Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

Question on card grading

jspyke52jspyke52 Posts: 14
edited February 24, 2022 10:36AM in Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

Is there a way on PSA to find out the subgrades given to a card, corners, edges, scratches, centering?
Just trying to figure out why my card received what it did. Not saying it didn't deserve the grade it did,
just want to know why it did for my knowing for future submissions.

Comments

  • CoinCrazyPACoinCrazyPA Posts: 2,899 ✭✭✭✭

    Unfortunately no

    Positive BST transactions: agentjim007, cohodk, CharlieC, Chrischampeon, DRG, 3 x delistamps, djdilliodon, gmherps13, jmski52, Meltdown, Mesquite, 2 x nibanny, themaster, 2 x segoja, Timbuk3, ve3rules, jom, Blackhawk, hchcoin, Relaxn, pitboss, blu62vette, Jfoot13, Jinx86, jfoot13,Ronb

    Successful Trades: Swampboy,
  • So let me get this straight…PSA typically outsells and is valued higher in the community, and is considered #1. But you cannot find out why a card received a grade that it did or its flaws, after paying money for it. Therefore there is no liability on them, in my perspective. I am not understanding why people want this, other than showing it is a legit card and not a reprint.?.

  • DgilbertDgilbert Posts: 127 ✭✭✭

    If I were to share my thoughts in this public forum on the grading process I would likely be banned from the site lol

    "Knowledge speaks, but wisdom listens" Jimi Hendrix.
    instagram dgilbert008

  • What grade did your card get? Is it a 9 and you think it should be a 10? Is it an 8 and you think it should be a 9? Is it a 7 and you think it should be an 8? Read the definition of the card grades and take another good look at your card. Yes, sometimes it is just a mystery why a card received the grade it did. Still unhappy just by Beckett in the future or some other funky grading service that will give subgrades.

    A's World Championships-1910, 1911, 1913, 1929, 1930, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1989
  • It was a 9, and the card is currently being shipped back to me. I am not unhappy with it. Just would like to know why it received what it did. Corners, edges, all looked good to me. Centering looked to to be a little off, but within there allowance. I went thru the surface and couldn't find any scratches. I used a powered lighted magnifying glass to measure and inspect, and a good one. Like I said, I am not unhappy with the grade. Yes of course I wish it received a 10. If I could know why it was marked down, then I could use that as a reference on other submissions in the future, instead of blindly knowing. I did read there description afterwards, and it is to general and basically says it could be anything....

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 11,793 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jspyke52 said:
    It was a 9, and the card is currently being shipped back to me. I am not unhappy with it. Just would like to know why it received what it did. Corners, edges, all looked good to me. Centering looked to to be a little off, but within there allowance. I went thru the surface and couldn't find any scratches. I used a powered lighted magnifying glass to measure and inspect, and a good one. Like I said, I am not unhappy with the grade. Yes of course I wish it received a 10. If I could know why it was marked down, then I could use that as a reference on other submissions in the future, instead of blindly knowing. I did read there description afterwards, and it is to general and basically says it could be anything....

    Go to my auctions for 1987 Topps Baseball PSA 9's. You will see a LOT of 10's that ended up in 9 holders.

    Post a scan of your card when you can, but I suggest you get used to the fact that it is nearly impossible to get a 10 and PSA has never given an explanation for why any card is a 9 instead of a 10.

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • I'd guess there is at least a 9 out of 10 chance its because of the centering.

    A's World Championships-1910, 1911, 1913, 1929, 1930, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1989
  • GilRGilR Posts: 147 ✭✭✭

    The thing I find questionable is, though I have no personal experience with this, I've read plenty of comments to suggest that PSA 10's are perceived as much harder to get for popular cards that already have many graded PSA 10's out there. To me, that should not be a factor, and if I send in, say 1000 1984 Don Mattingly's (877 PSA 10's) and 1000 1984 Don Baylors (15 PSA 10's) there should be roughly equal distributions of each grade level. But, from these forums, it seems that is not the case, and I'd have a better chance of getting more Baylor's graded gem mint. I wish that PSA at some point would address this issue.

  • DBesse27DBesse27 Posts: 3,078 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @GilR said:
    The thing I find questionable is, though I have no personal experience with this, I've read plenty of comments to suggest that PSA 10's are perceived as much harder to get for popular cards that already have many graded PSA 10's out there. To me, that should not be a factor, and if I send in, say 1000 1984 Don Mattingly's (877 PSA 10's) and 1000 1984 Don Baylors (15 PSA 10's) there should be roughly equal distributions of each grade level. But, from these forums, it seems that is not the case, and I'd have a better chance of getting more Baylor's graded gem mint. I wish that PSA at some point would address this issue.

