Quality Control

bgr · March 9, 2024 11:16AM

Occasionally I come across some submissions which I think are incorrectly graded. Sometimes under-graded, sometimes over-graded. I like to watch the trends and I continue to submit with PSA.

Here is a submission which I came across that I found interesting.

https://www.psacard.com/cert/78647562

I love this Marichal card, but this one is rough for the grade. There is an allowance for squiggly aged signatures and Marichal is still signing frequently, but this one was put in the sleeve too soon after signing and those 4 spots sh^H^Hwould prevent this signature from being a 10.

5/8 ?

https://www.psacard.com/cert/78647563

Solid Killebrew. Strong signature in what I consider the preferred spot on this card. The grades are fair. It could be a 2,2.5,3 without complaint.

3/10

https://www.psacard.com/cert/78647564

It's a great grade for the card. With the issues this card has in centering, corners, edges and surface... Maybe I am being overly harsh but I was thinking...

5/10

https://www.psacard.com/cert/78647565

Wow. I love this card. Strong for the card grade. The little fade on the H in the signature hurting the auto grade a bit, but taking nothing away from the clear, bold signature.

What do you think? Would you be happy with these results?

bgr · March 9, 2024 11:36AM

Here's one which popped up in my robot's list for Thome recently that I was amazed by. If you're looking for a Thome 1991 UD Final Edition PSA 10/10 there are a lot coming to market.

All of these PSA 10 for card and PSA 10 for auto. This submission was big and included a lot of autos of Wagner, Thome, & Rolen.

There are cards from this "block" being sold on 4sc now so maybe that means something to somebody.

bgr · March 9, 2024 11:53AM

For any Ripken collectors who might be after a nice dual graded RC as large submission hatched recently. There was another thread about which Ripken and values etc. For auto collectors it's good to know what high-grade population is coming.

The '82 Donruss. I think these were all 9/10 and 3? 10/10.

The '82 Fleer

https://www.psacard.com/cert/82626360 9/10
https://www.psacard.com/cert/82626361 9/10
https://www.psacard.com/cert/82626362 9/10
https://www.psacard.com/cert/82626363 9/10
https://www.psacard.com/cert/82626364 9/10
https://www.psacard.com/cert/82626365 9/10
https://www.psacard.com/cert/82626366 8/10
https://www.psacard.com/cert/82626368 8/10

'82 Topps T

https://www.psacard.com/cert/82626358 9/10

'82 Topps

bgr · April 11, 2024 10:03AM

I sent a '68 Ryan with Auto in for crossover from Beckett to PSA (In the Beckett slab). It was a Beckett 6/10 and this is a card that I pulled from a cello pack myself, got autographed myself, and submitted myself. N0/Auth. Not a big card/Not a big deal. I just wonder what they're seeing that makes it look altered.

RufussCkingston · April 11, 2024 11:39AM

Looks short, so maybe it got a min-size on the card grade. I take it that you didn't sub with a min grade

RonSportscards · April 11, 2024 12:06PM

@bgr said:
I sent a '68 Ryan with Auto in for crossover from Beckett to PSA (In the Beckett slab). It was a Beckett 6/10 and this is a card that I pulled from a cello pack myself, got autographed myself, and submitted myself. N0/Auth. Not a big card/Not a big deal. I just wonder what they're seeing that makes it look altered.

It that a scratch resulting in paper loss, or a print line, running beneath the player's names.
Was that there before, or maybe caused during the crackout, if it is a scratch?

bgr · April 11, 2024 12:19PM

Looks short, so maybe it got a min-size on the card grade. I take it that you didn't sub with a min grade

That should be N6 rather than N0 (Right?). This is in QA checks so usually I get the little N0 designation once it's through those. I'll post when I have it.

When I compare it to other '68s in the same slab it I would say it sure could be min size. This is the only '68 Ryan I have that doesn't fill the space. The Beckett slab had it in a mylar envelope and I never gave it a second thought.

It that a scratch resulting in paper loss, or a print line, running beneath the player's names.
Was that there before, or maybe caused during the crackout?

It's a print defect - it was there. I had assumed that, and the centering, was the reason for the 6 Beckett grade.

When it gets home I'll crack it and measure and look at the edges to see if I can sort out what they might have seen. I don't know if this is more "error on the side of caution" or if it's "mistakes happen" or which is worse.

bgr · April 11, 2024 1:20PM

This one bummed me out a bit. Thought ...maybe... my quest for a 9/10 '75 Rice was over... but... what's that?

Before

After

It was 50/50 with that print dot in the upper right, but... bummer. Thankfully Rice remains under-appreciated and is alive & signing.

bgr · April 16, 2024 9:28AM

I don't have any information on the Ryan from PSA so I'll have to email them.

I don't understand the difference between N0: Authentic and AA: Authentic Altered. It reads like they are used "interchangeably" but I ask.. why?

RufussCkingston · April 16, 2024 10:10AM

To avoid this happening in the future, I'd submit with a min card grade of PSA 5 or something, as they may not really get a good measurement till it's cracked out. So if they crack it out and then discover it is short or altered, they can't give it an Auth cause they already commited to giving it a grade 5 or higher, or they'd have to pay you out if they really don't want to give it a number grade.

RufussCkingston · April 16, 2024 10:14AM

@bgr said:
This one bummed me out a bit. Thought ...maybe... my quest for a 9/10 '75 Rice was over... but... what's that?

Before

After

It was 50/50 with that print dot in the upper right, but... bummer. Thankfully Rice remains under-appreciated and is alive & signing.

I'd say it was more like 8-8.5 with the top right corner and the bottom right edge chips.. was this a crack and resubmit or did you send it to get a numeric grade? Is that a new chip on the left or a surface turd?

bgr · April 16, 2024 10:41AM

It is a new chip on the left. I cracked and submitted this under value service level and this was not on the 'first view' images so I just email them and ask them to take a look. Could have been a 9... don't take that away from me.

Quality Control

Comments