does anyone ever ...

wolfbear

Just made another submission, which brings me to about 400 vintage cards submitted,
in the last 2 months, so am still new at this ...

But does anyone else sandwich high 7 to low 8 star cards in between lower end 7 commons,
so the star cards will look better by comparison.

Or have I been over-analyzing the entire process ...

FB

Nope...

I think that its a game that a lot of us play. I usually only send in cards that I feel should get 8 or better. So, when I set up the invoice, I try to start out with the "lower end" 8's and take my lumps early. The hope is that later in the batch, that the comparison between 8 and 9 quality becomes easier to see.

Of course - after 5000 cards submitted - I still can't say whether or not it really works!!!

rbeaton

<< <i>So, when I set up the invoice, I try to start out with the "lower end" 8's and take my lumps early. >>



So, what happens when they take them out to check them in, then the grader starts from the end of the invoice and works back

Robert

FB

Actually... on some invoices... it seems like they drop them on the floor first and grade them in the same order that they pick them up!

ChrisKK

along the same lines ...... does anyone feel that PSA grades differently for different people? i've read the note that says the grader does not know who is submitting what but, does anyone feel that the new submitter gets average grades where the veteran submitter gets above average grades. I know the veteran, most likley, has a better eye for good cards, so i don't mean that. i am talking about the cards that are in the 9 holder that looks like a 7 or the card in the 7 holder that looks like a 9.


stop talking about me!!! i can hear you. oh, wait .... those are just the voices in my head.

Cubfan

A question Ive always had is whether or not the PSA graders look at the population report before grading. Ive wondered if they give a closer look to a card that may not have a 9 population than they might to a card that has 900 9's already graded. Does anyone know?

riccaboni

ChrisKK,

I submit cards every so often. I get accurate grades. Everyone gets fairly accurate grades. I agree they miss one here and there, but there is no reason to think that PSA has prefferential treatment for anyone. I feel it's pretty safe to say that that statement holds true. I've gotten 10s, 9s, 8s, 7s, 6s just like everyone else has. There is no reason to worry.

Ian

69topps8

<< <i>along the same lines ...... does anyone feel that PSA grades differently for different people? i've read the note that says the grader does not know who is submitting what but, does anyone feel that the new submitter gets average grades where the veteran submitter gets above average grades. I know the veteran, most likley, has a better eye for good cards, so i don't mean that. i am talking about the cards that are in the 9 holder that looks like a 7 or the card in the 7 holder that looks like a 9.


stop talking about me!!! i can hear you. oh, wait .... those are just the voices in my head. >>




Maybe in the "bad old days", if ever. The very first card I ever submitted in my 4 card "freebie" invoice was a '69 Clemente they graded a '9'. I don't think PSA favors high volume submitters as far as grades are concerned. You only need to look at certain dealers, who will remain nameless, who left PSA because they weren't getting enough high grades. I think high volume dealers have more high end cards because they, a) have a better eye, b) have more raw material to mine for gems and c) purchase 9's on the secondary market. I know a few high volume submitters and they never got preferential grades.

Davalillo

I will submit over 10,000 cards this year, psa certainly knows who I am and that I submit a lot of cards and I can attest that I do not get preferential grades. I would think, however, for high value or low pop cards vintage cards that psa looks at these very, very carefully--more so than your average 1968 psa 8 or 9.

FB

And don't forget that no matter how hard they try - you'll never get two different people to assign the same grade to the same card 100% of the time. There are definitely easy graders, "dead on" graders and hard graders as well... and in their eyes, the grades that they are assigning meet the criteria that PSA has laid down.

So, have I ever received lower grades on better cards - yes! higher grades on worse cards - yes again!

I too have heard stories from the early years of PSA and I have to admit that I haven't seen anything to substantiate it in the 2 - 3 years that I've been submitting.

mikeschmidt

<<A question Ive always had is whether or not the PSA graders look at the population report before grading. Ive wondered if they give a closer look to a card that may not have a 9 population than they might to a card that has 900 9's already graded. Does anyone know? >>

I think that there are some cards that have "unusually high" populations in PSA 9 and PSA 10 -- which means that some cards will have a very hard time at grading out at PSA 9 or PSA 10 again. For example -- I would argue that PSA would never grade another 1955 Bowman Mickey Mantle card as a PSA 10 -- the population is 3, and there are only 16 10's in the set. No more 10's will be assigned. 1957 Topps Les Moss PSA 10. 1968 Topps Don Drysdale PSA 10. Those are all examples.

I guess what I am saying is that it works the opposite of the way you suggested -- I don't think PSA will be noticeably harsh on a card just because it has not had a "9" yet. However, if that card has a disproportionate number of PSA 9's given a set or some other circumstances, I think it will be harding for incremental 9's to be awarded.

MS

FB

I can't imagine that graders would look at the pop reports (especially for commons) before they grade a card. There is just too much pressure to grade quickly and accurately to be concerend whether this is the first "9" or "10". Besides - the grading criteria should be the same whether its the 1st one or the 100th.

Cubfan

Thanks for the replies. I was just curious and wondered if any of you knew if there was a preference (good or bad) to low pop cards during grading. You always hope everything is done on a fair, square and relatively consistent basis. Im just glad to have that confirmed.

Mantlefan

I think the grading has been fair. On cards I've really disagreed with PSA, I've resubmitted the cards and often will get a better grade.

purelyPSA

mikeschmidt - take a look at the pop on the LC Greenwood RC in '72 Topps. Out of 157 cards graded, there are 41 10s! And it's not like that's a common, what with the strong Steeler contingency out there. A stat like that would lead me to believe that they'll grade a card a 10 if they feel it's a 10, rather than putting a cap on the number of Gem Mint grades they're willing to give a card. It could be different for cards from the 50s and back, but it seems that newer, deserving cards aren't being held back because of populations.

mikeschmidt

PurelyPSA -- The question is, though, when were they graded? How many 10's do you think will be graded of the next 157 submitted? This would be an interesting "test" example to keep track of. Or -- I can pull out my 1999 Population Report and try and figure out what the population was back then.