    I don’t buy into such conspiracy theories.

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

    Also collecting Andre Tippett, Patriots Greats' RCs, Dwight Evans, 1964 Venezuelan Topps, 1974 Topps Red Sox

  • TabeTabe Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @GilR said:
    The thing I find questionable is, though I have no personal experience with this, I've read plenty of comments to suggest that PSA 10's are perceived as much harder to get for popular cards that already have many graded PSA 10's out there.

    Given the extremely high percentage of 10s on certain modern cards that already have tons of 10s handed out, there's no way that this is true.

  • athleticsfanathleticsfan Posts: 249 ✭✭✭

    There should not be equal distributions of 9's and 10's. 1984 cards were printed on a sheet of cardboard placed by a human on a machine. Thats why some individual cards are known for being consistently off center based on where they were on the sheet.

    A's World Championships-1910, 1911, 1913, 1929, 1930, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1989
  • RufussCkingstonRufussCkingston Posts: 1,642 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 24, 2022 1:30PM

    @jspyke52 said:
    Is there a way on PSA to find out the subgrades given to a card, corners, edges, scratches, centering?
    Just trying to figure out why my card received what it did. Not saying it didn't deserve the grade it did,
    just want to know why it did for my knowing for future submissions.

    PSA doesn't do subgrades. You should use BGS if you want an analysis of why your card gets a particular grade. A psa grader just looks at a card and makes up a grade based on what he/she sees after looking at the "four" metrics. There is no paper trail/computer input of notes on why a card gets a certain grade. Only if a card is Altered, Min size, or fake, do you get particular notes in the form of a rejection label...

  • GilRGilR Posts: 147 ✭✭✭

    @athleticsfan said:
    There should not be equal distributions of 9's and 10's. 1984 cards were printed on a sheet of cardboard placed by a human on a machine. Thats why some individual cards are known for being consistently off center based on where they were on the sheet.

    Okay, point taken. But I chose Don Baylor because he was another guy named Don who was with the Yankees in 1984. So I get points for writing style, but lose points for not knowing which other valueless cards in the 1984 set actually appeared centered and off-centered at the same rate as Mattingly's card and therefore would be suitable for my proposed experiment.

    DBesse27 may well be right that this is just a conspiracy theory, and I hope that's true. I do know that, even at $50 a shot, I'm not about to run the test I propose...

  • AFLfanAFLfan Posts: 1,272 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @GilR said:
    The thing I find questionable is, though I have no personal experience with this, I've read plenty of comments to suggest that PSA 10's are perceived as much harder to get for popular cards that already have many graded PSA 10's out there. To me, that should not be a factor, and if I send in, say 1000 1984 Don Mattingly's (877 PSA 10's) and 1000 1984 Don Baylors (15 PSA 10's) there should be roughly equal distributions of each grade level. But, from these forums, it seems that is not the case, and I'd have a better chance of getting more Baylor's graded gem mint. I wish that PSA at some point would address this issue.

    There is an awful lot you are not taking into account with this statement. You quote 877 Mattinglys in PSA 10 and only 15 Baylors in PSA 10. But there have been 15,434 Mattinglys submitted and only 33 Baylors. If you go by percentages, Mattingly 10s have hit at a rate of .056%, while Baylors hit at .455%.

    People likely would be less likely to take a gamble subbing a Baylor because if they miss, then they likely won't recoup grading fees. The Mattingly card is more valuable, so lower grades still have value and so they are more likely to grade that card.

    There are also issues like card location on an uncut sheet, recurring print issues and other things that can make one card more difficult to find in 10 than another from the same set.

    Todd Tobias - Grateful Collector - I focus on autographed American Football League sets, Fleer & Topps, 1960-1969, and lacrosse cards.
  • Once I get the Joe Burrow Orange Lazer back, I will post a pic. As I mentioned, i don’t disagree with the grading, just nothing says why. I knew the centering was a little off, but measured to their allowance as posted. That is why I don’t disagree with the grade. But for other things it would be nice to know

  • GilRGilR Posts: 147 ✭✭✭

    AFLfan,
    Those are fair points, and I should have noted that there's a reason why there are more Mattinglys than Baylors at PSA 10. My only point, and it's based on what others have claimed or hinted at, is that there is a suspicion out there among some that if one were to submit what appears to be a perfect Mattingly and a perfect Baylor (or any other low-pop 1984 card) the Mattingly would have less of a chance of getting a PSA 10. I didn't mean 1000 random Mattinglys and Baylors, but 1000 that look like they could be mint or gem mint after careful examination. Of course, no one is in a position to do that, so this is all hypothetical.

