Options
I’m Crying Uncle With Grading Results
Mefer
Posts: 1,156 ✭✭✭
Just received a 101 card bulk order results. Cards of various types and expectations with at least 60 percent expected to have a shot at a 10. Results? 46 9s and 1 single 10 included in the group.
What??? I’m still in shock. I just can’t believe that ratio. I’ll be sending some back in but I shouldn’t have to do that.
That ratio and result really chaps my hide especially the amount I spent. We all know 9s and 10s are often really close. I just can’t believe my eyes were that bad.
Matt
0
Comments
Sorry for the unexpected results Matt. I know when I have a card/s that I'd expect to 10 but don't, there's usually a small surface flaw I missed. Whether it's a faint line or a tiny surface pin dent. I've also learned to watch for the dreaded penny sleeve boogers. I've pulled many sleeves straight from the pack that have tiny clear nodules. When the card is inserted into the sleeve and placed into a card saver, the pressure indents the nodule into the card turning a 10 into a 9. Not saying this is what happened to you but it's just a few things to look out for. Good luck with the crack and resub.
Thanks! I’m pretty careful; even cut the corner of penny sleeves to avoid damage. You do make good points!
9s and 10s though are largely the same; some 9s you can certainly tell apart with centering but all of these looked carefully at centering.
I’m a big PSA supporter but this still has me rather miffed especially given the fact I had to wait five months.
Matt
What Years were you sending in?
BIGLEAGUE SportsCards
"Respect The Hobby"
www.bigleaguesc.com
https://www.ebay.com/str/bigleagueseller
just call me the "8 man". i get 8's on all 1981 and up. 1980 and back im the "6 man".
I feel ya. Very frustrating. I had similar results from a sub last week. 102 cards, 0 tens. I split the sub with another of similar items, the other sub was 20% tens. I was contemplating asking them to hold and review, then just threw in the towel. Fingers crossed on pending subs.
Thanks,
David (LD_Ferg)
1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
man, I know if I sent in 100 cards that I thought were primarily 10's, I would be sick to my stomach and contemplating whether it is worth it...maybe you can post scans of some of them when you get them back...I have 100 cards there now and many more hundreds I want to send in over the next few months...stories such as this make me cringe...sure, you could have missed some minor things -- but on 60 cards? I know I am not along in saying I wish we knew why each card got the grade it did, but the grading process would take a year -- unless they could have some sort of audio recording where the grader talks as he grades...I know I would pay an extra $10 or $20 for my order if I could get an audio recording stating why my cards got the grade they did...even something as simple as "this card is off center left to right, otherwise everything else looks good, so giving it a 9" or "there is a scratch on the surface that can be seen when held sideways up to a light, so giving it a 7"
This sounds a lot like my recent bulk submission. I did okay on some modern cards but was destroyed on vintage.
That sounds great in theory. Not sure why it couldn't be a reality. I'd pay extra for that service add as well.
It’s really crazy. I’ll post my sub once it formats into a more readable fashion (they apparently change formats after a few days).
Big portion of the submission was 81 Fleer Star Stickers. I culled the best of the best I have opened. 90 percent 9s and not a single 10. Absolutely crazy— it seemed as if the directive is to really clamp down on 10s. I simply don’t get it.
This is really tough for me to swallow as I don’t complain and have supported PSA and still do. But it just doesn’t smell right; the odds are just way off again given the slight differences between many 9s and 10s (if differences at all).
Matt
Sorry to hear this, Matt. Post some scans or pics when you can.
0/60 is mind-boggling.
Andy
Andy
Wow, I was contemplating a 100 card submission, but am having second thoughts. I have lots of newer rookies that are straight from packs (Gronkowski, kuechly, Julio Jones, etc.) that if graded 10 will be worth it, 9’s maybe break even. Any others with experiences to share?
Many people are feeling the frustrations. In order to keep the grading process moving and not falling farther behind, I think many cards are given the human error look and them slabbed. My latest experience: sent in a card taken from a new pack and got it back form one of the big-3 as a 4 (4!). Tapped it out and sent it to another big-3 and got an 8. Across the board, grading is sub-par.
From that era, you're probably safer. You can look at the grading results people post on blowout's forums, but when I've looked they've been mostly 10's. Cards printed around the 80's are probably a dangerous area to tread given the increases in grading fees and the fact that 10's from era are generally more borderline. I don't know if new graders handle those orders or not. I doubt they handle vintage but 80's stuff in kinda in between.
After years of submitting I have probably gotten around 100 10s on vintage cards. And with very few exceptions I did not see those cards as markedly nicer than the many surrounding 9s I received. I always felt like if I sent in a really nice batch of 20-30 cards, I would get two or three tens on really nice ones, but I never knew which ones they would be. I just don’t and never have seen a discernible difference between nice 9s and 10s. I actually sold my 10 of the card below when I received this 9 because I thought it was way nicer.
