The Grader Of Death Sucks!

Remobolan

I need some help here. I recently received my results from a "Free Set Registry 75%" submission and I am furious! I have over 400 PSA graded cards and the five that I sent in for this submission I spent hours reviewing and agonizing over. These were low population cards that I have been searching for for a year. I had at least two of each one of these and in two cases five, I sent in the best of the best, (other than the Manny Fernandez which I had hoped would be maybe a 9 knocked down to a 7, since I spoke to customer service and told them that I had forgotten to put "no qualifiers" on the order and was assured that it would be taken care of, recieved an 8OC). If the 3 cards that were graded 7 are really 7's then over half of the cards that I have in my collection graded at 8 or 9 need to be regraded and reduced to 6 or 7. I know that it is only 3 cards but damn I am pissed. I think I am more angry because it was free more then anything else. I consider myself a halfway decent screener. On my last submission I received two 9's, three 8's and one 7, and I knew that the seven was going to be a seven and had no problem with that. Anyway, I have to vent.

Now I need some advise. I have 40 cards that I have gathered together out of about 100 I have purchased over the last year and I was going to send them in. Now, I am scared to death. I would go balistic if I sent in 40 cards and the idiot who graded these got them and I got 8 8's and 32 7's. What the heck should I do, I'm like you guys money does not grow on trees and I really want to finish my set. I only need 32 more cards. Can I resub these three and ask for a review? How much does that cost? Or do I just sell my set and forget about this grading crap, it's starting to give me nightmares.

Helpless In Columbus!!!!

Submission #556020 43085

67standup

I'm sorry for your experience. My definition of submission worthy changed as soon as I started using a 10x loupe.

goodriddance189

i don't think it's a "grader of death" so much as it is a guy who knows absolutely jack about grading cards. i've read so many posts from people complaining about the grades they get on their supposed "perfect" cards. at first, i just wrote it off as rookie submitters. but i've recently seen posts by long time, eagle-eye guys who are absolutely getting hammered on their submissions. of course, none of the higher-ups at PSA ever come on here to defend their case. occasionally, they'll delete posts they deem as "attacking" them, but not much else.

i don't see how people continue to submit to PSA when this happens. people give other grading companies crap about being too lenient, or too inconsistent, saying they are simply bad graders. well guess what people, grading too tough is the same thing. in fact, i think routinely grading way too tough is a huge red flag. it is INCORRECT GRADING, plain and simple. at this rate, i will NEVER submit a card to PSA, at least until this kind of stuff stops. if i submit, i expect consistent grading year-round. i do not want to lose possibly hundreds of dollars because PSA's obviously incompetent grader happens to be working that day. it isn't fair, and it shouldn't be tolerated.

if i get banned for this post, then so be it.

Slabbed

If the grades do not fit you must resubmit.

grilloj39

I think you might have misjudged the centering on the Fernandez card. Are you sure it meant the centering requirements for a PSA 9? The fact that the graders put an "OC" qualifier on it tells me maybe that card wasn't a 9. Now I am not sure about the other one's you mentioned.

I only thing I can suggest is if you feel your cards look nice (whether they are 7s, 8s,or 9s) then maybe that should be good enough. I think the "competition" thing on the registry is overblown at times. (Remember grading is subjective--like figure skating judges). Who can have the highest graded set, doesn't necessarily mean that person has the nicest looking cards. The registry is fun and I enjoy it, but I am not too concerned with strict grading standards.

FB

I gotta admit - that I' have definitely found inconsistency in orders taken out of the same box. I've found that cards sent in under a Vintage Common invoice got bashed harder than those on a Modern Invoice - and I'm not talking about 50's versus 90's - I'm talking 67's and 69's versus 72's.

grilloj39

Will has a good point here...whether grading is strict, lenient, or somewhere in between, it needs to be consistent and fair.

Remobolan

Grillo, What I meant on the Fernandez was that it was a perfect card other than the off center top to bottom. I forgot to put "No Qualifers" on my order form and when I called customer service they said they would put it on the order form no problem.

A) they didn't put it on the form so I got a qualifer
9 0C's do exist I have several of them in a pile I use to hold my office door open.
C) when a card is graded without qualifiers it is my understanding that it usually knocks the grade down 1 to 2 levels i.e. if it was a 9 maybe I could get a 7 with no qualifiers.
And, finally I have alot of 7's & 6's and some OC's that I like in my sets. I just don't send them in to be graded because I don't need an idiot to tell me that they are not 8's.

