Home› PSA Set Registry Forum

How does requesting "no qualifiers" effect the grade?

MorrellManMorrellMan Posts: 3,238 ✭✭✭
in PSA Set Registry Forum
I've been reading about this here and I'm a little confused: Someone in an earlier thread said that a "no qualifier" request will usually lower the grade by one; the set registry rules says a qualifier lowers the grade by two. Can anyone share their experience with me? Also, do you just "no qualifiers" across the invoice? I didn't even know you could do that....


Edited to get off Robert's icon and to seek an indelible identify of my own....and I swore I'd never become my father....
Mark (amerbbcards)


"All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Comments

  • rbeatonrbeaton Posts: 631 ✭
    In that other thread, I was really talking about a specific card. In general, centering could just be a little off, causing a grade to go down by 1, or it could be way off and cause a grade to be lower by 2 or more. The registry takes off 2 points no matter how much the qualified attribute affects the card.

    Robert

    P.S. Hey MorrellMan, you stole my icon!
    Looking for:
    Any high grade OPC Jim Palmer
    High grade Redskins (pre 1980)
  • FBFB Posts: 1,684 ✭✭
    MorellMan,

    Robert is correct.

    Ever seen an 8OC that is so far off-center that there is BARELY any border left on on side? Well, if the submitter had requested "No Qualifiers" - this card might grade as a PSA 3 because the centering is 90/10 even though the corners are PSA 8 sharp.

    And there are some cards that get the PSA 8OC but the centering is really 75/25 - just enough to keep it from being an 8 but the corners are 8 sharp. So, in this case the "No Qualifers" would net you a PSA 7.
    Frank Bakka
    Sets - 1970, 1971 and 1972
    Always looking for 1972 O-PEE-CHEE Baseball in PSA 9 or 10!

    lynnfrank@earthlink.net
    outerbankyank on eBay!
  • 1420sports1420sports Posts: 3,473 ✭✭✭
    This may sound strange, but I wish OC qualifiers did not exist. MK qualifiers make sense, as do PD qualifiers to a degree. I have seen many OC PSA 8's and 9's that seemed okay to me but I didn't buy due to the designation. I know that seems contradictory but unfortunately that's just the way it is. Let the collector decide if centering is a problem.
    collecting various PSA and SGC cards
  • ctsoxfanctsoxfan Posts: 6,246 ✭✭
    Unfortunately, it's too late for that. Let's take the 1979 Ozzie Smith RC as an example. A very large percentage of these cards are o/c, but with nice color and corners. Are these 8 o/c's and 9 o/c's now worth the same to the collector and straight 8's and 9's? No way. I hate the qualifiers myself, but imagine the wide variety in quality you would have in 9's, if centering qualifiers were not used. Or, how about buying a 9 on Ebay without a scan and getting a badly o/c card?
    image
  • JasP24JasP24 Posts: 4,645 ✭✭✭
    Here my take based on info I received from PSA in the past when I asked the same question. A card will NOT be assessed an (OC) qualifier unless the centering is equal to the standards two grades lower.

    For example, a card that exhibit's all the qualities of a PSA 8, except the centering which only meets the standards for a PSA 6 or lower will receive a qualifier. PSA 8 (OC)

    If a card exhibits all the qualities of a PSA 8, yet the centering only meets the standards of a PSA 7, the card will be graded a PSA 7, no qualifier.

    Jason
    I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit,
    according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
  • theplasticmantheplasticman Posts: 333


    << <i>Here my take based on info I received from PSA in the past when I asked the same question. A card will NOT be assessed an (OC) qualifier unless the centering is equal to the standards two grades lower.

    For example, a card that exhibit's all the qualities of a PSA 8, except the centering which only meets the standards for a PSA 6 or lower will receive a qualifier. PSA 8 (OC)

    If a card exhibits all the qualities of a PSA 8, yet the centering only meets the standards of a PSA 7, the card will be graded a PSA 7, no qualifier.

    Jason >>



    Makes sense.
    Eddie Murray, Will Clark and Darin Erstad collector, check my wantlists for what I need.
    http://www.clark22murray33.com
  • iamthegreatcornholioiamthegreatcornholio Posts: 3,366
    Don't forget "MC" that hurts the card the most.
    Brian
  • packCollectorpackCollector Posts: 2,786 ✭✭✭
    I think o/c qualifiers have a purpose, they put a designation on a card that is probably pack fresh but like 50$ of the cards that come from packs , the centering is lacking. many collectors prefer that card to a psa 6 that has gotten around. without qualifiers, they would receive the same grade.
  • scottsusorscottsusor Posts: 1,210
    Just my opinion, worth what you paid for it, but I believe that allowing specification of "No Qualifiers" and adjusting the grade down because of it, is the single biggest mistake PSA makes in their business philosophy. I believe it undermines the entire foundation on which card grading exists. If PSA (or any company) is going to include qualifiers as a standard part of their grading philosophy, then it should not be an option for a customer to cancel it out by specifying "No Qualifiers." The submitted card should be graded universally and consistently for what it is. I believe that PSA should either USE the qualifier system or DON'T USE the qualifier system, but it should not be at the customer's discretion as to when its used and when its not.

