Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
Options

PSA grading vs CGC grading

mbothnermbothner Posts: 761 ✭✭✭

I needed one card to finish a set in PSA 8 or better. This is a difficult card because it is one of those cards that is off center almost all the time.

I finally found the card in a CGC 8.5. I bought is for $110. This card too was off center but within CGC guidelines for an 8. CGC standards for an 8 is 65/35.

I get the card and crack it out. The card looks mint except for the centering. Would be a 9 or better if it were centered but since CGC decided it was 65/35 they gave it the highest grade possible since it could not be a 9. I completely agreed with CGC assessment.

I get the card back from PSA and they give it a 7. PSA standards for an 8 is not more than 70/30. CGC standards are even more strict than PSA.

I do not have a tool to measure this but do not think this is not worse than 70/30. With the price of the card, grading and shipping, I have over $150 into this.

Would like opinions from anyone including PSA.



Comments

  • Options
    82FootballWaxMemorys82FootballWaxMemorys Posts: 1,292 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 20, 2023 3:30PM

    Top Bottom looks close to 50/50, left/right looks about 65/35 perhaps a tad worse. I've seen many card with similar centering with PSA8 flips and many worse centered 8's than your card.

    Some will say PSA found something non-centering related CGC did not and of course that is possible. Spider-wrinkles being a generic nearly un-proveable catch-all.

    Looking at the card it's very strong 7 and a weak 8. It present very nicely so IMHO it's a 7.5.

    I have purchased some CGC 9.5's and have been very happy. Some I think are PSA 10 candidates and some I feel would be 9's. Since their flips match the comics slabs, and I like the slab "heft, I now submit all my Comic Book related non-sports cards to them. That said I don't sell cards.

    Unless otherwise specified my posts represent only my opinion, not fact.

  • Options
    RufussCkingstonRufussCkingston Posts: 1,489 ✭✭✭✭

    The reason it got a 7 is because of the Top edge.... Almost has a divot.

  • Options
    daltexdaltex Posts: 3,486 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It is my considered opinion that PSA doesn't measure cards for centering. Rather the graders, who have graded tens if not hundreds of thousands of cards have a very good idea of the eye appeal of "8", say, centering, and grade accordingly.

    I could be completely wrong, and no one at PSA has told me this, but it makes a ton of sense to me.

  • Options
    mbothnermbothner Posts: 761 ✭✭✭

    @82FootballWaxMemorys said:
    Top Bottom looks close to 50/50, left/right looks about 65/35 perhaps a tad worse. I've seen many card with similar centering with PSA8 flips and many worse centered 8's than your card.

    Some will say PSA found something non-centering related CGC did not and of course that is possible. Spider-wrinkles being a generic nearly un-proveable catch-all.

    Looking at the card it's very strong 7 and a weak 8. It present very nicely so IMHO it's a 7.5.

    I have purchased some CGC 9.5's and have been very happy. Some I think are PSA 10 candidates and some I feel would be 9's. Since their flips match the comics slabs, and I like the slab "heft, I now submit all my Comic Book related non-sports cards to them. That said I don't sell cards.

    By PSA standards, 50/50, left/right and 65/35 is an 8 if there are not other flaws. Thanks for the input.

  • Options
    mbothnermbothner Posts: 761 ✭✭✭

    @RufussCkingston said:
    The reason it got a 7 is because of the Top edge.... Almost has a divot.

    The top edge was cut that way. If PSA was considering that an issue, they could not even give it a 7 so I do not believe that was a factor in their grading.

  • Options
    mbothnermbothner Posts: 761 ✭✭✭

    @daltex said:
    It is my considered opinion that PSA doesn't measure cards for centering. Rather the graders, who have graded tens if not hundreds of thousands of cards have a very good idea of the eye appeal of "8", say, centering, and grade accordingly.

    I could be completely wrong, and no one at PSA has told me this, but it makes a ton of sense to me.

    The grade on this card came down to centering. Don't think anyone would say this is worse than 70/30. I have had thousands of cards graded myself and have plenty of crazy grading stories both good and bad. Recently, one card I had I thought was a solid 8+ but got a 7. I cracked it out and sent it back in and got a 9.

  • Options
    HarnessracingHarnessracing Posts: 323 ✭✭✭

    PSA doesn’t use their own published standards anymore, not in a long time

  • Options
    mbothnermbothner Posts: 761 ✭✭✭

    @Harnessracing said:
    PSA doesn’t use their own published standards anymore, not in a long time

    If they are not going to follow them, they should at least update them. Customers are agreeing to have PSA grade their cards based on the published grading standards but I do think you are correct.

  • Options
    BBBrkrrBBBrkrr Posts: 949 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @mbothner said:

    @daltex said:

    Recently, one card I had I thought was a solid 8+ but got a 7. I cracked it out and sent it back in and got a 9.

    I am absolutely planning on doing this very thing in the future with some.

  • Options
    RufussCkingstonRufussCkingston Posts: 1,489 ✭✭✭✭

    @mbothner said:

    @RufussCkingston said:
    The reason it got a 7 is because of the Top edge.... Almost has a divot.

    The top edge was cut that way. If PSA was considering that an issue, they could not even give it a 7 so I do not believe that was a factor in their grading.

    I don't doubt it was factory cut that way, not damage, but still it's part of the eye appeal and added to the off center, you get a 7. If it was cut good, then maybe would have been an 8. Except for O-Pee-Chee, a rough cut usually is a deduction/negative attribute....

  • Options
    HarnessracingHarnessracing Posts: 323 ✭✭✭

    I have a box of cracked out flips with 1,2 and 3 grade upgrades on resubmissions.

  • Options
    mbothnermbothner Posts: 761 ✭✭✭

    @RufussCkingston said:

    @mbothner said:

    @RufussCkingston said:
    The reason it got a 7 is because of the Top edge.... Almost has a divot.

    The top edge was cut that way. If PSA was considering that an issue, they could not even give it a 7 so I do not believe that was a factor in their grading.

    I don't doubt it was factory cut that way, not damage, but still it's part of the eye appeal and added to the off center, you get a 7. If it was cut good, then maybe would have been an 8. Except for O-Pee-Chee, a rough cut usually is a deduction/negative attribute....

    Not even getting the OPC benefit of the doubt anymore. I sent in a 1971 Jackie Hernandez red letter and a 1972 Gil Hodges (deceased) and both came back less than I expected because of the rough cut.

  • Options
    82FootballWaxMemorys82FootballWaxMemorys Posts: 1,292 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 22, 2023 12:37PM

    @mbothner said:

    @RufussCkingston said:

    @mbothner said:

    @RufussCkingston said:
    The reason it got a 7 is because of the Top edge.... Almost has a divot.

    The top edge was cut that way. If PSA was considering that an issue, they could not even give it a 7 so I do not believe that was a factor in their grading.

    I don't doubt it was factory cut that way, not damage, but still it's part of the eye appeal and added to the off center, you get a 7. If it was cut good, then maybe would have been an 8. Except for O-Pee-Chee, a rough cut usually is a deduction/negative attribute....

    Not even getting the OPC benefit of the doubt anymore. I sent in a 1971 Jackie Hernandez red letter and a 1972 Gil Hodges (deceased) and both came back less than I expected because of the rough cut.

    Is it being alluded to that a Pete Townsend Lyric in The Who's Join Together may be inplay

    Unless otherwise specified my posts represent only my opinion, not fact.

Sign In or Register to comment.