Is this smudge usually allowed on 1978 PSA 8 Molitor RC?

ndleo

I just received a 1978 Topps Molitor/Trammel RC PSA 8. Th card looked OK on the scan, but when I received it, the card had a smudge. I know that the smudge is common on this card, but I didn't think it could pull a PSA 8 NQ. Attached is a scan. Any advice from a 1978 expert?

IJustLoveCards

heres mine, you can compare..

softparade

good question. I have yet to see a PSA 9 Molitor with the smudge. I have two Molitor 9's and neither have the smudge.

ndleo

I haven't seen a PSA 8 or 9 with the smudge.

jrdolan

<< <i>I haven't seen a PSA 8 or 9 with the smudge. >>


I have. In the last year I graded five or six Molitor rookies that came back PSA 8, all had the ink smearing around the "Rookie Shortstops" area, to a greater or lesser degree. Even the one that came back 9 had a tiny trace of it.

ctsoxfan

So have I. I have owned, and have submitted, 8's with the smudge. Nicely centered, though - but the smudge was there. The 9 I currently own has no smudge, however.

ndleo

This may seem like an obvious question, but do non-smudge cards command a significant premium? Most PSA 8's go for $37-$45. I got mine on the lower end of the range.

ctsoxfan

I would guess that they do - but if you have an 8 without a smudge, you still won't get that much more than the price range that you quoted. 9's vary a bit though - SMR is $350, but I bought mine a year ago for $220...and, have sold other 9's recently for closer to $300. All of the 9's were smudge-free, but I have seen a few with a light print mark given the 9 designation.

sagard

I think PSA screwed this card up. There are many smudged eights and a few slightly smudged nines that I've seen. Had PSA used their standards and base on the knowledge there exist cards without smudges there should be far more 8 (PD) than currently exist.

50/50 Clean Molitors can command a premium if you find someone who wants one that way, but not nearly as large a premium due if all Molitors with the smudge were assigned the PD.

CDsNuts

I agree. PSA shouldn't change their grading standards for one card becuase it usually "comes that way". Especially when there are a decent amount of copies without that particular defect. If I sent in a 1989 Fleer Randy Johnson with the same ugly smudge, there's no way it's not coming back with a qualifier.

Lee

goudeygold

Universal smudging. Very interesting. I think this topic is similar to the print line issues. Like the 1970s with the white lines still getting PSA 10s. I have seen some 38 goudeys with the print smudge/line/rub that is under the gloss as well. I doubt PSA is consistant with these issues across the board either.

A 9 with a smudge trace? interesting.

GG

softparade

<< <i>I agree. PSA shouldn't change their grading standards for one card becuase it usually "comes that way". Especially when there are a decent amount of copies without that particular defect. If I sent in a 1989 Fleer Randy Johnson with the same ugly smudge, there's no way it's not coming back with a qualifier.

Lee >>



The Molitor smudge with the Klutts blue nose is the worst Molly card one can pull. The case that Steve from BBC Exchange is pulling his wax boxes from have this crappy type Molitor in them. Other than that they are awesome boxes.

Coolidge

The PD (print defect) qualifier is mostly for snow, not print marks.

ndleo

While PSA seems to be consistent on this one, I have a hard time passing the card off as an 8NQ. If I sent the scan to PSA, do you think they would provide an explaination? I don't think the smudge is like the OPC rough cut, because I have seen many Molitors that are smudge free.

magellan

I sent in a Molitor with the smudge (pretty bad one) in the last 4 months. It got an 8 NQ & sold for right around the low end of the range you mentioned ($37?) on eBay.

DeutscherGeist

I bought that card in PSA 8 NQ that actually looked like a PSA9 with great centering and no smudge. I paid $59 because it was the condition I wanted.
I also submitted a nice looking Molitor with great centering, the smudge and a questionable corner. It got a PSA 8 NQ. Sometimes PSA lets the smudge pass. Again, buy the card, not the holder.

sayheykid54

Correction-Trammell rookie

That type of smudge is commonplace on that particular card. The tough part is finding a sharp one without the mark.

sagard

<< <i>The PD (print defect) qualifier is mostly for snow, not print marks. >>



I don't believe this to be true. PD can mean snow or smudge. Around 250 Molitor RCs are in the 8Q or 9Q category, many I'm sure are OC, but many more are likely PD.

jrdolan

You know, not only does this card have a HOFer (Molly), a possible HOFer (Tram), and the best pinch-runner of the era (U.L.) ... but it also has Mickey Klutts, who was a bad baseball player but a star in the All-Time Goofy Baseball Name HOF.

Other members are Clyde Kluttz (no relation), Van Mungo, Coot Veal, Cot Deal (no relation) and Rusty Kuntz. Up-and-coming candidates are Tim Spooneybarger and Boof Bonser.

ndleo

If Tramm gets the Tigers to compete in the AL Central, this may renew interest in this card. I don't think Trammell will ever get in the HOF as a player, so his manager skills are his best bet.

Jack Morris, however, should be in.

rvc

i thought ndleo's psa 8 card should have been 8oc.
one of my favorite cards .
soft's comments about the bbc boxes couldnt be more true.
i think a psa 10 went on ebay for around $2500 last year
i wonder when the next 10 will surface

Coolidge

<< <i>

<< <i>The PD (print defect) qualifier is mostly for snow, not print marks. >>



I don't believe this to be true. PD can mean snow or smudge. Around 250 Molitor RCs are in the 8Q or 9Q category, many I'm sure are OC, but many more are likely PD.

>>





My comment was accurate. The card that you used as an example was given the PD for snow in the black background behind Trammell. Heavy contrast is hiding the snow in your scan.