Got my grades back
shambo2000
Posts: 322
The grades came back from my collectors club free submission.
LINE # CERT # CARD CARD CO. CARD # CARD NAME VARIETY GRADE
1 31079376 1982 TOPPS 434 LAWRENCE TAYLOR ALL-PRO 9
2 31079377 1981 TOPPS 240 NOLAN RYAN N/A 9
3 31079378 1981 TOPPS 479 EXPOS FUTURE STARS T.RAINES/R.RAMOS/B.PATE 8
4 31079379 2001 TOPPS CHR. TRADED T266 ICHIRO SUZUKI RETROFRACTOR 9
5 31079380 1955 TOPPS 2 TED WILLIAMS N/A 6
6 31079381 1956 TOPPS 30 JACKIE ROBINSON N/A 3
Date Received: 03/30/2005
Date of Grades Posted: 04/08/2005
Date Shipped: 04/08/2005
My guesses were Taylor 8, Ryan 9, Raines 10, Ichiro 9, Williams 5, Robinson 4. I sure thought the Jackie Robinson was better than a three but that shows what I know. I even went over the Raines rookie with a 10x loupe and could find no defects... Oh well I'm still pleased. I'll try to post a scan of all the cards. Mean while here are "raw" pics of Ryan and Raines:
LINE # CERT # CARD CARD CO. CARD # CARD NAME VARIETY GRADE
1 31079376 1982 TOPPS 434 LAWRENCE TAYLOR ALL-PRO 9
2 31079377 1981 TOPPS 240 NOLAN RYAN N/A 9
3 31079378 1981 TOPPS 479 EXPOS FUTURE STARS T.RAINES/R.RAMOS/B.PATE 8
4 31079379 2001 TOPPS CHR. TRADED T266 ICHIRO SUZUKI RETROFRACTOR 9
5 31079380 1955 TOPPS 2 TED WILLIAMS N/A 6
6 31079381 1956 TOPPS 30 JACKIE ROBINSON N/A 3
Date Received: 03/30/2005
Date of Grades Posted: 04/08/2005
Date Shipped: 04/08/2005
My guesses were Taylor 8, Ryan 9, Raines 10, Ichiro 9, Williams 5, Robinson 4. I sure thought the Jackie Robinson was better than a three but that shows what I know. I even went over the Raines rookie with a 10x loupe and could find no defects... Oh well I'm still pleased. I'll try to post a scan of all the cards. Mean while here are "raw" pics of Ryan and Raines:
0
Comments
My Steve Carlton Basic Registry Set
PSA has a guideline on their grades and consistently stick to that. If you get a card back graded 8, then take a look at their standards for the grade and you have your answer.
People who want subgrades should stick with those incompetent clowns at BGS.
Judging from the scan, the Tim Raines rookie looks like an 8 to me. I don't see any problem with the grade PSA assigned.
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
<< <i>brian...BGS got it right by doing subgrades. If PSA didnt want to do subgrades on their holders, they could attach perhaps a brief explanation as to how the card was graded. >>
NO NO NO NO NO!
I'm quite frankly sick and tired of people trying to undermine the integrity of PSA. They're fine and their customers are happy with the product. It's a win-win situation! They are paid to grade cards! not explain to you why your card graded the way it did!
If you go to a doctor and he tells you that you have cancer. Do you ask him how this cancer came about? NO! You just accept that you have cancer and enjoy whatever days you have remaining! Don't ask the doctor to explain something to you that you wouldn't understand. That's not his job!
People send in cards to PSA for grading because they're not very good at grading. If they knew how to grade cards in the first place, there would be no need for PSA! You want to learn to grade cards like the trained and certified experts at PSA, go take a course. For PSA to have to take the time to educate all these people would be a tremendous waste of valuable resources.
Sorry for jumping at you, but I'm really sick and tired of people tryin to make PSA explain their business practices. They're doing a great job and should be commended, not taken to task over trivial things such as subgrades and notes to explain grades.
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
DaBigHurt - you say the card looks like an 8 to you, which would mean to me that you see something in the card that prevents it from being a 9 or 10. What do you see as a possible reason?
