Home› Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

How is this GEM MINT centering? Am I missing Something?

MeatloafMeatloaf Posts: 1,308
in Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
http://www.ebay.com/itm/141497013491

What am I missing here? How is this 9.5 or GEM MINT for L/R centering? Looks awful.

Meatloaf

Comments

  • StanTheManMusialStanTheManMusial Posts: 2,053 ✭
    It goes back to what I have been saying for some time. BGS grading standards have softened since about 2006. Notice the serial number like we discussed before. Older graded BGS cards were graded pretty strictly. It's simply not the case for the most part anymore.
  • MrNearMintMrNearMint Posts: 1,209 ✭✭✭
    I collect mainly BGS graded cards and that looks hideous. I hate to say this because I do like BGS, but it almost seems they will grade easier on low pop refractors and xfractors...remember the Strasbourg xfractor?

    But like I always say, no grading company is perfect. Occasionally cards slip through the cracks and receive undeserving grades. Every company will undergrade and overgrade.
  • olb31olb31 Posts: 3,480 ✭✭✭✭✭
    when nit pick any and all grading companies and even the individual cards. Some are under graded and some are over graded. However for the gem mint ones you would think there would almost be a consensus of companies, graders and on-lookers.
    Work hard and you will succeed!!
  • GWilsh1999GWilsh1999 Posts: 96
    Centering on this issue is measured via the green letters at the bottom.

    I agree with the subgrades.
  • sportscardstopsportscardstop Posts: 530 ✭✭✭
    This centering looks very close to the one in the OP, and it got an 8.5

    8.5 centering
  • LarkinCollectorLarkinCollector Posts: 8,975 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Centering on this issue is measured via the green letters at the bottom.

    I agree with the subgrades. >>


    OP was not questioning the T/B. I get 42/58 centering L/R, which shouldn't be Gem.
    Who is the Golf Card Guy?
  • StanTheManMusialStanTheManMusial Posts: 2,053 ✭


    << <i>

    << <i>Centering on this issue is measured via the green letters at the bottom.

    I agree with the subgrades. >>


    OP was not questioning the T/B. I get 42/58 centering L/R, which shouldn't be Gem. >>



    The card is pretty off centered top to bottom and side to side.

    image

    edited to add scan
  • StanTheManMusialStanTheManMusial Posts: 2,053 ✭
    It looks like someone just paid $900 for it.
  • GWilsh1999GWilsh1999 Posts: 96


    << <i>

    << <i>Centering on this issue is measured via the green letters at the bottom.

    I agree with the subgrades. >>


    OP was not questioning the T/B. I get 42/58 centering L/R, which shouldn't be Gem. >>



    I was talking about L/R, T/B is measured from the top of the image to the bottom of the second text box.

    The example linked is horrible L/R compared to this one.

    For clarity:
    Green letters = Green Back Packers/Quarterback (NOT his name). The T/B is measured from the top of the image to the bottom of the second text box.

    All that said I still completely agree with the grades.
  • lawnmowermanlawnmowerman Posts: 19,477 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>Centering on this issue is measured via the green letters at the bottom.

    I agree with the subgrades. >>


    OP was not questioning the T/B. I get 42/58 centering L/R, which shouldn't be Gem. >>



    I was talking about L/R, T/B is measured from the top of the image to the bottom of the second text box.

    . >>



    I'm confused. You made no mention about the l/r centering in your original post. So how the heck were you talking about the l/r centering when you only said this:



    << <i>Centering on this issue is measured via the green letters at the bottom.

    I agree with the subgrades. >>

    1994 Pro Line Live

    TheDallasCowboyBackfieldProject

  • StanTheManMusialStanTheManMusial Posts: 2,053 ✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>Centering on this issue is measured via the green letters at the bottom.

    I agree with the subgrades. >>


    OP was not questioning the T/B. I get 42/58 centering L/R, which shouldn't be Gem. >>



    I was talking about L/R, T/B is measured from the top of the image to the bottom of the second text box.

    The example linked is horrible L/R compared to this one.

    For clarity:
    Green letters = Green Back Packers/Quarterback (NOT his name). The T/B is measured from the top of the image to the bottom of the second text box.

    All that said I still completely agree with the grades. >>



    Using your standards(how the card should be measured), the card is still off centered top to bottom and side to side. Not worthy of gem mint centering to me. By the original strict BGS standards, this card might have received an 8 or 8.5 at best for centering.
  • lawnmowermanlawnmowerman Posts: 19,477 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    Using your standards(how the card should be measured), the card is still off centered top to bottom and side to side. Not worthy of gem mint centering to me. By the original strict BGS standards, this card might have received an 8 or 8.5 at best for centering. >>




    Oh ok. I see what Sean was saying now. I do agree though. The card is still off and really ugly at that.

