
Steve
<< <i>Dealers should use industry-standard terms when describing the condition of their cards, period. I've seen plenty of people selling horribly worn cards describing them as "VERY GOOD CONDITION!!!!", the exclamation points suggesting that the "very good" is an adjective to describe a superior card, when in fact there is nothing "very good" about a card in very good condition. And while there is obvious confusion and the the opportunity for double speak in mid and lower grade terminology (good, very good, excellent, etc), there is absolutely no wiggle room when referring to a card as mint or near mint. It either is or it isn't, and if you don't know, don't advertise it as such. "This a near mint card, with near mint corners, except one corner is completely TORN OFF!". Come on. My '65 mustange is a mint condition car too, except that doesn't run. But everything else is cherry. The body isn't rusted, because it has no body. In fact, I don't even have a '65 mustang. What sort of logic is this, and why would anyone attempt to use it? At least with this auction the picture clearly shows the card is in POOR condition with an entire corner ripped off--thus, "near mint" certainly isn't going to deceive anyone except the blind who can't look at the picture. And its going to turn off experienced collectors. Furthermore, the other 3 corners are NOT "near mint". They are very good-excellent at best. I'd tend to think the seller of this card knew nothing about them, if not for the user's ID which has "PSA" in it.
I guess I must have <eyeroll> missed that part about the dictionary and all of your latest crapola that you now claim you said.
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????/
Steve >>
You clearly aren't on par with with the audience my posts were intended to reach. You've quoted me where I clearly define what I'm saying, but then use that quote to illustrate how I never said what I clearly said. Everything to you is "spin", "twist"--what the hell is wrong with you mentally? Why would I say something and then deny what it meant? You have issues. You can't accept posts for what they are, and you sure as hell refuse to accept clarification--you want to "win" something. You've got it in your ID. You win. So now you should be happy.
it depends, if a TRUE VG t3 was offered for the same price as a Nmnt with pinholes I may take the VG example.
Steve
that is all everyone needs to know about you basestealer.
and you say i twist?
LOL
Steve
as far as calling a card with a torn off corner nm, I can't comment on that one
<< <i>Actually many of those Turkey Reds have the pin hole. they ca appear to be ex, nmnt etc. however the dreaded pinhole grades them out as poor 1
Steve >>
I'll take those all day over a true VG card! I like eye appeal, and dont like basestealer.
<< <i>...And while there is obvious confusion and the the opportunity for double speak .... >>
<< <i>There is nothing very good about a card in very good condition. It is a low end grade. Argue all you like. If you collect them, great. My post is what it is. A card in very good condition has been abused >>
My daughter was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at the age of 2 (2003). My son was diagnosed with Type 1 when he was 17 on December 31, 2009. We were stunned that another child of ours had been diagnosed. Please, if you don't have a favorite charity, consider giving to the JDRF (Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation)
JDRF Donation
Seeking primarily PSA graded pre-war "type" cards
My PSA Registry Sets
34 Goudey, 75 Topps Mini, Hall of Fame Complete Set, 1985 Topps Tiffany, Hall of Fame Players Complete Set
Why is that PSA 2 Robinson a 2? back problems? crease(s)? corner wear?
John
HOF SIGNED FOOTBALL RCS
<< <i>
<< <i>I think we would all agree that the designation "VG" for very good is really a grading term which most non-hobby people would not really appreciate or understand. It's a convention in our hobby. When you think about it, it is probably as much a marketing ploy than anything else. I mean, on a scale of 1-10, when is a 3 considered "Very Good" in anything except card grading? But I would agree that there is a huge difference between the eye appeal of a vintage VG (3) and a modern VG (3). A 53 Mantle VG (3) is going to look a heck of a lot better to me than a 2005 Pujols VG (3). >>
Exactly, and that's what I said in my post. The point of my posts are lost on trolls who do nothing but pick them apart to start flame wars. The grading standard "good, very good, excellent" are misleading to people outside the hobby. They are misleading because if I knew nothing about cards and I saw a "mint" card, I might refer to it as "very good". Yet if I graded a card "very good", people would be expecting a PSA 3, a heavily worn card. It has nothing to do with attacking what people like to collect -- my GOD people are assinine fools. However, if anyone was offended by my post, I'm thrilled. They are the very people that are worth offending. Screw them. This confusion over grading terms (my second point) is a loophole whereby some dealers will describe worn cards as "I don't know much about cards but this is in VERY GOOD CONDITION!!!" (implying something better than the hobby recognized "very good" grade). Meanwhile, people who know nothing about cards are inclined to describe near mint and mint examples as "very good", because those are the APPROPRIATE ADJECTIVES to describe something that is near flawless. In baseball cards, the adjectives used to describe cards do not follow their dictionary meanings. The third point, of course, is that the only two grades that actually follow an understood meaning across the board is "near mint" and "mint". When applied incorrectly, it doesn't matter who is doing it, there is no excuse. Something cannot be "near mint EXCEPT", especially when that exception is a torn off corner. >>
I'm not going to get involved in the pissing match, but there definitely is something to this. How many of us have looked at an Ebay auction featuring something like a '67 Topps set with blurry scans being offered by someone with a feedback rating of 50 and no card sales in their feedback where the description reads "I'm not a card collector, but this set has sharp corners. It's in excellent condition!" And you're left wondering if their using the term 'excellent' as a hobbyist would use it, or if it's being used in a more general sense.
alhman, when i said true VG i meant ones that are centered with 4 more then touched corners. cards that appear sweet to the eye. in that case then VG means VG.
as for the robby it had a slight wrinkle that some card doctor pressed out. it was bought raw by me from yorktown sports who graded it ex mnt. now here is a card that a dealer OVER GRADED by 4 grades. a person that knows better. of course i could not see it in the scan. Luckily I paid raw ex money for it so i did not lose that much. yorktown sports lost a client and I will continue to tell everyone how they conduct business. slimy they are.
Steve