67standup I have a 10X Loupe. I used it.

goodriddance I understand your frustraition. I am not ready to give up yet. But you could have knocked me over with a feather when I saw those results. I wish, as much as I hate Beckett, that I could at least find out why this moron graded them so low. a note, a hint, something.

Thanks for the imput guys.

BBNUT

There is too much inconsistency in grading vintage commons. One grader's view of the card differs too much from another grader's view. What I consider an 8 or 9 using a 10x and 16x loupe gets hammered to a 6 or 7. And some of these are better than 8s I see all the time. Do graders have the pop reports on their desks when they grade? There may be a mass exodus from grading vintage commons in the future if this harsh grading continues. It demoralizes the veteran collector and makes you wonder if the raw card collecting will prevail stronger in the future over subjective card grading. A point to ponder.

toppsgun

I have never gotten a fair shake on the 75% completion freebie submissions. I was ticked on the first one, got wise on the second one and sent in crap on the third one just for grins. I think I've had two 8's out of 15 cards.

I figure I got what I paid for. I resubmitted several under a paid invoice and got what I was looking for.

Graders know that a 5-card invoice of commons is likely a freebie, so they hammer it. They know full well they'll see the card again, from a paying customer. Just being a good company man, I guess.

scottsusor

<< <i>It demoralizes the veteran collector and makes you wonder if the raw card collecting will prevail stronger in the future over subjective card grading. A point to ponder. >>


Excellent point. It definitely pushes the two worlds (raw vs. graded collecting) further apart and puts PSA at risk of undermining their own success story (the PSA Set Registry). It wouldn't be the first time for that though. Remember when IBM was the undisputed king of the computer world?

Scott

Ripken

Rem,

The increased toughness on vintage cards has been a popular topic here lately. 9's are very, very tough now and 10s seem impossible. I know PSA hears from lots of disappointed collectors but those of us who have submitted thousands of vintage cards over a 3 or 4 year period and suddenly see undergrading are, apparently, being taken seriously and should be. Joe Orlando is generally good about looking at a sampling of the cards you believe are undergraded if you have a bulk submission that's been hammered. I can't promise you'll always get what you want, but they should get a second look if you pursue it. Since you only submitted a handful of cards, however, this may not be an option. PSA can't do that everytime a collector gets a 5-card submission back and feels jobbed.

Anyone who has experienced this trend, however, really needs to stand up & demand that the consistency return. We should not have to pay to resubmit cards that should have been graded accurately in the first place. Hopefully PSA is sincere about agreeing with that.

pool

Grillo
I completely agreed with your posts.
We smash a certain card grading company for over-grading.
Under-grading is just as bad.

murcerfan

There may be a mass exodus from grading vintage commons in the future if this harsh grading continues. It demoralizes the veteran collector and makes you wonder if the raw card collecting will prevail stronger in the future over subjective card grading. A point to ponder.

that's where I'm at.

I have decided that I will no longer submit cards.

mojorob

I am completely with you Murcer fan........I won't be submitting anymore to PSA either, unless something drastic changes.
PSA IMHO has really blown it as far as extremely harsh grading on vintage commons as of late.
I have submitted 700-800 cards in the last year and KNOW what a PSA 8 looks like, or at least use to look like.
My last submission was a complete disaster!!
What a waste of time and money on my part.
I only submit under VINTAGE and have always averaged around 70-75% PSA 8 or better.
My last submission of 65 cards came back yesterday with UNDER 30% PSA 8 !!
This submission, was extremely high grade........and the grades it produced were IMHO completely unfair,
and not consistent with what I have received in the past.
Something DRASTIC has changed at PSA reguarding their graders and or grading standards re. vintage material IMHO.
I have heard about it for months now......and I WAS STUNG by it yesterday.
IT WON'T HAPPEN AGAIN, until things change.
PSA should be very careful, with their present tatics because I am the kind of customer that they really don't want to be losing.
No more money from my pocket, which is sad because I have enjoyed their product in the past.

Mojorob

Fabfrank

I havenever received any free grades for being over 75%. After reading these posts it seems I'm ahead of the game

Fabfrank

Sorry guys. double post

Ruthfan

Why does everybody keep talking about THE grader of death when it should be the Grader(s) of death? I thought that Joe keeps telling us that at least two graders evaluate the card. I personally think that some of PSA's graders need to be given a refresher course on grading with the way some of these cards recently have been graded. I would like to know what kind of formal training a grader has to go through before they start grading for PSA. Hey Joe, how about a response.