    Scott
  • MorrellManMorrellMan Posts: 3,238 ✭✭✭
    thanks for all the wisdom - I know a lot more about this than I did before, and actually I'm glad to know that it's not just a simple matter of requesting no qualifiers and dropping 2 grades; makes me feel more comfortable with what those guys are doing at PSA. Robert - I noticed too late that I took your icon - is there a way I can grab an icon off the list that I can be sure no one is using?
    Mark (amerbbcards)


    "All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
  • poolpool Posts: 58 ✭✭
    I believe that PSA should either USE the qualifier system or DON'T USE the qualifier system, but it should not be at the customer's discretion as to when its used and when its not.

    I agreed completely.
    Submitters should not be able to effect or change the grade.
  • WabittwaxWabittwax Posts: 1,984 ✭✭✭
    In all honesty, once you get a very good eye for cards, you shouldn't get hardly any qualifiers. I never write "no qualifiers" on my invoices and I very rarely get one. The only purpose for it might be for a high dollar card.
  • rbeatonrbeaton Posts: 631 ✭


    << <i>Robert - I noticed too late that I took your icon - is there a way I can grab an icon off the list that I can be sure no one is using? >>

    I was just kidding about taking my icon, you didn't have to change it (there are several others who have it as well). I consider it mine because I'm the one who loaded it up in the first place. So, are you a Palmer fan, or a fan of the other guy image

    Robert
    Looking for:
    Any high grade OPC Jim Palmer
    High grade Redskins (pre 1980)
  • MorrellManMorrellMan Posts: 3,238 ✭✭✭
    Robert - cool....even tho I'm a fan of the other guy, could you tell me how to load my own icon? I actually wanted to use a little pic of my '59 Morrell Koufax, shredded as it is.
    Mark (amerbbcards)


    "All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
  • 1967topps1967topps Posts: 459 ✭✭
    >>I wish OC qualifiers did not exist.

    there is such a place, it's called SGC...
    ebay:1967topps
    1967and 1973 Topps baseball wantlists (any condition) welcome. Once had the #14 ATF 1967 set. Yet another collector like skylaneflyer, gimel1 who made it to the completion of 1967 only to need the money more than the company of 609 close friends.
    Looking for oddball Norm Cash and Cleon Jones stuff, and 1956 team cards
  • toppsguntoppsgun Posts: 787 ✭
    lol
  • scottsusorscottsusor Posts: 1,210


    << <i>>>I wish OC qualifiers did not exist.

    there is such a place, it's called SGC... >>


    Maybe they have the patent. image

    Scott
  • srs1asrs1a Posts: 398 ✭
    Actually, I believe that PSA is the only grading company that uses qualifiers...As someone said above, SGC doesn't...and neither does GAI...likewise for BVG/BGS...SCD didn't either.

    I also believe that requesting no qualifiers is completely legit and does nothing to "undermine the entire foundation on which card grading exists". In the description of each and every grade is a centering criterion. If a card doesn't make it, then down it goes until it fits...just like corners or anything else.
    Dr S. of the Dead Donkeys MC
  • scottsusorscottsusor Posts: 1,210


    << <i>I also believe that requesting no qualifiers is completely legit and does nothing to "undermine the entire foundation on which card grading exists". In the description of each and every grade is a centering criterion. If a card doesn't make it, then down it goes until it fits...just like corners or anything else. >>


    With all due respect, your assertion that, "... If a card doesn't make it, then down it goes until it fits...just like corners or anything else ..." is absolutely correct but completely misses my point.

    I have no problem with a card getting the "down it goes" treatment in the grading process, for whatever shortcomings the card has -- worn corners, edge dings, surface wrinkles, stains, AND BEING OFF-CENTER. That's precisely why there is a grading process, correct?

    My point is that the same card should not be subject to two different grades on the basis of what the submitter specifies. If you had two essentially identical cards, they should get an identical grade. With the "No Qualifers" specification, one could become an "8 OC" and the other could become a straight "6" correct? Why? What possible justification is there for this in terms of the main goal of professional grading, which is CONSISTENCY? What is CONSISTENT about two essentially identical cards getting two completely different grades?

