1966 Topps Batman Riddler Back #19 A Purr-Fect Plot — Raw

Centering estimate: left border appears noticeably wider than right (roughly 65-70% left-heavy), top border slightly wider than bottom, suggesting approximately 65/35 L/R and 60/40 T/B — centering is off but not extreme. Most critically, there is a prominent diagonal crease or fold line visible running across the upper portion of the card (upper-left to center area), which is a significant surface defect despite the seller claiming 'NO CREASES' — this crease alone caps the grade in the VG range or below. The card also shows visible wear along the top edge and corners appear rounded/soft, consistent with heavy handling. The photo angle and resolution prevent confident assessment of gloss loss and all four corners, widening the range considerably, but the visible crease and corner wear point strongly to a VG (3) grade.

Centering estimate: left border appears notably wider than right (approximately 70/30 L/R), top border slightly wider than bottom (roughly 60/40 T/B), so centering is off but not catastrophic. The corners are the primary concern — all four show visible rounding, consistent with heavy handling, with the top-left and bottom-left corners appearing the most worn. The black border along the top edge shows chipping and wear, and there is evident gloss loss across the surface. A light surface crease or surface wear appears present in the lower-left quadrant, though the image resolution makes it difficult to confirm a hard crease definitively. Overall condition profile aligns with VG (3), with the rounded corners, gloss loss, and possible surface crease; could drop to 2 if the crease is confirmed on inspection, or reach 4 if the surface distress is lighter than it appears.

Centering estimated at approximately 65/35 left-to-right and 60/40 top-to-bottom — borders are reasonably balanced but slightly tighter on the right and bottom edges, consistent with NM-MT to NM range on centering alone. Corners appear to show very light wear on at least two corners (bottom-left and top-right appear slightly soft), not razor sharp but not rounded, consistent with EX-MT to NM territory. Surface gloss appears intact with no obvious creases visible, and print quality looks clean for a 1966 Topps issue with no notable print snow visible at this resolution. The back of the card is not visible so the Riddler-back condition cannot be confirmed, and corner sharpness cannot be fully assessed without a closer crop, widening the range slightly downward.

Centering estimate: left border appears slightly narrower than right (~55/45 L/R), top border appears tighter than bottom (~60/40 T/B) — centering is acceptable and not a primary concern. The CoMC watermark obscures the center of the card surface, preventing assessment of print defects, scratches, or staining in that zone. Corners appear to show mild rounding at the visible edges — consistent with EX range — but the scan angle and watermark prevent confident corner grading. Edges appear reasonably clean with no obvious chipping visible. Gloss retention is difficult to assess from this reproduction photo. Range widened significantly due to watermark obstruction and scan quality; a raw inspection could easily shift this card a grade in either direction.

Centering estimate: left border appears slightly wider than right (~55/45 L/R); top border noticeably thinner than bottom (~60/40 T/B) — not severely off-center but not tight either. Corners show visible rounding/softening on at least two corners (upper-left and lower-right appear most worn), consistent with EX range. Surface gloss appears partially intact with some loss visible — no obvious creases can be confirmed from this photo but the resolution is insufficient to rule out light surface creases. Edges appear reasonably intact with typical vintage rough-cut texture normal for this set; no writing or staining visible. The seller's 'Netherlands Holland' notation may indicate a non-Topps (possibly A&BC or European) printing variant — if so, this could affect set identity and grading context, but image alone cannot confirm print origin definitively.