three of kind becomes a small straight

yawie99

just wanted to share the results of a trio of psa 7 '53-54 parkhurst cards i cracked out and resubmitted to psa (invoice 8024199):

hergesheimer - now a 6
peters - still a 7
dewsbury - now an 8

i'm pretty pleased to land the 8 - a first on one of my own vintage invoices - and my disappointment on the 6 is tempered by the fact that i purchased an 8 of the card after i had busted out the former 7. but even with this very small sample size, it's hard not to be a tad disconcerted by the lack of consistency.

LloydsBaseballCards

How old were the grades you cracked out?

yawie99

they all had verification numbers starting with 0, so these cards' original grades were probably at least a year old.

Mefer

Grading is, and always will be, subjective. As such, banking on getting the same grades each time just will not happen. The fact that your new grades are "in the ball park" (i.e., go down one grade, stays the same, goes up one grade) does nonetheless suggest to me PSA is applying consistent standards (your average grade remains a 7). I would be more concerned if you had 6s going to 9s, 7s to 10s, etc. A one grade swing is not a big deal in my mind. As many of us have said here before, there are "high end" and "low end" cards of each grade. As such, your new 6 may have been a low end 7 while your new 7 may have been a high end 7. All told, I would not be concerned.

yawie99

i agree with you to an extent - especially since these cards were just three commons. but i'm sure this pattern is not out of the ordinary and probably could've easily taken place with far more valuable cards. it's just another little thing that makes me question the tremendous amount of faith we place in grading.

brucemo

It's true that PSA is not consistent, and you are right to be concerned about it. You were lucky to have had the results that you did. The 8 more than makes up for the 6, especially since you've already upgraded it.

bruce