    Scott
  • WinPitcherWinPitcher Posts: 27,726 ✭✭✭
    I have in my collection a PSA 6 1955 Mays that is centered 50/50 side to side and 98/2 top to bottom, I didnt pay much for it as it came in a lot that i purchased. In any event I think that I would have preferred that card being graded 8oc then as a 6. the centering did not change with the grade given. what i have is a card that no matter what it's grade it has the centering issue. luckily for me its top to bottom.....I have a psa5 killebrew that is centered 50/50 all the way around has decent corners yet it was given only a 5, I think that we put to much stock in the grading of cards professionaly, and that it is best to buy the card not the holder. one thing that is good abt buying a psa card is that you are at least assured that the card has not been trimmed and is authentic. what do the others on the board think? I sure as heck think that regardless if a card gets a qualifier or not I can still see its centering.

    image
    Good for you.
  • scottsusorscottsusor Posts: 1,210


    << <i>I sure as heck think that regardless if a card gets a qualifier or not I can still see its centering. >>


    Which is exactly why I maintain that CONSISTENCY is (or should be) the main goal in professional grading. Unless you're Mr. Magoo, you can see that a card is off-centered without 10x magnification. What truly makes a card a 6 should not be its centering -- it should be things you CAN'T see with the naked eye, period. That is why it makes no sense to offer an optional downgrading of a card from 8 OC to 6 simply by requesting "No Qualifiers."

    Scott

    Edited for typo.
  • mojorobmojorob Posts: 392 ✭✭
    Scott,
    You are making WAY TOO MUCH SENSE HERE.
    Stop it right now......MISTER!! image

    Kirk
  • SKINSFANSKINSFAN Posts: 1,032
    I hate to be the 1 to disagree here but i feel 100% in the other direction.The no qualifiers really reflects a much more true grade. After all if psa sets limits at 60/40 centering for a psa 9 i dont care how sharp the corners are if its a 90/10 centered card its a psa 6 in my book.I dont think quilifers should even be a option.If a card is centered perfect has great corners but a huge wax stain on the front is it mint? NO. Also oc cards just dont have the same eye appeal in my book.Well thats just my 2 cents. Just to add 1 more thing think about this if you have a otherwise mint card that has a scrach or two on the front why is that a 6 at best in the logic of qualifiers should it not be a mint 9 scrach qualifier?
  • scottsusorscottsusor Posts: 1,210


    << <i>... if you have a otherwise mint card that has a scrach or two on the front why is that a 6 at best in the logic of qualifiers should it not be a mint 9 scrach qualifier? >>


    Yes it should and once again, that supports my perspective 100%. I STILL have not heard a logical explanation for giving the customer the OPTION to get such a card graded as EITHER a 9 with a qualifier or a straight 7 with no qualifier. This is the same card! Why allow for it be able to receive two very different grades?

    Mojorob -- LOL! -- I'll try to make less sense in the future! image

    Scott
  • srs1asrs1a Posts: 398 ✭
    It appears that there are rather strong opinions on this one and I agree with SKINSFAN. It's really a stretch to say that an inconsistency is generated when PSA slabs a card with an 8OC or a 7,6,5, etc if NQ's are specified on the invoice. When I evaluate a card with Q's, I basically assign a NQ grade to it. A PSA-8OC card is not a nm/mt card!

    We've all seen plenty of beautiful, pack-fresh cards sitting in 4 or 5 slabs...and its clear that there is a (factory) wrinkle somewhere. So, why don't these guys get 8-W's? Its a factory defect just like print marks, centering, etc. Why don't wrinkles get their own qualifier? What's so special about PD's and centering?

    I see no inconsistency or problem with PSA providing non qualififed grades when requested.

    Dr S. of the Dead Donkeys MC
  • scottsusorscottsusor Posts: 1,210
    Let's try an analogy. Two cars, same make, model, and year. One has a small dent on the fender but runs perfectly. The other is pristine but won't start. Both the buyer and seller are aware of this information. Should the two cars be valued the same? Obviously not.

    Now let's suppose that a seller owns both cars. Both start and run fine but one has a rolled back odometer, known only to the seller. The seller knows but says nothing to the buyer. Should the seller be able to get the same price for both?

    Think about it but be careful with your answer.

    Scott
  • srs1asrs1a Posts: 398 ✭
    Scott, the car with the rolled back odometer has been tampered with...like a trimmed or color touched card, so has no place in this discussion.

    Leaving qualifiers off a card LOWERS its grade. It isn't fooling anyone or trying to deceive anyone. In my opinion, a NQ grade is a more accurate reflection of the quality of the card.
    Dr S. of the Dead Donkeys MC
  • scottsusorscottsusor Posts: 1,210


    << <i>Scott, the car with the rolled back odometer has been tampered with...like a trimmed or color touched card, so has no place in this discussion.

