02-25-2013, 02:22 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-25-2013, 09:38 PM by coimbre 21.)
Reasons NOT to grade Relic Cards?
Reasons NOT to grade Relic Cards?
Preferences aside, raw collecting vs the benefits of graded cards and condition preservation, I'm looking for any valid reasons NOT to grade relic cards.
As an example, I've seen a number of 2003 Topps Tributes tarnish, for lack of a better word. I've run across a few where the surface finish was cloudy. In some cases, the cloudy film wiped off and the original surface finish was restored. In other cases, the cloudiness and damage was deep into the card layer and couldn't be wiped away. I don't know if this is condition inherent to the card or if it was an external cause but the 2003's seem to be the only Tribute issue where I've noticed this. I'd hate to grade a 2003 Tribute Jimmie Foxx bat relic and then have it tarnish after grading.
My personal ritual with relics is to touch the uniform swatch, just once, before storing them. I like the idea of touching a pinstripe that was worn Lou Gehrig or other players. Encasing a relic eliminates this from anyone who might purchase or inherit it.
I plan to send in a good number of Yastrzemski relics ranging from 1/1 to xx/36 in for grading. There's no shortage of Yaz relics but I'm more indecisive about players like Gehrig, Wagner, Ott, Hornsby, Sisler, DiMaggio, Greenberg, Williams, and a few others, mostly low numbered relics, including bats, largely because of the touch factor and because the aesthetics of these cards are better when raw. Preserving those aesthetics through grading is a bit of a dilemma.
Most of these are Tribute (not 2003), Triple Threads, and Sterling.
Any other potential ideas on why not to grade are welcomed. Thanks.
As an example, I've seen a number of 2003 Topps Tributes tarnish, for lack of a better word. I've run across a few where the surface finish was cloudy. In some cases, the cloudy film wiped off and the original surface finish was restored. In other cases, the cloudiness and damage was deep into the card layer and couldn't be wiped away. I don't know if this is condition inherent to the card or if it was an external cause but the 2003's seem to be the only Tribute issue where I've noticed this. I'd hate to grade a 2003 Tribute Jimmie Foxx bat relic and then have it tarnish after grading.
My personal ritual with relics is to touch the uniform swatch, just once, before storing them. I like the idea of touching a pinstripe that was worn Lou Gehrig or other players. Encasing a relic eliminates this from anyone who might purchase or inherit it.
I plan to send in a good number of Yastrzemski relics ranging from 1/1 to xx/36 in for grading. There's no shortage of Yaz relics but I'm more indecisive about players like Gehrig, Wagner, Ott, Hornsby, Sisler, DiMaggio, Greenberg, Williams, and a few others, mostly low numbered relics, including bats, largely because of the touch factor and because the aesthetics of these cards are better when raw. Preserving those aesthetics through grading is a bit of a dilemma.
Most of these are Tribute (not 2003), Triple Threads, and Sterling.
Any other potential ideas on why not to grade are welcomed. Thanks.
Twitter: @Coimbre21 - Collecting Carl Yastrzemski Topps, Jimmie Foxx, 1966 Topps Venezuelan, 2010 Topps Tribute HOF Relics & Autos, L.A. Rams Autos