Todd

koby

I understand that, on average, GAI is from 1/2 grade to one full grade more lenient than PSA. Perhaps they are using the old standard.

crsportscards33

Question: Are graders just graders, or are they specific to certain types of cards. What I mean is, are there graders who mostly handle vintage, and some who specialize in modern, or is it just whatever winds up on their table?

qualitycards

<< <i>I havenever received any free grades for being over 75%. After reading these posts it seems I'm ahead of the game >>


FABFRANK - When I passed 75% for the 1936 S&S game card set, I sent in 2 raw cards for my "free" submissions, and I would not have sent them in otherwise, as I had both in PSA-8's. 1 card looked good while the other had a bit of wear on an edge. But since they were the only 2 raw S&S I had laying around, I submitted them. The nice one Floyd Young rec'd a PSA-10 (the 1st "10" ever given for that set) and the other got a PSA-5. So I LOVE the free grading program ...jay

Ruthfan

Koby, I would like to know where you get your info. As for PSA's grading standard, PSA can't even follow their own standard they have set up. I submitted a raw 1952 Topps Duke Snider to PSA at the 2004 National. I requested a minimum grade of an 8 as the card was that nice. The card came back as MG and when I talked with Peter Ma on why this card could not fit in a 8 holder he had no response but said I should resubmit the card. The card easily fit into their standards of a PSA 8. There was no way in hell I was going to waste my money with PSA and resubmit to them for something it should have received the first time. After showing it to some of the top respectable dealers sometime listed on here, that by the way said they would grade it NM/MT and a coulple NM/MT+, I took the card to Mike Baker (head grader at GAI) and he said there was no reason that card shouldn't have received a NM/MT grade from PSA. After getting the card gradeda NM/MT 8 by GAI, I then took the card back to Superiors Auction booth where the auction items could be viewed. There was a PSA 8 1952 Topps Duke Snider card in the Superior's 2003 National Auction that I compared my Snider to. The PSA example was far inferior to my Snider that PSA earlier had said would not holder at an 8. Let's just say if I was the high bidder on Superior's 1952 Topps Snider in that auction I would have really been pissed off and asked for a refund. All four corners showed wear and I would have liked to have met the grader that graded the card NM/MT.

I tried to get Peter Ma to walk over the 25 feet that separated PSA's and Superior's booth to show them how far apart the two cards were and why that card received an 8 but mine couldn't but he did not seem interested. To him, the only way to possibly get my card in the holder it deserved was to give PSA more money by resubmitting it. I would put it up against any PSA 8 Snider in the collecting community.

Another thing I would like to see from PSA is a list of the names and backgrounds of their graders listed on this site. GAI does it and I think it would benefit the submitters to know that some weekend card trader is not the one grading their cards. I think all of the reputable grading companies should do it.

Todd

murcerfan

Jay,

You authorized PSA dealers getting preferential grades is yet another issue

qualitycards

<< <i>You authorized PSA dealers getting preferential grades is yet another issue >>


MF - Believe me, when I get a break or 2, I'll let you know! They have 30 cards of mine in the grading room, I'm sure they are fighting over the chance to slap 9's & 10's on each card...jay

qualitycards

MF - Since you caught me red-handed, I'd figure I'd share to you, the last submissions that I rec'd from PSA. It was graded on 4/27.
Thank god, they give me all the breaks, as all these cards should have been PSA-2's & 3's....jay
My last PSA invoice w/ tons of high graded cards, gotta love these gifts!!!

aconte

Does Peter Ma still work at Psa?

aconte

Ruthfan

I think he no longer works for PSA.

koby

Ruthfan

I can only go by what I have seen and what people have told me. There is a concensus that GAI is MUCH more lenient than PSA and SGC. Oftentimes up to one grade or one and a half grade higher for the same cards.


This would explain why GAI cards sell for far less than PSA and SGC cards. Some will argue that this is only the case for commons and this discrepency is generated by the popularity of PSA's registry. Lower prices, however, are reflect acroos the board..........star cards, commons, modern cards, vintage cards, regional cards, popular cards, prewar, postwar, etc.