    1994 Pro Line Live

    TheDallasCowboyBackfieldProject

  • GWilsh1999GWilsh1999 Posts: 96


    << <i>

    << <i>

    Using your standards(how the card should be measured), the card is still off centered top to bottom and side to side. Not worthy of gem mint centering to me. By the original strict BGS standards, this card might have received an 8 or 8.5 at best for centering. >>




    Oh ok. I see what Sean was saying now. I do agree though. The card is still off and really ugly at that. >>



    The aesthetics suck, but the technical grade is proper.
  • LarkinCollectorLarkinCollector Posts: 8,975 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Using your standards(how the card should be measured), the card is still off centered top to bottom and side to side. Not worthy of gem mint centering to me. By the original strict BGS standards, this card might have received an 8 or 8.5 at best for centering. >>


    +1, still measures 42/58 R/L at the green letters (43/57 if being generous) which alone should be no higher than 8.5.
    Who is the Golf Card Guy?
  • DanBessetteDanBessette Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭
    Personally, I think centering snobbery is stupid. But no matter what I think, that is a criterium, and this card does not warrant a Gem grade, no matter how one tries to rationalize it. It's not even close.
  • StanTheManMusialStanTheManMusial Posts: 2,053 ✭


    << <i>Personally, I think centering snobbery is stupid. But no matter what I think, that is a criterium, and this card does not warrant a Gem grade, no matter how one tries to rationalize it. It's not even close. >>



    Centering is where you gain or lose the most eye appeal on a card, imo. It's not stupid to many of us. I know lots of people that pay more for centered cards over their off centered counterparts.
  • MinorLeagueSourceMinorLeagueSource Posts: 661 ✭✭
    A very ugly card no matter the centering.

    Best regards!
    Buying or trading for these signed Jeter rc's:
    1992 GCL, 93 Stadium Club, 93 Greensboro,, 93 South Atlantic League, 93 Topps Marlins & Rockies,, 94 Classic Tampa, 94 Procards Tampa, 94 Florida State League & 95 Columbus Clippers.

  • DboneesqDboneesq Posts: 18,219 ✭✭


    << <i>Personally, I think centering snobbery is stupid. But no matter what I think, that is a criterium, and this card does not warrant a Gem grade, no matter how one tries to rationalize it. It's not even close. >>


    Dan, have to disagree with you on this one. IMO, great centering is one of the things that makes a card really stand out. But heck, you don't even like THE MICK! lol

    After all Dan, which DaVinci would you rather own? lol

    image

    image
    STAY HEALTHY!

    Doug

    Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
  • DanBessetteDanBessette Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>Personally, I think centering snobbery is stupid. But no matter what I think, that is a criterium, and this card does not warrant a Gem grade, no matter how one tries to rationalize it. It's not even close. >>


    Dan, have to disagree with you on this one. IMO, great centering is one of the things that makes a card really stand out. But heck, you don't even like THE MICK! lol >>



    Oh I get that centering is really important to a lot of you and I don't begrudge you it. More power to you. I just happen to be a corners and edges guy more than centering. Doesn't mean I'm not proud of the well centered vintage cards in my collection, just that 65/35 centering is not a deal breaker for me, personally. To each his own. Back to the main point of this thread: I vehemently feel that this is not gem centering.

    One last word on the Mick: everybody seems to think I don't like or respect him. Nothing could be further from the truth. He was a better player than Yaz, without a doubt. There, I said it. He truly is one of the all time greats. All I asked once upon a time is why his cards are worth exponentially more than those of other guys in that upper crust, like Ted Williams, mays, and Aaron. A recent SMR article supposed it had a lot to do with the Yankees brand and the NYC market and I concur. He is without a doubt one of the most gifted ball players in this history of the universe, a no doubt top ten all time kind of guy. I just don't consider him head and shoulders above most of the other guys in the top ten. Hopefully this clarifies my position on the Mick.
  • DanBessetteDanBessette Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭


    << <i>After all Dan, which DaVinci would you rather own? >>



    Neither. That is one ugly broad! image
  • DboneesqDboneesq Posts: 18,219 ✭✭
    No argument from me on her looks! image
    STAY HEALTHY!

    Doug

    Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
  • GWilsh1999GWilsh1999 Posts: 96


    << <i>

    << <i>Using your standards(how the card should be measured), the card is still off centered top to bottom and side to side. Not worthy of gem mint centering to me. By the original strict BGS standards, this card might have received an 8 or 8.5 at best for centering. >>


    +1, still measures 42/58 R/L at the green letters (43/57 if being generous) which alone should be no higher than 8.5. >>



    I can't argue with the facts.

    Is there anything L/R (words, borders, pictures) that does measure up?
  • LarkinCollectorLarkinCollector Posts: 8,975 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>

    << <i>Using your standards(how the card should be measured), the card is still off centered top to bottom and side to side. Not worthy of gem mint centering to me. By the original strict BGS standards, this card might have received an 8 or 8.5 at best for centering. >>


    +1, still measures 42/58 R/L at the green letters (43/57 if being generous) which alone should be no higher than 8.5. >>



    I can't argue with the facts.

    Is there anything L/R (words, borders, pictures) that does measure up? >>


    44/56 at the green line between the gold and white is the closest I can get. I really think this is all just to distract everyone from how the Auto got a 10 image
    Who is the Golf Card Guy?
  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 11,981 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Considering it got a Gem Mint grade, that card is hideous! I don't care if it's claimed the centering is figured by the lettering, borders side to side make this card look obviously off center to me.
    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • lawnmowermanlawnmowerman Posts: 19,477 ✭✭✭✭


    << <i>Considering it got a Gem Mint grade, that card is hideous! I don't care if it's claimed the centering is figured by the lettering, borders side to side make this card look obviously off center to me. >>



    Maybe 4sc's subs to BGS as well?

    1994 Pro Line Live

    TheDallasCowboyBackfieldProject

Sign In or Register to comment.