Grade my card -- 1958 Topps Johnny Unitas

Rosatos_HotelRosatos_Hotel Posts: 13

Just got it back from PSA and I'm disappointed with the grade. Tell me what you think?

Using a loupe and a mm ruler, I put the centering at 60/40 Top to Bottom, and 67/33 Side to Side, FYI.

Comments

  • brad31brad31 Posts: 896 ✭✭✭✭

    Looks like a surface wrinkle above the H in John. If that is a wrinkle I say a 5. If not a wrinkle I say an 8oc or a straight 6.

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 6,188 ✭✭✭✭✭

    6 sounds about right. Being off centered both ways really hurts eye appeal.

    Wrinkle could reduce grade even below a 5.

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • DBesse27DBesse27 Posts: 981 ✭✭✭✭✭

    My guess is PSA 4

    Yaz Master Set
    #1 Gino Cappelletti master set
    #1 John Hannah master set

    Also collecting: 1964 & 68 Venezuelan Topps, Patriots team HOFers, Andre Tippett

  • PROMETHIUS88PROMETHIUS88 Posts: 2,576 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 9, 2019 9:47AM

    I see it was a straight 6 by the cert number. I think that is a pretty fair grade given the centering.

  • mknezmknez Posts: 1,933 ✭✭✭

    PSA 5

    ------
    stupid print dots

  • PSA 6 MC

  • @brad31 said:
    Looks like a surface wrinkle above the H in John. If that is a wrinkle I say a 5. If not a wrinkle I say an 8oc or a straight 6.

    No wrinkle about the H-- it's a funny light reflection off the case.

    I'm new to this (can you tell)? Which is more appealing to potential buyers... 8(OC) or straight 6? Or are they the same?

  • PROMETHIUS88PROMETHIUS88 Posts: 2,576 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @Rosatos_Hotel said:

    I'm new to this (can you tell)? Which is more appealing to potential buyers... 8(OC) or straight 6? Or are they the same?

    Depends on the buyer. Some people don't mind the oc designation while some won't touch them. Others would prefer the the straight 6. I would assume that those are people that are buying the holder and not the card since it is virtually the same thing.

  • Looks like a solid 6. The centering is preventing it from being a 7 or 8.

  • KbKardsKbKards Posts: 1,772 ✭✭✭

    Using a loupe and a mm ruler, I put the centering at 60/40 Top to Bottom, and 67/33 Side to Side, FYI.

    FYI you are not computing the centering correctly. The centering is considerably more off than your numbers. The centering is measured at the point where the card is off center the most. Top to bottom that would be measured at the right side of the card, and left to right that would be measured at the top of the card. If you click on your picture to view the very large picture you can more easily and accurately measure the correct centering of your card, unless you're rounding up to the 1/2". Visually just based on the off centering and tilt two ways a 6 was a rather generous technical overall grade on the card.

  • brad31brad31 Posts: 896 ✭✭✭✭

    @Rosatos_Hotel said:

    I'm new to this (can you tell)? Which is more appealing to potential buyers... 8(OC) or straight 6? Or are they the same?

    I think more people prefer the straight grade. The people looking for 8s usually will not buy something with an OC. The people that collect 6s will look at the card and then assess if the cards trade-offs (centering vs sharp corners) are something they want in their collection.

  • @KbKards said:
    Using a loupe and a mm ruler, I put the centering at 60/40 Top to Bottom, and 67/33 Side to Side, FYI.

    FYI you are not computing the centering correctly. The centering is considerably more off than your numbers. The centering is measured at the point where the card is off center the most. Top to bottom that would be measured at the right side of the card, and left to right that would be measured at the top of the card. If you click on your picture to view the very large picture you can more easily and accurately measure the correct centering of your card, unless you're rounding up to the 1/2". Visually just based on the off centering and tilt two ways a 6 was a rather generous technical overall grade on the card.

    Thanks for the feedback, @KbKards. FWIW, I used this as my tutorial, along with the spreadsheet that calculates the ratios. I found it very informative! https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/897961/a-guide-to-centering

  • Thanks for the responses, everyone. Looks like PSA got it right. They gave it a straight 6 -- I was hoping for a 7.

    Take a look at this Bart Starr, which was submitted in the same batch as the Unitas. It came back an 8 (OC) and it looks the same as the Unitas. Thoughts? Is there a difference? Again, I'm new and learning.

