Anyone noticed how everyone is getting there cards out of the old PSA holders that started with &quo

1960toppsguy

I've been saying this for years . . . Any card with the old PSA holders with the hologram on the back are way overgraded. It seems if you look on e bay, many sellers are investing in re holdering there cards so they at least appear to be recently graded although they have the same serial # starting with the dreaded "0". What a joke . . . Anyone who knows anything about collecting should realize this. I personally wouldn't buy a card or a set of cards at 50% of SMR that are in those old PSA holders as 75% are over graded by todays standards by at least a grade or two! Don't try to trick people, just because you got suckered into buying those things by having them re holdered!

Mefer

I don't necessarily agree. I have many 71 Topps cards that are graded 7 that start with the 0 serial number that I feel are undergraded. As an example, I had a PSA 7 Tony Perez that started with a 0; I cracked it and sent it back in and it came back an 8. Speaking strictly to the 71s, I have seen both undergraded, and overgraded, examples in a variety of serial numbers.

BugOnTheRug

Your investigative analysis is incorrect. PSA is simply now issuing unused '0' cert numbers along with the typical numbers they've been using. Numerous new submissions have certs starting with 04, 06, 07, and 09. The reason behind this usage could be due to the perception you've suggested in your opening sentence.

lowstartmick

PSA is using the "0" certs again for newly graded cards. Probably at the request of well heeled collectors or big dealers who are sitting on a ton of "0" certs. I don't agree that all zero certs are weak but there is certainly the perception among many collectors that they are.

1960toppsguy

If that's the case, no doubt they realize the suspicion of the serious collector. That only clouds the image they are trying to portray. It's OK in life to improve, but you don't have to cover up your tainted past.

onlyanumber

Funny. All of the old cert cards I've bought throughout the years, cracked and resubmitted, have come back equal or higher grades. I guess it all depends on the cards in question.

1960toppsguy

I have a difficult time believing that, as I purchased many of those old holers as a new comer to the hobby and they pail in comparision 90% of the time to recently graded holders. I think almost anyone would agree except the people that are "STUCK" with those old overgraded cards!

ChrisC

1960 - Do you think Fogel's 1952 Topps Mantle would grade a 10 if resubmitted?

RonBurgundy

Wrong. Some cards in these certs are overgraded. Others come back with equal or higher grades. Why? Once again, it is because it's about the card, not the holder. Anyone who familiarizes themselves with PSA's grading standards can learn relatively quickly whether a card is overgraded or undergraded - regardless of the cert number. In fact, there are guys out there (dealers) who make some of their money by looking for undergraded cards, buying them, cracking them, and resubmitting them.



Stay classy,


Ron

mikeschmidt

I don't agree with you, either.

The flip side to the argument is that when grading first started in 1991 - it was only the 'best of the best' that got graded for the next 5-10 years, so some of the best raw cards that existed were all graded in PSA's early days.

Obviously there are some examples that in retrospect seem overgraded, but I do not think that is the rule.

I think a perception issue is this: The great stuff that got graded early tends to stick in collections for longer periods of time. The marginal stuff that got graded early continues to get flipped for certification buyers [people that buy the holder, not the card]. This is the same reason the Jackie Robinson GAI 9 keeps getting auctioned off.

A761506

While you'll seldom hear anyone complaining about a card being overgraded, there are plenty of people who complain that their cards are undergraded. I suspect there were plenty of undergraded complaints even back then when they were using the original 0 certs.

There will always be inconsistencies in the grading process - it's unavoidable. I would love to find someone willing to take a group of like 30 vintage PSA 9's, crack them all and resubmit to see what happens.

ken61

Interesting thread. I also noticed that PSA had started using the "0" serial numbers again. I agree with previous posters that the motivation may have been, in part, to intermingle pre-2000 cards with cards submitted recently.

As far as early "0" cards being graded more leniently, I have mixed emotions. I have some old "0" cards that are dogs for the grade, but the vast majority stack up well against "non-0" cards. So overall, I don't think it's a big deal.

Card grading is an art and not a science. Overall, I think PSA's consistency over the years has been pretty good.