I think there is great danger in having too close relationship with preferred vendors and preferred customers. Whether perceived or real, that is the perception that people have of GAI. Baker and Rocchi have very close relationships with soem dealers and some collectors. Is this the reason for soem cards appearing to be more leniently grade. Who know?


All I know is this perception is bad for value of GAI cards.

Koby

grilloj39

Bart Simpson has a quote...."damned if you do, damned if you don't." Complaining about tougher grading, complaining about lenient grading, it's a double-edged sword for these grading companies.

All I ask is that a company develop grading standards and adhere to those standards. If the standards are lenient, fine. If they are tough, fine. Just be consistent and accurate in your grading, and I'll make my decision as to where my cards are going to be graded.

We can get into arguments all day about who is more lenient...PSA, GAI, and SGC. I'm sure they're are plenty of examples out there to justify all ends of the argument.

Nuyauwka

Well, Jay, after seeing your grades I am no longer anxious to get my cards back. I have alot of vintage there now and after seeing all this hoopla about the card grades and undergrades, I'd rather not go through the aggrevation of seeing my grades right now! Did you expect 8's or 6/7's? that could make me feel a little better!

qualitycards

NUYAUWKA - I never said my cards submitted were all high end. Although I could have used a few bumps here and there, many of the cards were just sitting around here and I figured 6's & 7's graded were still better then ungraded cards in top loads. I merely pointed out my last card order, since some think that Auth dealers get all the breaks...jay

Basilone

<< <i>I think there is great danger in having too close relationship with preferred vendors and preferred customers. Whether perceived or real, that is the perception that people have of GAI. >>



I do not feel that there are many on this board that a GAI 8 would cross to a PSA 8. If significant dollars are involved....many would want a GAI 8.5 to feel confident of a PSA 8 crossover.

A fine example would the the GAI 8 Lockman that sold last week on eBay.

1420sports

With all of the bee-otching as of late (myself included) it amazes me that we still collect graded cards.

Why do we?

qualitycards

1420 - If you think theres problems in the "graded world" try going back to buying the ungraded cards at shows and on eBay...jay

aconte

<< <i>Why do we? >>



For fun?

aconte

Basilone

I keep seeing a couple of jokers bidding on some ebay items that I want....

Gee..I wonder who those guys are??? (1420 & Aconte)

Basilone

Jay-

Maybe you should scan your blockbuster 1965 Topps Phil Ortega PSA 5 for the world to see.

That should provide solid proof of your preferential grades.

goodriddance189

someone mentioned something about harsher grading on your free grades, whether when you join or reach 75%. something to the effect of when a grader sees a 5-6 card submission, he will intentionally hammer it. i would think that if anything, the opposite would be true. anything, PSA would give "preferential" grades to those submissions.

remember the old story you heard as a kid, about the drug dealer offering you a free sample in hopes that you would get hooked and come back for more? i know, i know, it's a lame analogy. but if PSA actually does leniently grade certain submissions, i would think it would be small "starter" ones. you know, to get you hooked and coming back for more.

of course i honestly don't think PSA does this, but it seems a more likely theory than tougher grading on small submissions.

Wabittwax

<< <i>You authorized PSA dealers getting preferential grades is yet another issue >>



You know, I used to think that nobody got better grades but I'm beginning to think other wise. A while back I purchased a semi large lot of PSA cards from a big time submitter. I won't say who or what it was, but most people here would know who they are if I said. Anyways, after receiving these cards, I put them under a scope for possible resubmitting. I was absolutely shocked at the condition of some of these cards. Many that were labeled PSA 8 were about PSA 6-7 quality. A few of them I couldn't even believe that this person would submit yet they came back with good grades. Many were the quality that the holder stated but many were not. It might have been a fluke submission but being that they were from a heavy duty submitter, it makes me wonder. I never gotten that many sliders on my submissions but then again, I don't submit crap cards.

Remobolan

Hey Guys,

I did not intend to start a crap storm. I'm surprised I didn't get banned! However, I agree with everything that I have read in this thread. I mean I collect PSA graded cards for fun, security and bragging rights. My 1972 Topps Football set is my dream, I'm not doing this to sell them! I just want fair grades. If I missed something on one, well hey, shame on me, but lets face it if you have been doing this for a while not to many people don't learn the basics of what should be an 8. I could have accepted a 7 and I knew that one card was OC, but I'm not stupid don't treat me like I am.

