*Update*For the aspiring vintage graders...rate this T206, PSA grade exposed.

akuracy503

PSA standards...grade opinions...I do see a small crease in the lower left corner which shows through the back...other than that what do you think?





Verdict is in......

VitoCo1972

3/4 depending on the day

WinPitcher

PSA 2 if the crease has been spooned out, otherwise it is possible to get a 3.

My opinion? it is a 3


Steve

stevek

Whatever grade it is, i'd love to have it.

PoppaJ

I think it deserves a 3.

PoppaJ

nightcrawler

Ya, great card, I'll go 3.5 for eye appeal.

Stingray

<< <i>PSA 2 if the crease has been spooned out, otherwise it is possible to get a 3.

My opinion? it is a 3


Steve >>



Agree with above!!

lsutigers1973

PRO 9.5

yawie99

I've seen creases like that on 4's, but that card shouldn't be higher than a 3. So, yeah, 3.

baseballfan

in say psa 2 bad grader day

TheThrill22

2.5

StopYurWhining

2.5

Blackborder

I agree, 3.

Carew29

3

akuracy503

I'm staring at other PSA "3"s such as one from 707 and prefer mine in terms of eye appeal.

I know mine does have quite a few dirty spots but the corners do much better than most of the PSA 2's i've seen.

So the major question is...resubmit? what are my chances if I crack it?
I've never submitted a high dollar card...how much would it cost?

Here is a 707 PSA 3 example, very clean compared to mine, i don't know...what do you think?:

VitoCo1972

Wow, I like yours WAY more.

benderbroeth

and i bet your cost a tenth of what 707 is selling theirs for..ha ha i recently bought on ebay a psa 1 willie mays for $175 and saw a worse psa 1 on 707 for $500 trade ya...ha ha

nightcrawler

How about the back of your card, is there any paper loss?

akuracy503

See my original post up top, polar bear back, no paper loss just speckling of dirty spots.

The only think akward about this card is that it has what i've researched as a common problem with t206's, an uneven cut, see top and bottom borders and the way they align with the PSA holder, the card is cut with an angle (Top border - slim left to thicker right, Bottom border - reverse thicker left to slim right)

I would love to try resubmitting without cracking the case but don't know what my chances of that would be.

Appreciate the opinions.

MBMiller25

Great Cobb card! Very nice on the eyes, Congrats. I love that card!

akuracy503

I'm running around work and when I get a chance to actually sit down all I can think about is....to re-submit or not?

Hoping someone with past experience on low grade t206 can chime in....please note the uneven cut.
If I resubmit it'll be either crack or leave in slab to upgrade to PSA 3

churchiscool

i collect alot low grade t&e cards...and looking at just the card (before seeing the flip)i thought it was at least a 2.5 and a good shot at a 3. there are varying degree on the deepness of the crease that would affect the technical grade from a 2 to 3. with psa you will need to crack card out to have a fair shot. the diamond cut should not affect grades this low, only EX cards and up. that's a very clean PB card.

looking at card again there seems to be more than 1 crease on the bottom left, like multiple light spider creases...i'd say it's a solid 2.5.

msassin

Nice card....definitely a better looking card than the 707 PSA 3 shown above.

It won't grade a '3' everytime you crack and resub but it won't look out of place in a '3' holder

akuracy503

churchiscool you have eyes that pierce through the monitor...i couldnt believe you picked up on that crease, i just had to check for myself and can confirm there is a very faint crease on the bottom left seperate from the one visible in the scan. However this faint crease can only been seen in the lights reflection and does not show through the back.

In any case i'd love to get this into a '3' slab...just not sure if it's worth the $ or risk, with the mindset that i'm keeping the card for a long time...just nice to know it sits in a grade higher when you know there is a remote chance.

i'll have to go check how much this will cost to resubmit to PSA.

akuracy503

Sorry to keep adding to the thread but I am posting other PSA 3's as examples for reference.
Trying to convince myself that my '2' has a shot at '3'.

fandango

akuracy, for such a new user, you really have taken this rube thing to heart....amazing how these "new" members jump right into the fray....

WinPitcher

I believe your card got a 2 because the 'crease' was spooned out.


Or they thought it was.


Steve

JESSEJAMES

Hard to grade a card from a scan guys. You may be missing a bit of paper loss, which would confirm why it was a 2.