Jake
<< <i>I don't see why PSA should explain anything to the submitters. Their job is not to explain the grade. Their job is to grade. You submit, they grade and you accept the grade. For them to start explaining grades, including silly things like subgrades will only slow down the process. PSA has graded over EIGHT MILLION cards and their formula is working quite well.
PSA has a guideline on their grades and consistently stick to that. If you get a card back graded 8, then take a look at their standards for the grade and you have your answer.
People who want subgrades should stick with those incompetent clowns at BGS.
Judging from the scan, the Tim Raines rookie looks like an 8 to me. I don't see any problem with the grade PSA assigned. >>
That's just idiotic. I can't believe how much of a sheep you are. Yes, their job is too grade, and as a paying customer, I have a right to know why a certain grade was assigned if I don't agree with it. How would you know whether or not providing the customer with some type of quick and ready explanation of the assigned grade would slow things down? You're reaching here.
Also, your "cancer" analogy is absolutely stupid and insulting. Having several members of my family go through this hell, the doctor does not just say "Oh, you got cancer. Sorry about that. See you next visit.". When breaking the news to a patient, they try to educate the patient in the illness, whether it's cancer or something else, then go into length explanation of their treatment options. That's just a dumbazz analogy.
Also, seeing as you're obviously an "expert" at this, just what is it about the Raines that justifies an 8 that you can spot from the scan that we can't? Hmmm. Oh get it, just because PSA says so.
Lee
<< <i>If you go to a doctor and he tells you that you have cancer. Do you ask him how this cancer came about? NO! You just accept that you have cancer and enjoy whatever days you have remaining! Don't ask the doctor to explain something to you that you wouldn't understand. That's not his job! >>
That's not a very good analogy. Comparing a diagnosis of cancer to a diagnosis of an 8 in card grading is ludicrous. In the case of Cancer, doctor's REALLY do not know what might have caused it (outside of heavy drinkers, smokers and those with a history of the malignancy in their families). In the case of card grading, PSA/SGC/GAI/BGS know exactly WHY that card is not an 8 and not a 9 or 10.
<< <i>Sorry for jumping at you, but I'm really sick and tired of people tryin to make PSA explain their business practices. They're doing a great job and should be commended, not taken to task over trivial things such as subgrades and notes to explain grades. >>
No problem. My point is that i paid for my cards to get graded....it would be nice to know why the cards got the grades they did...maybe not specifically, but in general like BGS does. As a consumer, you have the right to quality service...because without the consumer, business becomes non-existant. So, it's in the best interest of a company to hear what their consumers are suggesting and wanting because we are in a free market society...making monopolies (at least in most cases...excuse major sports industries, microsoft and energy) nonexistant.
It's very difficult to grade a card EXACTLY via a scan, but if I were to guess at why the Raines came back an 8; it'd be because the borders aren't orange enough.
The graders at PSA were able to hold the card in their hands, examine it and after exhausting examination, determined the card did not meet the requirements of being a 9. That's good enough for me.
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
<< <i>I was going to be disappointed if I didn't read a post from DaBigHurt, in CAPS. My weekend hasn't even started, but I already feel complete. >>
Me too, as well as reading the posts from those that don't get it.
<< <i>I would like to reinforce my opinion that DaBigHurt is the one poster I most respect on these boards. He sticks to his guns, even when his back is to the wall. The raines card looks like an 8 to me as well. >>
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
When the card arrives back from PSA I'll post an oversized scan of the front and back and maybe we can cross this bridge again.
Thanks for all the great replies. Keep it coming!
My Steve Carlton Basic Registry Set
<< <i>I don't see why PSA should explain anything to the submitters. Their job is not to explain the grade. Their job is to grade. You submit, they grade and you accept the grade. For them to start explaining grades, including silly things like subgrades will only slow down the process. PSA has graded over EIGHT MILLION cards and their formula is working quite well. >>
Big Hurt, are you at all familiar with the term VALUE ADDED PRODUCT? The proposal was to PAY PSA EXTRA MONEY to deliver an explanation for the grade delivered. You should be frigging WETTING YOUR PANTS at the prospect of more money coming into your company. Maybe you should open your mind to the concept of CHANGE rather than blindly verbally fellating your beloved PSA at every opportunity. Believe it or not NO GRADING COMPANY IS PERFECT, and all of them need to understand the needs and desires of their target market and adapt accordingly in order to maximize profitability.