Kurtman9

<< <i>I have a difficult time believing that, as I purchased many of those old holers as a new comer to the hobby and they pail in comparision 90% of the time to recently graded holders. I think almost anyone would agree except the people that are "STUCK" with those old overgraded cards! >>



Yeah, it really sux to be stuck with these overgraded zero cert cards

Griffins

On the contrary, there is considerable anecdotal evidence pointing to grade inflation.
I agree what you are seeing is slider 0 certs being sold. I've got plenty of 0 certs in my collection (and shelves of mastro catalogs picturing 0 cert slabs) that are definitely high end for the grade.

Slabbed

I do not agree. Why don't you just collect cards with the 999666333 number on them.

blacklab

Forget about the cert. # & whether the old #'s are now being interspersed w/ the newer #'s for new gradings. If the PSA logo on the back is in gray, it's a newer submission. If the letters are white, it's an older submission. I don't know if it makes much difference to a collector. I've been told a major dealer wants the gray letters since he figures there is no way he can break out the white letter holder & get an upgrade-under the theory that the white letter version (starting to sound like '56 Topps) was overgraded. Quite frankly, from all of the material that I've seen, I don't know that I put a lot of stock into this older-newer grading argument (even factoring in grader changes at PSA).
Doug

ping4u43

I just receivied 13 cards that began with 0, the were submitted raw. Never been submitted before. So in your eyes these cards are overgraded because they began with the Ser #0. In my opionion I'm very Happy with the 6-9's. 5-8's and 2-7's that these cards receivied for 1961 Fleer Football.

SDavid

I had nothing to do with sportscards during Baker's days with PSA, but I know I've read comments on here that psa catered more toward big submitters during those days. If that was true, then there would be a lot of undergraded cards that came from small submitters.

From my purchases, I can't tell much of a difference with the 0 certs, but the cards with the really old font seem to be graded more leniently.

glossycrazy

Here's my two cents on what I collect and the differences I see! I have two of the top sets in the registry for 1970 topps super glossy football! I have some cards with the "old font" and they start with the number 0 and many recently graded cards from my own submissions or bought on ebay with the different font and a variety of #'s other than zero starting the psa serial #.. THERE IS A HUGE DIFERENCE IN THE CARDS GRADED 10 YEARS AGO AND NOW!! The cards that start with a zero are more off-centered, have poorer edges, and problems on the back.. Many of the psa 8's I have would easily be 9's or 10's if they would have been submitted way back when!! I really think that all of the 9's I have with the old font and zero at the beginning are psa 8's and maybe even 7's with today's tougher grading!! There, I gave my cents worth!
Paul

Kurtman9

I agree if you are talking about the really old flips with the long bar codes. The Aaron below would no doubt be a 7 today due to corner wear. Other than these original PSA graded cards, I have seen little or no difference in grading consistency of the older zero certs vs. the newer flips over the past 5 or 6 years.

1960toppsguy

Paul,
You hit it right on the head. It's just that the old collectors would never admit it, because there collections would be worth significantly less.

packCollector

the inconsistancies are there in all certs. I bought 1/2 a 56 topps in psa 8 with 0 certs a few years ago and it has since been sold. Those cards stack up against any cards in a newer holder. I have seen duds in new holders and old holders. gems in new and old holders. I think modern 10's are easier now than they were 3-4 years ago . I think if you look at a large sample of any set of certs , you will find similar percentages of over and undergraded cards.

doncherry

<< <i>the inconsistancies are there in all certs. I bought 1/2 a 56 topps in psa 8 with 0 certs a few years ago and it has since been sold. Those cards stack up against any cards in a newer holder. I have seen duds in new holders and old holders. gems in new and old holders. I think modern 10's are easier now than they were 3-4 years ago . I think if you look at a large sample of any set of certs , you will find similar percentages of over and undergraded cards. >>

MorrellMan

<< <i>I've been saying this for years . . . Any card with the old PSA holders with the hologram on the back are way overgraded. It seems if you look on e bay, many sellers are investing in re holdering there cards so they at least appear to be recently graded although they have the same serial # starting with the dreaded "0". What a joke . . . Anyone who knows anything about collecting should realize this. I personally wouldn't buy a card or a set of cards at 50% of SMR that are in those old PSA holders as 75% are over graded by todays standards by at least a grade or two! Don't try to trick people, just because you got suckered into buying those things by having them re holdered! >>



My zero cert submissions were from '99 - out of roughly two dozen cards, one was overgraded (in my opinion) and the rest were right on - they were at least the grade assigned, if not bumpable to the next grade up.