Knopfler

I picked up the same card raw a few years ago and sent it in. I kind of lucked out because I had a snipe set for it, and the auction ended right in the middle of the big eastern seaboard power grid failure a few years back. I think I ended up paying less than $300. I sold it though, wish I still had it!

akuracy503

Less than $300 and it popped a 4!!

That might of been your big hobby moment...can I ask how much it was sold for?

akuracy503

<< <i>I believe your card got a 2 because the 'crease' was spooned out.


Or they thought it was.


Steve >>



Steve,

I am just guessing on what "Spooned out" means...can you clarify?

originalisbest

Rounded part of a spoon is applied with pressure to smooth out the crease. Can be done very well, or haphazardly.

If I owned your card, I'd be happy with it as a 2 -- you could try and submit for a bump. It's FAR better to have your in-focus card, vs. that blurry "3".

dizzle

<< <i>Rounded part of a spoon is applied with pressure to smooth out the crease. Can be done very well, or haphazardly.

If I owned your card, I'd be happy with it as a 2 -- you could try and submit for a bump. It's FAR better to have your in-focus card, vs. that blurry "3". >>



I was always under the assumption that a card that was "spooned" would be deemed altered. I've seen cards kicked back for altered stock where a crease was pressed out, isn't this the same thing?

akuracy503

<< <i>

<< <i>Rounded part of a spoon is applied with pressure to smooth out the crease. Can be done very well, or haphazardly.

If I owned your card, I'd be happy with it as a 2 -- you could try and submit for a bump. It's FAR better to have your in-focus card, vs. that blurry "3". >>



I was always under the assumption that a card that was "spooned" would be deemed altered. I've seen cards kicked back for altered stock where a crease was pressed out, isn't this the same thing? >>



I think that spoon altered rule would be ghey just like your avatar.

From looking at my card it'd really be difficult to distinguish if the crease was pressed out...i really don't see any raising (bubble) of the card stock where the crease is...just a spider crease line..Then again i've never graded a card in my life.

srs1a

I collect T206 portraits in relatively low grade (2-4, with an ocassional 5). There are tremendous differences in visual appeal and technical flaws in this grade range. Your card has great visual appeal -- strong colors and great focus -- but, it has a pretty heavy crease. I say heavy because the paper damage is visible from both sides of the card. In my book, that card is a borderline 2/3 -- and you got the short end of the stick. Given that PSA now has half grades, I'm somewhat suprised that you didn't get a 2.5. No matter, you have a very nice red Cobb with a great Polarbear back.

Here are a couple of 3's that might be interesting comparisons. The Waddell has a very slight wrinkle in the upper R which I believe you can see in the scan. The Bresnahan has a paper flaw in the upper L that accounts for the white mark. My only intent in posting these images is to show the huge variation in visual appeal you can find in 3's -- there are some really nice ones out there and some that (to my eye) are pretty darn ugly.

akuracy503

Thank you for posting those for comparison...very nice 3's by the way.
I believe you are correct in my card taking a major hit due to the crease, i've seen 3's with very round corners and even dented corners the only reasoning I can come up with is due to the crease and dirty spots on my cobb.

I will most likely resubmit this card (may have been graded 2 before the .5 implementation)

If anyone can answer this one...what makes the "Polar Bear" back so special...from reading VCP about T206's it states that Polar Bear backs fall under the common back category with Piedmont, Sweet Corporal, etc.... But i've seen more than a few times there was an emphasis on "Polar Bear" backs..maybe just misinformation people are stating.

akuracy503

>>



Definitely sets apart as to why these grade higher than my 2, however who's to say these arent 4's, certainly look like top tier '3' cards.
Good stuff.

srs1a

Yeah, like I said, there is alot of spread in cards in this grade range...some absolute beauties with a spot of paper loss on the back to cards that look like they have been chewed on by a dog ; - )

There are a couple of good sources on backs -- t206museum.com is one. Polar Bear is a "less common" back, but not a "rare" one. I think you get a little more slack for "dirty" PB's than the others as Polar Bear was loose tobacco. So, the cards were apparently in a pouch of tobacco (?) rather than in a pack of cigs with paper between the card and the tobacco. Many times, the dirt is actually tobacco staining.

Here's my lone Polar Bear -- as you can see, it shows the same staining as your Cobb.