News flash: grading eight million cards does not necessarily make you good at it, yet you seem to think this is the be-all-end-all statement to prove grading superiority. How about trying to put up a substantive argument rather than constantly spewing out thoughtless rhetoric.
<< <i>Judging from the scan, the Tim Raines rookie looks like an 8 to me. I don't see any problem with the grade PSA assigned. >>
Specifically, WHAT do you see in that scan that would knock it down to an 8? I'm dying to know
Edited to add: Big Hurt, I think it's time to change your user icon. Try this:
I'm not really in favor of subgrades. That would just make things even more subjective than people already claim they are. Can you imagine if we were having this conversation over the card's surface grade receiving an 8? It'd be a whole new can of worms.
<< <i>I luv the BigHurt. He cracks me up. I actually enjoy reading his posts now because he p*sses everyone off. >>
i agree..
Could you do a high resolution scan of the Raines and "link" it rather than posting so we don't eat the screen?
I find it hard to tell from the scan what grade to definitely assign.
thanx
mike
My Steve Carlton Basic Registry Set
Robinson and Williams
Taylor, Ichiro and Ryan
Raines Rookie
Shannon
shambo2000
My Steve Carlton Basic Registry Set
Upper right corner of the Raines card looks weak and most likely kept it out of a 9 holder.
And everybody quit picking on DaBigHurt.
He and I have enjoyed many a glass of refreshing kool-aid together.
"How about a little fire Scarecrow ?"
I wonder if the PSA bashers who were condemning PSA will admit they were the ones who were wrong. Not likely, but it's good to see PSA get the grade right. Or do these people still need PSA to explain why the Raines got a 8 instead of a 9?
Bottom line is, PSA grades, you accept it. If you don't know why your cards received the grades they got, that's not PSA's fault.
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
Shannon
My Steve Carlton Basic Registry Set
I agree with the Wolfman, if looking at the card horizontally, the upper right corner does not look as sharp as the rest of the corners.
Overall, I think you did real well - congratulations on the 9s and I hope your next submission is a good one!
mike
"Pete Rose would walk through hell in a gasoline suit to play baseball." - Sparky Anderson
<< <i>In regards to dabighurt, does nobody here recognize and appreciate satire? Come on folks! Keep on posting BigHurt! I hope to keep reading until your EIGHT MILLIONTH POST! >>
Mark
I agree but satire is like Vicodin - when taken in constant dosage, it loses its potency.
Stone
Lee
GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
<< <i>
<< <i>In regards to dabighurt, does nobody here recognize and appreciate satire? Come on folks! Keep on posting BigHurt! I hope to keep reading until your EIGHT MILLIONTH POST! >>
Mark
I agree but satire is like Vicodin - when taken in constant dosage, it loses its potency.
Stone >>
Amen!
<< <i>Does DaBigHurt receive a kickback from PSA for each one of his ignorant posts? If so please let me know how much they pay. I have a lot of free time and could use the extra cash. I think if they paid me I could drink the PSA Kool-Aid and completely lose my objectivity. I could then sit for hours and pray at the PSA alter, and marvel at their complete infallibility and perfection. >>
What part of the word "satire" did you not understand?
I don't know if I agree with the notion that too much of a satire becomes bad. He does chose his spots and it is always in cases where valid concerns about PSA and their practices arise. That's the genius of DaBH's responses because one can clearly hear the words of a defense that rings hollow.
But in the end, most of us do believe in PSA despite their imperfections. For my collection, I wouldn't have it any other way.
<< <i>But in the end, most of us do believe in PSA despite their imperfections. For my collection, I wouldn't have it any other way. >>
Buc
I agree and most of us can see that DaBig is just having fun - but sometimes it creates unnecessary tension when people are just asking questions and the "satire" rings of argumentative tripe that stiffles the conversation and derails a healthy debate. I think that is where people may get tired of his rhetoric.
nuje