    Leaving qualifiers off a card LOWERS its grade. It isn't fooling anyone or trying to deceive anyone. In my opinion, a NQ grade is a more accurate reflection of the quality of the card. >>


    You're right -- The car with the rolled back odometer has been tampered with but it would not be recognized by the typical car buyer. How would the typical graded card buyer recognize what is wrong (not tampering, just some type of defect) with a PSA 6 or PSA 7 that was reduced from a PSA 8 or PSA 9 just because the submitter requested "No Qualifiers?" Perhaps its a wax stain, or some other very light stain, or some type of very minor production defect -- that is not instantly recognizable without 10x magnification. The point is that when "No Qualifiers" is allowed, defects are made essentially unrecognizable, as if the submitter was attempting to hide it. Sure, the grade is lowered, but how would the potential buyer truly know why its a 6 or 7. Or is that not important? If somebody is BUYING THE CARD and not BUYING THE HOLDER, I would think it would be.

    By the way, I'm not arguing that an NQ grade is not a more accurate reflection of the quality of the card. In fact, I agree with you. What I AM saying is that it should not be an option for the submitter to dictate. In the best of all worlds, wouldn't you agree that if the card is an 8 PD, and it gets downed to a 6 because of a production defect -- then a truly better way to describe it grade-wise is as a 6 PD?

    Why allow for effectively HIDING the PD simply by giving it a 6 NQ instead of an 8 PD?

    Scott

    Edited for typo.
  • WinPitcherWinPitcher Posts: 27,726 ✭✭✭
    In my opinion things that can be seen readily with the naked eye such as centering, print dots and stains should not be allowed to have that advantage. Cards with unseen problems to the naked eye should be given the qualifier without exception. I person that submits a card should be able to ask for no qualifiers, then its up to the grader to do what he feels is best. I would much prefer to have my Mays as 8 oc (only if the stigma wasnt attached as it seems to be) then a 6 that anyone can readily see is OC hmmmmm I think

    edited to say:

    srs makes a valid point
    Good for you.
  • jackstrawjackstraw Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭
    looks like walt requested no q's onthis one? he scored an 8? so maybe the front centering will get you a lower grade say a 6 or 7 but the back only lowers it one grade?
    Collector Focus

    ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
  • MorrellManMorrellMan Posts: 3,238 ✭✭✭
    Very interesting thread here - since I posed the question in the first place, let me add my perceptions prior to this question being asked. To me, qualifiers are defects in the card that have nothing to do with the way the card was treated after being pulled from the pack or the box or whatever. As such, short of ignoring the defect, a qualifier is the best way to allow for accurate grading of the rest of the card. What precipitated this query was a greedy perception that I might be able to get a 7 NQ on a card that might otherwise grade 8 OC - I have been greatly educated by this thread and I have no intention of requesting no qualifiers on my submissions. As far as Scott's challenge, I agree. In terms of advising collectors of condition, I don't see the purpose of grading a card with no qualifiers. The qualifiers are meant to "qualify" a grade by including those defects of printing that accompanied the card into the pack, box, whatever.
    Mark (amerbbcards)


    "All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
  • VirtualizardVirtualizard Posts: 1,936 ✭✭


    << <i>looks like walt requested no q's onthis one? he scored an 8? so maybe the front centering will get you a lower grade say a 6 or 7 but the back only lowers it one grade? >>




    If I submitted that card (which I wouldn't do if I had it), it would come back with an MC qualifier for sure. I don't care as much about back centering in general, but that is horrible. At least the seller is honest enough to post a scan of the back - it probably cost him some money, though.

    Just to clarify, littledevildog is a great seller to deal with on ebay. I'm surprised that this card was even submitted to PSA in the first place.

    JEB.
  • WinPitcherWinPitcher Posts: 27,726 ✭✭✭
    he sez in the desription "very nicely centered" the front is off the back like you say is mis cut.....how that got an 8 is beyond me it may have 8 corners and sides, the centering is a 6 at best in the front and a 0 for the back.......
    Good for you.
  • poolpool Posts: 58 ✭✭
    I see no inconsistency or problem with PSA providing non qualififed grades when requested

    The inconsistency is that one card could get 2 different grades.
  • srs1asrs1a Posts: 398 ✭
    I must be missing the points of several of the comments above...oh, well. I'll try one more time, then disappear to the Carribean for 10 days and not think of it again!imageimage

    The "defect" that you are hiding when you request a NQ grade is an overall better card than the grade suggests. The defect that would have been ID'ed with a qualified grade is 100% consistent with the NQ grade. I maintain that this is not any sort of deception...but, apparently, others think otherwise.

    The "inconsistency" of obtaining 2 different grades for the same card (eg. 8OC and 6NQ) doesn't bother me. In my mind a qualified grade is a significantly lesser grade to start with.

    What does bother me about qualified grades is someone marketing a PSA-8OC as a PSA-8 card in the auction title and then putting the qualifier in small print inside of the auction. I'm still mad about getting burned on an auction like this 4 years ago. image.



    Dr S. of the Dead Donkeys MC
Sign In or Register to comment.