Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

How does this registry OPC 71 Rose get a 8?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=55925&item=5187499525&rd=1

The card is OC, appears to have a tilt, a print dot, not to mention rough edges around the entire card? If this was my submission, I'd likely get a 6. Opinions?

Steve
steve

Comments

  • carew4mecarew4me Posts: 3,471 ✭✭✭✭
    I have to agree. I have a 71 Carew OPC 8 that is a 10 compared to that.

    Loves me some shiny!


  • If this was my submission, I'd likely get a 6.

    Same luck as me. Mine would have gotten a 5
  • CDsNutsCDsNuts Posts: 10,092
    If it was anybody's submission it should have gotten a 6. Take the rough cut out of the equation (which PSA always does) and it has bad corners and bad centering. A 6 all the way in my book.

    Lee
  • larryallen73larryallen73 Posts: 6,061 ✭✭✭
    LINK
    That is interesting. I could see a 7 if graded Friday afternoon but 8? Hard to believe. Interesting card though, for grading, as the rough cut is the worst part and is (as stated above) ignored by PSA. As also stated above, if it was my card it would have been a 6... if not a 5!
  • smallstockssmallstocks Posts: 1,631 ✭✭✭✭
    I just received a '71 Ryan back that was perfect in every respect except for a slight nick in the corner. I was certain this was a high end 8. Nope, a 7. Gonna resubmit, but again, my card is a 10 compared to that Rose.

    Mike

    Late 60's and early to mid 70's non-sports
  • charliehustle14charliehustle14 Posts: 425 ✭✭✭
    Yuck! That looks a lot more like a 6 to me.
  • RedHeart54RedHeart54 Posts: 2,277 ✭✭✭
    It looks worse than it is. The OPC rough cut is embellished because of the black borders but the corners are actually quite square (save for the lower left). I've seen OPC Gretzky rookies (with the equally tough blue borders) with worse cuts in PSA 9. PSA just allows for some latitude with these old OPCs.
  • EagleEyeKidEagleEyeKid Posts: 4,496 ✭✭
    Calling the Dabighurt....bighurt, come in bighurt.
  • RG58RG58 Posts: 119
    card slipped through - should be a 5 or 6. Very unattractive

    Old cert#- this may have played a role!
  • Stone193Stone193 Posts: 24,407 ✭✭✭✭✭
    image

    As was said - this is an OPC card with substantial rough cut which looks awful with the black border. IMO, these have to be compared to other OPCs and perhaps, not to the regular Topps issue.

    I will have to say, that the centering does "push" the envelope?

    mike
    Mike
  • beware the old flip!!

    GG
  • AHHHHHH The Baker Rochhi days.
    I love candy cards
  • StingrayStingray Posts: 8,843 ✭✭✭
    I would have to agree that maybe they would not grade it an 8 today, looks like it was graded a while ago.


    Stingray
  • packCollectorpackCollector Posts: 2,786 ✭✭✭
  • AxtellAxtell Posts: 10,037 ✭✭


    << <i>I think the only thing that may not be an 8 is the lower left corner. the scan is blown up to 200% which makes it look a lot worse than it is. without the lower corner , the card could have gone either way, with the corner probably should hve been a 7 but can be justified. not pretty for sure but can be graded as such. for the record , if any of you guys got a 5or 6 on that card , you would all be screaming holy hell as to how your submissions got graded too harshly etc, etc ,etc >>



    There's no way that card is even a 7. I have 7s of this set that blow this card away in terms of overall quality. Look at the edge whitening!

    This card is a 5, 6 at best.


  • << <i>This card is a 5, 6 at best. >>



    agree 100%
  • DaBigHurtDaBigHurt Posts: 1,066 ✭✭
    I think the card is graded fine. If I recall correctly, OPC are notorious for being rough cut, no? It's really hard to gauge the condition of a card from just looking at a scan. We didn't have the opportunity to grade the card raw with our own eyes. We didn't get a chance to examine the card closely and at different angles. We didn't spend 5-10 minutes scrutinizing this card like PSA did. I'm inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt since they're the experts on OPC. They've graded thousands of OPCs for every one that I've even seen at a card show!!

    Besides, the print dots are probably just some reflection from the scanner. image
    image

    GO MARLINS! Home of the best fans in baseball!!
  • AxtellAxtell Posts: 10,037 ✭✭


    << <i>I think the card is graded fine. If I recall correctly, OPC are notorious for being rough cut, no? >>



    I know there's no arguing with you, hurt, because you believe PSA to be always right.

    I don't need 5-10 minutes of holding the card at different angles to see the whitening of the edges of this card. That has nothing to do with being 'rough cut' it has to do with edge dinging which is very common for 71's. It also is the biggest cause of these cards to lose grades.

    I doubt you'd be happy if you bought a PSA8 of any card and got this piece of junk in the mail.
  • wallst32wallst32 Posts: 513 ✭✭
    The centering is very deceptive on this card. At it's worst L/R ( near the top of the card) it is about 70/30, so no OC qualifier. Remember 80/20 would mean the left boarder is 4 times the right, and it's not even close to that.

    I'm surprised to see how many threads there are questioning PSA grades. You have to have look at it from PSA's point of view (ie what does PSA look for in a card), not your own. In my 6-7 years of dealing with PSA cards, I have noticed that they are lenient on centering, rough cuts in general (not just OPC), and chips in the border or edges. What they do look for is corners that form a solid point and a nice clean surface. All the "eye appeal" everyone uses to judge cards from scans takes a backseat in the grading process.