The above really illustrates my beef. My order included 39 81 Fleer Star Stickers. 30 graded a 9 (77 percent) 2 graded an 8.5 (which look as good as the 9s) and 7 graded an 8. While I didn’t expect all 10s and some misses, the above shows my calibration was spot on. But you mean to tell me not a single 10 in the bunch? Matched against the 10s I own, which were used as a benchmark in sending in, my 9s look just as good or in some cases better.
Now I am left having to resubmit. The new PSA case is a bear to crack open (which is a good thing) so I will send these in for review. Some I know will come back as 10s but, in the process. PSA wins with more grading fees. To me, it is simply not statistically possible to have 0 tens out of these cards considering they are plentiful and still relatively new.
I also received back a PSA 7 87 Fleer Glossy Barry Bonds. The upper right corner has a huge and noticable chip. There is also border chipping. Neither were there when I sent it in. Of course, I have no proof but it makes me wonder with my cards sitting for five months what could have happened. Not a huge loss but annoying.
On the bright side, I did receive a PSA 9 ‘69 Harmon Killebrew, a PSA 9 65 Jim Bunning and a PSA 9 65 “Cards Celebrate” World Series Card. Those were pleasant surprises.
My lone 10? A PSA 10 2018 Buster Posey Black Chrome Refractor. Cool, of course, but calibration overall was way off by PSA on this.
Matt
Quick story about the only 10 I have ever self submitted ...
At a card show and ready to leave when I go through one last box of cards, and find a raw card I need for a set registry. I think its good enough as is, I think its a 9 so its probably an 8, and overpay for it at $4. The guy doesnt even give me a penny sleeve, I'm out of card savers, and put the card in a side pocket of my back pack, where I proceed to forget about it for about a week. I send it in in my next bulk order, just so I can add to my registry, and several months later it pops as a 10. Its now worth $40!!
Many many cards I have pored over, thought over and prayed over, submitted thinking a 10 and gotten back a 9. Or a 8.5. And in one case a 6. But this is the one that gets a 10. You really just never know.
Saw sub results the other day that had a lot of PSA 8 crack outs that all came back 7, 6, 5. I'm pretty scared for the cards I have there now.
Arthur
Bell curve.
Sucks to think you have that many shots at a 10 and only get one. I agree that grading companies should supply you with why your cards grade the way they do. I use SGC and suggested it to them 2 years ago. I got a response basically saying that would never happen. But then when SGC launched the new website they said that was being implemented. But i have yet to get a grading report with my latest submissions
I think we all want grading companies to be transparent. It seems sgc gives out even less 10s than PSA. I wonder if graders are sometimes scared to call it a 10. I've also wondered if high volume dealers often receive bumps in their grades as opposed to low volume collectors. I say this because in pursuing my 48 leaf boxing set I've bought graded cards from large dealers that look way over graded compared to what I've submitted.
I'm sending out my latest submissions tomorrow. 6 more 48 leaf cards That I expect 5s and 6s on. But this time I also sent a 1996 upper deck Jordan tv cell predictor card. I think it's a 10. I've examined it with a jewlers loop and can see zero flaws. It's been in a top loader since it was opened over 20 years ago. As are all of my 80s and 90s cards. I think I have a shot at tons of 10s, but I'm Leary to invest in grading them. I would sell the 10s to pursue other cards I now want. But as you guys know there isn't really any money in a modern 8 or 9 graded card. So the Jordan card is an experiment for me.
Ditto.
Thanks,
David (LD_Ferg)
1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
Do you own a loupe? Id recommend buying one. It helps immensely. Also, if you buy cards online, and if they are affordable, I would buy several copies of each.
This isn't an issue of guys wholesale missing the what a 10 is or isn't.
This is PSA's expanded workforce either misapplying standards or punting to the safe position of "9" to get through the volume of submissions.
I haven't submitted in almost 2 years waiting on a return to normal.
It's just not cost effective to send in 100+ card submissions and only get a 3-5% return of 10's from cards that are all at LEAST in mint condition.
saucywombat@hotmail.com
Part of what I was saying as well. I think these guys are sometimes scared to call a 10 a 10. To me, it either is it isn't. 9s and 10s are very close, so if it's a 9 is there something that prevents if from being a 10? Also, does submitting in bulk hurt? If you send 100 cards is the grader hesitant to send back fifty 10s?. ONLY way to know is to resubmit a few. Of course that means more $$$ ... They know this..
To be fair, in my experience over the past year, every card I sent in that I thought was a 10 that came back a 9 I was able to find the reason it got a 9 instead of a 10 when it got back to me. Every time.
