A good Test for PSA's Quality

jrinck

Don't expect this thread to last, but I'd be surprised if I'm the only one who's ever thought of it. In fact, there are probably those out there who routinely do this...

Since PSA is obviously struggling to meet demand right now, one could reasonably conjecture that the graders are a bit overworked and, perhaps, not as thorough compared to when business is slower. A good experiment, thus, is to submit about 100 cards for grading during a slow period, note the grades, and then crack them out and resubmit during busy times such as now, comparing the old grades versus the new. If the grades are, collectively, better or worse depending on the time submitted, one would know when it was best to send in marginal cards versus really nice ones.

You know, I wonder if PSA even does this on their own to compile their own quality control statistics! Why not?

dbj77

Although I think this experiment is a good idea, I don't think it would work. There is no such thing as a control group and besides people have sent the same card in multiple times and gotten multiple grades.

Howitallbegan

John

How about a little more positivity . We have enough trouble arise without someone going looking for it

CON40

I agree... let's not drag these guys through the mud tonight. They try to do their best at all times regardless of "cardflow"... Your suggestion might be worth something if you could guarantee the same grader(s) reviewed each submission. Otherwise, this is a fool's errand.

murcerfan

edited to say : I feel an intervention coming on.

qualitycards

JRINCK - I'd be happy to participate in your experiment, I'll submit the 100 cards for grading, and when the slow period arises you can send me $600 + shipping costs to resubmit them again ...jay

jaybyrd

I just received the grades back from PSA a few days ago. All six were graded as I expected. Of course I had hoped a couple would squeak through to a higher grade, but I am glad PSA is strict on their grading. My confidence level has always remained constant.

1954 Berra - PSA 5 (thought I had a six)
1956 Aaron - PSA 6 (as expected, card has better color than most)
1956 Koufax - PSA 6
1962 Mathews - PSA 7 (I resubmitted since card has 8 or better centering and corners, faint fish eyes in the background downgraded.)
1965 Clemente - PSA 7 (Not perfectly centered, but no other problems
1970 Bench - PSA 8 (Hoped for an eight, but am still happy. This card looks nicer than the 9 currently on e-bay.)

jrinck

<< <i>JRINCK - I'd be happy to participate in your experiment, I'll submit the 100 cards for grading, and when the slow period arises you can send me $600 + shipping costs to resubmit them again ...jay >>



Doing my best Jackie Gleason impression: "OOOMPH!"

qualitycards

JR - Anyone who mentions the Great One (Not talking Gretzky here) is alright by me!...jay
I may have to put on a few episodes of the 'Mooners later tonight.