  • daltexdaltex Posts: 3,486 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @GilR said:
    AFLfan,
    Those are fair points, and I should have noted that there's a reason why there are more Mattinglys than Baylors at PSA 10. My only point, and it's based on what others have claimed or hinted at, is that there is a suspicion out there among some that if one were to submit what appears to be a perfect Mattingly and a perfect Baylor (or any other low-pop 1984 card) the Mattingly would have less of a chance of getting a PSA 10. I didn't mean 1000 random Mattinglys and Baylors, but 1000 that look like they could be mint or gem mint after careful examination. Of course, no one is in a position to do that, so this is all hypothetical.

    Well, of course, no one would submit the Baylor without high confidence that it was a 10. There is no one scouring eBay looking to find that card in an 8, (I see that none have sold for almost thirteen years.) Mattingly not only has some value in, say, a 3 (four sold on eBay last year), but there is also far more likely to be sentimental value from childhood, and, therefore, someone might want the card protected for sentimental value regardless of economic value.

    TL;dr: People will submit Mattingly in any grade but Baylor only when they think it should be a 10.

  • daltexdaltex Posts: 3,486 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jspyke52 said:
    So let me get this straight…PSA typically outsells and is valued higher in the community, and is considered #1. But you cannot find out why a card received a grade that it did or its flaws, after paying money for it. Therefore there is no liability on them, in my perspective. I am not understanding why people want this, other than showing it is a legit card and not a reprint.?.

    "How did my card get a 6 on edges? What is the standard to give edges a 6. The other three subgrades are 9, so how does my card earn a 7 when the average is over 8!"

  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 11,793 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jspyke52 said:
    Once I get the Joe Burrow Orange Lazer back, I will post a pic. As I mentioned, i don’t disagree with the grading, just nothing says why. I knew the centering was a little off, but measured to their allowance as posted. That is why I don’t disagree with the grade. But for other things it would be nice to know

    Cards with "centering a little off" rarely get graded a 10 even if it's within the requirements for a 10.

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • JoeBanzaiJoeBanzai Posts: 11,793 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jspyke52 said:
    So let me get this straight…PSA typically outsells and is valued higher in the community, and is considered #1. But you cannot find out why a card received a grade that it did or its flaws, after paying money for it. Therefore there is no liability on them, in my perspective. I am not understanding why people want this, other than showing it is a legit card and not a reprint.?.

    PSA does a better job than the others (some who have failed) and when you get a high grade on a PSA card it's worth more as a rule.

    Personally, I liked the 0-100 grading scale and having the sub grades listed, but I still sent my cards in to PSA.

    The only thing that has stopped me is the new prices.

    I am no longer grading my items.

    2013,14 and 15 Certificate Award Winner Harmon Killebrew Master Set and Master Topps Set
  • RufussCkingstonRufussCkingston Posts: 1,642 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @jspyke52 said:
    Once I get the Joe Burrow Orange Lazer back, I will post a pic. As I mentioned, i don’t disagree with the grading, just nothing says why. I knew the centering was a little off, but measured to their allowance as posted. That is why I don’t disagree with the grade. But for other things it would be nice to know

    The "allowance" for centering is not really a thing, it is a guide, but most PSA 10's graded today are way better than those allowances. So odds are that would be a reason assuming your corners, edges, and surface are perfect.

  • Jayman1982Jayman1982 Posts: 467 ✭✭✭

    @jspyke52 said:
    Once I get the Joe Burrow Orange Lazer back, I will post a pic. As I mentioned, i don’t disagree with the grading, just nothing says why. I knew the centering was a little off, but measured to their allowance as posted. That is why I don’t disagree with the grade. But for other things it would be nice to know

    Eye appeal trumps being within the centering allowance for a 10, especially if the card has borders. Full bleed image fronts will often get a pass on the 60/40 rule, but a card with borders usually will not because it looks visibly off at first glance.

  • Technically spoken, a signed card, never can get 10, since a signature is somehow an surface damage . But there lots of signed cars with 10

Sign In or Register to comment.