I should preface this by saying that I submit mostly '80s and '90s stuff. So there's some shiny but it's mostly paper cards. Among those, I've found the vast majority of reasons separating a 9 from a 10 were easily spotted with a loupe. The ones I yanked out (because I didn't want the 9) of my final look over were almost always because of something on the back. I think we all say we examine the back as much as the front but I think it takes a few go rounds on the back before that's true. We're so used to weeding through fronts that don't cut it that when we finally hit a beautifully centered front with 4 perfect corners and no surface issues it's almost like we enter a stage of denial about the card's back. Like "don't you effing dare have big fisheye or scratch on the back!"
I know I do it so I imagine other folks do it as well. It's just so hard to pull a card out with a perfect front due to something on the back. But as the great philosopher Neil McCauley once said, "that's the discipline."
Arthur
The "problem" is, that by their stated definitions, the difference between a 9 and a 10 can be the difference between "slight printing imperfection" versus a "minor printing imperfection". Now, tell me, what is the technical difference between "slight" and "minor"? There isn't; those are obviously subjective labels/terms. And intentionally so imo.
This is why I never by a card graded 10. I buy a 9 that looks just like it.
I actively collect Kirby Puckett. I have collections of Michael Jordan, Emmitt Smith, Roberto Clemente, Dwight Gooden, Tom Seaver, Errict Rhett and Evan Longoria.
Yep. And I have a feeling is that with enough magnification even A 10 will have a slight flaw. Same with a guy who looks at and grades 100s of cards a day. Perhaps he starts getting tunnel vision. If you look hard enough you can find a slight flaw or make yourself believe it's there .
THIS....EXACTLY!!
I would say by my standards of submitting bulk during my time using PSA (2007-to present) I would generally expect around 10-15% return of 10's on a 100 card submission.
These submissions are generally for my personal collection and building graded sets (usually modern and shiny), so many are sent that I know full well will not grade 10. But I am looking for 9 as the minimum grade. With that said, many are within the standards for 10.
For me anyway again the % of tens has gotten minuscule lately (given similar examples of cards) from what I had previously submitted.
saucywombat@hotmail.com
There have been a few folks also mentioning getting a jewlers loop to see your cards even better. I agree 100%. I use mine all the time. It's amazing what it can reveal to you.
I'm really enjoying this forum. You all seem like a great group of people and I love seeing everyone's point of view. I've definitely gained som3 knowledge in my short time here thus far.
Great read here for sure. Thanks for all the knowledge.
Sounds like I will continue to buy already graded.
Nic
Guides Authored - Graded Card Scanning Guide PDF | History of the PSA Label PDF
I just went through 38 cards that I submitted that I can find records on. I've submitted about 50 others that I can't find records on, but they'd likely have a similar distribution. Granted, it's a small sample size and mostly 80s cards and up. I only send in 10-15 for each sub and review each card multiple times before I send them off. Not saying others don't but if I was sending off 100 this month and 100 next month, there's no way I could dedicate the time I do to each card.
20 cards - expected result - 17 10s, two 9s, one 6. Most of the 10s were from 2011 and up.
4 cards - One grade higher than expected - 2 10s - A FF Ripken card and a 1983 Fleer Boggs card that I sat on for a couple years because I wasn't sure on them. One 1976 Topps Mike Schmidt PSA 9 that was a borderline 9 and a 1965 Topps Steve Carlton PSA 6 that I thought was a 5.
9 cards - One grade lower than expected - Mix of 70s, 80s and 2017. After getting them back, I only agreed with a couple.
2 cards - Two grades lower than expected - One was a PSA 7 83D Gwynn that was probably a 9OC. From the other subs that I couldn't find records on, I can tell you that I'm not good on judging 1983 Donruss centering. The other one was a 1990 Leaf Frank Thomas PSA 7. No idea on that one.
3 cards - 50's cards that I thought were probably 3s or 4s - got two 3s and one 4. Didn't put them in the "expected results" category because I didn't know what to expect. Lucky guesses.
From the sub that popped yesterday, I had 7 cards I expected a 9 or better on w/4 10s & 3 9s. Out of the 29 that graded, 3 were below my expectations (1s on two I thought were 1.5s, and a 2 instead of a 3) vs. 10 above (+0.5 to +3). I've done plenty of subs in the past where results were reversed and studied why and tightened my standards for subbing and expectations. Most of my misses have been surface related, so I do a close check on that, front and back, as my final pass and reject or lower expectations accordingly. I'm getting far fewer disappointments than I used to and I'm off by less on those that do miss. Yes, there's some subjectivity on the 9/10 border, but it's a dangerous game to require a high % of 10s to be a profitable sub.