  • And this Brown rookie. It too came back from PSA a 6. It was also submitted with the Starr and the Unitas in the same batch. Very similar centering issues as well, but only the Starr got 8(OC).

  • DBesse27DBesse27 Posts: 981 ✭✭✭✭✭

    My guess earlier of a PSA 4 was only because I was reading too much into your post and expecting it to be lower than I otherwise would have thought. Looking at the card, I think a 6 is fair. I probably would have guessed a 5, but a 6 is a fair grade I think.

    Yaz Master Set
    #1 Gino Cappelletti master set
    #1 John Hannah master set

    Also collecting: 1964 & 68 Venezuelan Topps, Patriots team HOFers, Andre Tippett

  • saucywombatsaucywombat Posts: 1,080 ✭✭✭

    I liked it as a 7

    Always looking for 1993-1999 Baseball Finest Refractors and1994 Football Finest Refractors.
    [email protected]
  • _EagleEyeKid__EagleEyeKid_ Posts: 213 ✭✭✭

    That looks more like 75/25 centering. Corners and edges looks like an 8. Hard to tell on surface. 8oc or 6 my guess

    Bryan

    "When I die, I want to die like my grandfather who died peacefully in his sleep and not like the screaming passengers in his car."

  • _EagleEyeKid__EagleEyeKid_ Posts: 213 ✭✭✭

    Too funny. Didn't see that the cert number was shown. I guessed correctly. Now I wonder why some received the OC designation while others didn't? Did the OP state no qualifiers?

    Bryan

    "When I die, I want to die like my grandfather who died peacefully in his sleep and not like the screaming passengers in his car."

  • EagleEyeKid said:
    Too funny. Didn't see that the cert number was shown. I guessed correctly. Now I wonder why some received the OC designation while others didn't? Did the OP state no qualifiers?

    Nope. I did not ask for No Qualifiers or minimum grades!

  • brad31brad31 Posts: 896 ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 9, 2019 6:20PM

    Interesting they went higher and qualifier on 1 of the 3 and lower with no qualifier on the other 2.

  • Rosatos_Hotel: "Got it back from PSA and I'm disappointed with the grade." Welcome to Vintage grading and prepare for disappointment. Considering the centering and eye appeal those are actually pretty strong grades. IMO higher value/ demand cards will always get more scrutiny during the grading process. Personally, I don't care for the no qualifier option as this was one aspect that separated PSA from the other TPG. Welcome and enjoy the ride...……….

  • KbKardsKbKards Posts: 1,772 ✭✭✭

    @brad31 said:
    Interesting they went higher and qualifier on 1 of the 3 and lower with no qualifier on the other 2.

    PSA also looks at other aspects of the card for grading. The Brown has heavy surface wear common for the card and the Unitas appears to have some corner issues which would limit the max grade.

  • PROMETHIUS88PROMETHIUS88 Posts: 2,576 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I have noticed a trend of receiving the lower grade without the oc qualifier in the last year or so. Even on cases that the centering is drastically off centered. I have maybe asked for no qualifiers on 1 or 2 cards out of probably close to 500 submitted during that time fram

  • MikeyPMikeyP Posts: 860 ✭✭✭
    edited October 10, 2019 9:20AM

    I believe that the John Unitas card should have received an OC qualifier. It looks like a PSA NM-MT 8 (OC) to me.

    "Nobody's ever gone the distance with Creed, and if I can go that distance, you see, and that bell rings and I'm still standin', I'm gonna know for the first time in my life, see, that I weren't just another bum from the neighborhood."
  • Rosatos_HotelRosatos_Hotel Posts: 13
    edited October 10, 2019 10:21AM

    Here's the backstory on these cards ... when I was about 11 or 12 (1983-ish) I found in my grandmother's basement a box of '58 football cards containing about 20 unopened cello packs, and one unopened pack of '58 Topps baseball cards. They were still in the store box. (My grandparents owned a hardware store in Pittsburgh in the 50's and 60's -- when they closed the store, most of the unsold inventory was packed up and moved into their basement. These cards came from that inventory.) Being 11 or 12 and ignorant about such things, I opened all the packs. The roughly 200 cards yielded a nearly completed set, and included the Brown, Starr, and Unitas pictured above. (Which may explain why they are all roughly the same off center–they could have come from the same print/cut run at the factory?) Immediately after opening, I put all the cards into plastic sleeves, where they've been ever since. Only time the cards have been handled outside of the sleeves was upon opening the packs and then again at PSA a few weeks ago. (@KbKards -- the Brown card's appearance is due to poor lighting or bad photo on my part -- it doesn't have any surface wear at all. It's only ever been touched twice.)