    Take a blank piece of brown cardboard, no picture or anything. Analyaze the surface and the corners and determine the physical condition itself. That is what PSA looks for first and foremost. Then centering, print snow (but not print dots), and such come into play for qualifers.

    We all have seen cards with rough edges, print dots, edge chips, 70/30 centering get 9s or 10s. Because they have these "defects" does that mean they are unworthy of the grade? According to PSA's scales, the answer is no. Is a card with a 9 grade and 50/50 all around centering more appealing than a 9 grade with 60/40 + 70/30 centering? Of course... but there are only 10 different grades on the scale. Let's say I took 10 indentical cards, made a 1cm scratch on the first, 2cm scratch on the 2nd..... 10cm scratch on the 10th. Well I can easily put them in order of best to worst condition. But as far as a grading scale goes, would they all get different grades... nope.

    The reason why many believe BGS is a tougher grader is they factor in centering, edge chips, and rough cuts with much greater weight. This means a lower percentage of cards would attain the highest grades in comparison to PSA. Does that make them a better grading company? Some might say yes, but I would just say the two judge cards based on different characteristics.

    It's amusing to see all the PSA diehards on these boards bash BGS at every oppoturnity, yet they question so many grades PSA has given. How often do you see a BGS card's grade questioned? And just for the record, I do not own a single BGS card, and several PSA cards. Unlike many here, I can offer an impartial view. For all those who think BGS buyers are "brainwashed" into only buying BGS and being anti-everything else, isn't the same true of yourself, only you're in support of PSA and anti-BGS?

    Bottom line is the grade is what PSA believes it to be; not what you think it is... if you don't agree then why use their service or purchase their cards?
  • imageI have seen many over graded PSA cards and I will not buy or do business with them. I have bought many cards on Ebay PSA 8, 9, and 10's only to be disapointed by their grading. I have PSA 10 cards with visible corner wear. Cards with large print defects graded 9. A Merlin Olsen rookie graded 8 that is in worse condition than the Pete Rose card. A PSA 9 1970 Topps Fran Tarkenton with dirt smudges on the back and print dots on his face. I think they probably have little kids grading the cards. If I were to take my over graded cards out of their holder and send them back to be graded I know the majority of the cards would be in the 5 or 6 range. Also why do so many PSA cards slide in their holder?
  • lommerlommer Posts: 160 ✭✭
    We didn't spend 5-10 minutes scrutinizing this card like PSA did

    DBHurt,
    Do you HONESTLY believe that PSA spend 5 to 10 minutes on a single card? I know it's a running joke the way you defend PSA on these boards, but come on, ease back on the dope.
  • packCollectorpackCollector Posts: 2,786 ✭✭✭
  • Nice centering!! It does have the authentic OPC rough cut unlike many of the cards wee see today.
    I love candy cards


  • << <i>. I'm inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt since they're the experts on OPC. >>



    As one of a small number of OPC enthusiasts, most of the PSA graders are a very far cry from being experts on this issue.
    “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” - George Carlin
  • BuccaneerBuccaneer Posts: 1,794 ✭✭


    << <i>We didn't spend 5-10 minutes scrutinizing this card like PSA did

    DBHurt,
    Do you HONESTLY believe that PSA spend 5 to 10 minutes on a single card? I know it's a running joke the way you defend PSA on these boards, but come on, ease back on the dope. >>



    Psst....it is a running joke that PSA would spend more than 30 seconds grading a card. That's what DBH is saying.

    I am willing to bet $100 that if someone were to crack that card and submit, it would not come back as an 8.


  • << <i>We didn't spend 5-10 minutes scrutinizing this card like PSA did

    DBHurt,
    Do you HONESTLY believe that PSA spend 5 to 10 minutes on a single card? I know it's a running joke the way you defend PSA on these boards, but come on, ease back on the dope. >>



    No. I know him. He isn't being serious, he doesn't back PSA, he isn't their spokesman, he's just a sarcastic SOB.
  • BuccaneerBuccaneer Posts: 1,794 ✭✭


    << <i>, I have noticed that they are lenient on centering, rough cuts in general (not just OPC), and chips in the border or edges. What they do look for is corners that form a solid point and a nice clean surface. All the "eye appeal" everyone uses to judge cards from scans takes a backseat in the grading process. >>



    I agree with this but one would have to ask is why then is PSA so stringent on slamming cards with a minute wrinkle on back that you can't see with the naked eye? Obvious "eye appeal" factors like centering, rough cuts and chips should be graded more harshly than corners and surface 'uneveness', imo, but the opposite seems to be the way it is.

    In my opinion, I would grade a card based on the following ranking (from most important to least important):

    1. Centering
    2. Registration
    3. Cut
    4. Corners
    5. Surface (as in eveness)

    In other words, 70/30 centering should not be a 7, let alone an 8. But frayed corners (on white borders) can be 8 because they can only be seen under magnification.
  • jrdolanjrdolan Posts: 2,549 ✭✭
    DaBigHurt is getting closer and closer to putting a wink instead of a smile at the end of his statements.

    Or maybe even ... Heh.
  • schr1stschr1st Posts: 1,677 ✭✭
    Can someone pass me the Kool-Aid? I'm running a little bit low here.

    The only thing nice I can say about that card is...


















    At least you can be sure it wasn't sheet-cut! image
    Who is Rober Maris?
  • phreakydancinphreakydancin Posts: 1,691 ✭✭
    Someone got some other 8's from this OPC set they can provide scans for comparison? It might help to put this in perspective, seeing as most of the board members are more familiar with the more common Topps counterparts.
  • Carew29Carew29 Posts: 4,025 ✭✭

    Two minute grading at it's best!!!!
Sign In or Register to comment.