Same hapend to me. Sent in 103 cards expecting 7-9s . And I have been grading for over 20 years now and know all the stories. But this order was my absolute worst yet. I got 2 8s.. Most graded 6-7 and had some 5s. These were 60s topps commons. Basic stuff. All worth less than the grading fees
Worst GOD Ive ever had
Good thoughts, all. I do look under magnification and cull my cards over a period of days and months before sending in. What may start as a "send pile" of 50 cards, for example, will get smaller. I then assign varying degrees of expectations and make a decision whether it is worth sending the cards in.
In any event, I've shared my piece of mind on my particular sub so I am not going to add anything further to it. Good luck to all on future subs!
Matt
I just got my grades back from a 100 plus vintage card order and I got the feeling that the grader was not going to give up any 10's no matter what. Many of my grades were 9's but not one 10. What the heck is going on? I had some pristine looking cards in my order. It's very disappointing. I may stop submitting cards all together. It's very expensive and I've just about had enough.
Patrick
I wonder what standards people use who submit bulk orders, as I do? When are you willing to look the other away/ignore as far as the back of the card goes? Obviously the grading standards say the centering can be a lot worse on the back than on the front, but what about print dots and other extraneous marks on the back? Do you go by the size of the mark, how big it is, how easily seen it is -- all of the above? I do believe a card can be a 10 with some sort of blemish on the back, but just what is allowable on the back besides lower centering standards?
On the right day, this is a 10, but I would never submit it expecting that ...
Actually, I should say I would never have submitted it, full stop. Lesson learned on purchasing without a back scan and one of my '10's that I will 'upgrade'.
Just FYI here are my year to year stats with PSA starting in 2007, my rookie year.
You see a clear adaptation to the then standards and increased proficiency in identifying what was Mint and Gem Mint, peaking in 2011. Since that time grading has been all over the place. As of 2018, the last year I submitted, I apparently am worse at identifying mint cards than ever including when I first submitted back in 2007. Looking at my submissions things get particularly squirrely at PSA around March 2016.
The numbers below are the percentage of cards identified as 10 from all submissions that year and then the total percentage that were identified as 9 or higher from all submissions that year.
Total cards submitted ~1900
Just sayin'
2007 | 7.08% | 65.4%
2008 | 19.27% | 74.3%
2009 | 21.68% | 85.48%
2010 | 34.18% | 86.22%
2011 | 41.67% | 86.75%
2012 | DNP
2013 | 7.34% | 77.06%
2014 | 44.92% | 90.68%
2015 | 5.71% | 80.0%
2016 | 18.98% | 83.94%
2017 | 15.67% | 79.1%
2018 | 3.92% | 54.9%
saucywombat@hotmail.com
I have a 150 card bulk at PSA since September and I’m more nervous than excited to see the results. My last bulk sub had some 1972 Topps commons that looked really nice, especially compared to 9s I already own in old slabs. I thought one might pull a 10 and then get 9s and 8s but ended up with mostly 7s. It’s frustrating looking at them side by side with 9s that look worse. I’m relatively new to grading. How often do you crack and resubmit and then get the result you are looking for? It doesn’t make much sense right now knowing I won’t see the card again for 6 months.
If I were looking for a 10 only I wouldn't submit a card that had any extraneous marks on the back. I've had perfect fronts come back 9s because of minor chipping to one edge on the back, a small fisheye on the back, a print defect on the back, surface issues on the back, etc. I treat the back exactly the same as I treat the front, except for the extra leeway in centering.
Arthur
Definitely a mistake on PSA's part. If you cracked that out and sent it back in I bet it doesn't get a 10 at least 90% of the time because of that stain/discoloration.
Arthur
I assumed that wasn't a stain or discoloration, but rather a big piece in the pulp used to make the card. Am I wrong?
No idea, but whatever it is, it's ugly and bugs me.
I scrutinize now for surfaces much more than in the past, tilting the cards in the light to determine whether the card has even gloss. I also use either a 10x loop or a bifocal, lighted 10x visor. But I think with super high end cards, it pays to scan the cards, zooming in to note any details otherwise missed. Invariably there'll be things observed that alluded the naked eye.
Thanks for opinions re: card backs and what you allow when looking for 10's. I guess I will be just as hard on the backs as I am on the fronts, except for the centering....really hurts when you come upon a really nice card and the front looks gorgeous in all respects, and then you flip it over and there is some tiny blemish/print dot, etc...
I do wonder tho, I have seen plenty of fish eyes on the front of PSA 10 cards -- if they allow a fish eye on the front, why would they not allow some minor blemish on the back -- or is it of your opinion that the grader missed the fish eye in the cases where those cards end up in a PSA 10 holder?
Here's a PSA 10 that was listed by 4 Sharp Corners. The back is not a 10. It has pen writing on it.
Patrick
Wow. I know folks are human. But that's bad. How was that missed??
They didn't miss a thing when they looked at my 71T sub.....
Kris
My 1971 Topps adventure - Davis Men in Black
Get out! Unreal.
Andy
PSA 10 mk lol