I own a service business, it's also similar to PSA, I have a real estate appraisal company. I get into confrontations with people who think thier $100,000.00 house is worth $500,000.00 all of the time and I have to explain to the lender why it's not, and I always have to back it up with logic and facts. Appraising is also an opinion of value but by god you better be able to compare apples to apples or you loose your clients.

I just want to finish my set. I was going to start next on 1971 football, I have 20 or so to send in with the 1972 cards. Now I just don't know. I will finish my 72 set but I don't think I will undertake another one until I see what happens. Thanks for the imput guys. Now I know I'm not alone with this.

Fuzz

MojoRob,
Sorry to hear about your recent disaster. Was this the dreaded 66's that we have the contest on? Please let us 66's guys know.
Fuzz

SKINSFAN

mojo sorry about the grades but i did warn you. I know of 2 dealers that just refuse to grade 66,s anymore so you are not alone.

By the way i think i won the contest. what do i win ?

Will emailyou soon on the 66 front

By the way fuzz my 66 updated all i can at least im back with in .10

Buccaneer

<< <i>

<< <i>It demoralizes the veteran collector and makes you wonder if the raw card collecting will prevail stronger in the future over subjective card grading. A point to ponder. >>


Excellent point. It definitely pushes the two worlds (raw vs. graded collecting) further apart and puts PSA at risk of undermining their own success story (the PSA Set Registry). It wouldn't be the first time for that though. Remember when IBM was the undisputed king of the computer world?

Scott >>



I'm already there.

I am also glad to see more people post and talk about raw sets and raw cards here. In my view, they are just as important and fun to collect.

BBNUT

What I would like to know is if the graders have the pop report on their screen when they grade. It seems the higher pop cards get the 8s but the low pop cards which are as good or better get the 6s and 7s. Why does this happen? Or is it coincidence? Vintage common submissions are getting hammered on veteran collectors who know exactly what an 8 is. But yet they get 6s and 7s .Why?If they have decided to get tougher on vintage common submissions it may scare away a lot of new collectors who are just now submitting for the first tiime and get a taste of of reality when they get their submission online. They in turn will tell others and the domino effect may damage the growth of the graded card hobby. We shall see what takes place here soon.

wolfbear

I quit too ! No more cards for me !

Time to go back to working on that thimble collection that I've been neglecting for far too long now ...

SKINSFAN

I WILL TRADE YOU 3 FULL BASKETS of thimbles and toss and some needles and thread for those nasty old card WOLF

Fuzz

Wolfbear,
I could ease out a buck or two for those 64 T FB you won't be needing to help you get that thimble collection rockin' and rollin'.

We all agree that standards are subjective and that they do change over time. Grading is not an exact science. If you believe that the standards have changed and there is some evidence that they might have, then I suggest you adapt for the short term. Change the strategy for the new enviornment while it lasts. By 8's, there are many available below SMR for some sets, and data suggests that they aren't making many more at the moment. That should eventually lead to price increases if it lasts for long. Also, stock up on 7's and 8's now at good prices. If the standard is tight now, it will change back given time and possibily swing to far the other way. That is the way these things often work. If so, by the nicest 7's now at good prices and stock pile. Sometime down the road, when the grading appears lenient, resubmit the whole bunch. If most upgrade to 8's and few 9's scatter in there, then it should be a financially viable enterprise. There are coin dealers whose sole business is the upgrade cycle. Eventually, there will be some like that here as well.
Fuzz

murcerfan

who said they were quiting the hobby?

Scoop

I think the grader(s) who gave the grade should appear with the card in the PSA database. This way, if you go to a show or call PSA for a review, you can be given an explanation by the grader who inspected your card. We all miss things, and if the imperfection that knocked card down were explained, we could live with it or resubmit it if we disagree.

JIM

murcerfan

There must be a reason PSA goes to such great lengths to keep their graders unavailable and behind a black curtain...........unlike the other grading companies.

.........are we as collectors dumb enough as a whole to believe this is the way it should be ?


When it was a game ?

When was it ever not a game ?

pc

<< <i>There may be a mass exodus from grading vintage commons in the future if this harsh grading continues. It demoralizes the veteran collector and makes you wonder if the raw card collecting will prevail stronger in the future over subjective card grading. A point to ponder.

that's where I'm at.

I have decided that I will no longer submit cards. >>



ive had rather good results with PSA.i dont submit much lately
but they have been very fair the past year with me.maybe
i got lucky.the year before i did get hammered though,big time.