    My dad used the doubles from that box to to build out a complete set of these '58s, and to start building his set of '55 Topps baseball. These footballers went into storage for 35 years and I forgot about them -- marriage, kids, jobs, life happened. I never got into the hobby. Dad sent the cards back to me a year ago. I'm only now getting around to figuring out what to do with them ... some dealers at a card show a few months back told me to get the best ones graded. So here we are.

  • CoarsegoldCoarsegold Posts: 64 ✭✭✭

    Cool story.

  • @Coarsegold said:
    Cool story.

    Believe it or not, the cards were NOT the reason I spent hours hunting through that musty basement. The rumor among my cousins was that there was a first issue/first edition PLAYBOY somewhere down there. As a young lad, THAT's what I was looking for when I stumbled across the cards.

  • MikeyPMikeyP Posts: 860 ✭✭✭

    That is a great story, Rosatos_Hotel. Considering the history of the cards, PSA seems to have been relatively consistent with the grading.

    "Nobody's ever gone the distance with Creed, and if I can go that distance, you see, and that bell rings and I'm still standin', I'm gonna know for the first time in my life, see, that I weren't just another bum from the neighborhood."
  • fiveninerfiveniner Posts: 3,884 ✭✭✭

    @Rosatos_Hotel said:
    Just got it back from PSA and I'm disappointed with the grade. Tell me what you think?

    Using a loupe and a mm ruler, I put the centering at 60/40 Top to Bottom, and 67/33 Side to Side, FYI.

    >
    I would give it 7oc

    Tony(AN ANGEL WATCHES OVER ME)
  • KbKardsKbKards Posts: 1,772 ✭✭✭

    The best thing about centering measurement ratios is there’s no opinion involved. All you need are accurate measurements, a calculator, and the resulting centering ratio is a fact not opinion. The problem apparent in this thread is not only some people’s inability to measure centering accurately, but also and most importantly understanding what those numbers are supposed to mean visually when looking at a card. You don’t look at a card like Unitas and put 60/40 unless you don’t understand what 60/40 means.

    A 50/50 card obviously means equally balanced borders.
    A 60/40 card means if you 1.5 times the width of the thin border it will equal the width of the fat border.
    A 67.5/32.5 card means that if you double the thin border it will equal the fat border.
    A 75/25 card means if you triple the thin border it will equal the fat border.

    Looking at the card and knowing what 60/40 and 67/33 ratios are supposed to look like means those ratio numbers are wrong. At the worst point of centering top to bottom one border is over twice the thickness of the other and left to right one border is over triple the thickness of the other. The picture is clickable and enlargeable to a very sharp detail so there is no excuse to obtaining measurements that will match the actual centering you see when looking at the card.

  • PatsGuy5000PatsGuy5000 Posts: 536 ✭✭✭

    Unitas and Starr cards look close. Which would you rather have? Straight 6 or 8 O/C

  • GDM67GDM67 Posts: 2,315 ✭✭✭

    >

    I'm new to this (can you tell)? Which is more appealing to potential buyers... 8(OC) or straight 6? Or are they the same?

    I would prefer an 8OC but I believe that I'm in the minority.

    To me, those are beautiful cards with solid eye appeal.

  • @PatsGuy5000 said:
    Unitas and Starr cards look close. Which would you rather have? Straight 6 or 8 O/C

    I'd prefer whichever grade will get me the most $$!! I'm planning on selling the set.

  • PatsGuy5000PatsGuy5000 Posts: 536 ✭✭✭

    @Rosatos_Hotel said:

    @PatsGuy5000 said:
    Unitas and Starr cards look close. Which would you rather have? Straight 6 or 8 O/C

    I'd prefer whichever grade will get me the most $$!! I'm planning on selling the set.

    Good luck

  • brad31brad31 Posts: 896 ✭✭✭✭

    I don’t think one grade (8(oc) vs straight 6) will get you enough more than the other to pay grading fees again. Good luck with selling your set.

Sign In or Register to comment.