With all due respect, 1960TG, I agree that your conclusion is flawed. There have always been inconsistent gradings and always will be, in spite of the TRAINED AND CERTIFIED grading PROFESSIONALS, and a blanket statement like the above just simply is not true. Again, meaning no disrespect, but what follows in your post after the bolded portion sounds like the statements of one who buys the holder and not the card. I'm not sure who you think is perpetrating the joke or trying to trick people - did you recently get burned?

Remember - BUY THE CARD, NOT THE HOLDER.

Wabittwax

I think any inconsistencies in grades is due more to new graders coming and going at PSA rather than a change in there standards. If anything, I thought they were tougher on me pre-2000 than now. It seemed like I could never get a 10 on modern stuff back then. I'm sure my grading eye was worse, but they still seemed tougher.

Money can definately be made by finding undergraded cards. I do it whenever I find them but I honestly don't even look at the serial number, I look at the card.

As for that 61 Aaron AS, that looks pretty sweet from the scan. You must be seeing something that isn't coming through the picture because it looks like a solid 8 to me.

Thulnanth

Hi all,

Interesting thread - I thought I'd chime in with one additional observation. When cards come back from PSA, some are graded "right", some are overgraded, and some are undergraded. The undergraded cards are often cracked and resubmitted, while the overgraded tend to sit in their holders forever (and often are sold, as others have stated). The effect of this, over time, is that we see more and more of the older cards that are overgraded, leading to the perception that all older cards are overgraded. This takes time, but PSA has been at this long enough now that I think it is a factor. Just my $.02 worth

Take it easy,
Jared

gemint

I also don't agree with the premise of this thread. Aside from the really old flips with labels such as the one on the '61 Aaron in Kurtman's post, the 0XXX were graded more harshly, generally speaking. I've submitted a lot of cards both in the days of the 0XXX/hologram days and after the hologram was removed and certs began with 1 or higher in the first digit. I definitely get better results today than I did back in the 0XXX days. I submitted a few thousand cards during the hologram holder days and never received a single 10. Since the hologram was removed, I've probably submitted around 5,000 cards and have received around 50 10's. I'd have to go back through all the invoices to get precise numbers but these estimations are pretty close. Also, the grader of death was very active during the 0XXX days. I had to return dozens of cards for review for certain submissions because they were clearly undergraded and those submissions were graded much more harshly than other submissions of the same card inventory. Better than 50% bumped on further review. I've also gone back in recent years and cracked and resubmitted some of the very high end 8's I have in my collection from the hologram holders. A high percentage have bumped from 8 to 9 including:

'73 Schmidt RC
'69 Rose AS
'72 Palmer
'73 Rose
'69 Palmer
'74 Aaron

These are just a few I can think of off the top of my head. I also had many commons bumped. They weren't sliders either. They carried all the attributes of a 9 most of those that haven't bumped were marginally centered to PSA 9 standards and therefore are up to the "eye appeal" opinion of the grader.

Aaronman

To make a blanket statement (overgraded, undergraded or right on) about a range of serial numbers is crazy. I would be willing to bet that anyone who responded to or has even read this post has not seen enough cards that start with any # to make an accurate assessment. How many 0xxx cards have you seen that are overgraded? 1, 10, 100, 1000? How many were actually graded that start with 0XXX? 10,000, 100, 000, 1,000,000? The number of overgraded card that anyone has seen, IMHO, is statistically insignificant. That does not mean that they don't exist. For the seasoned graded collectors, how many cards have you looked at or had graded yourself there were acurately graded? Compare that to the number of supposedly overgraded (or undergraded) cards and what's the ratio? Personally, I grade a few thousand cards a year for my own sets. What I find is this (based on a lot of 100 cards submitted):

PSA undergrades 2-3 cards
PSA overgrades 2-3 cards
2-3 cards can be argued about forever on how much print or corner fuzz makes a card a 7 or 8.

On the other 91 - 94 cards I have to say that PSA is pretty accurate. With the subjective nature of grading and the fact that it's still done by humans those numbers are more than acceptable to me.

For the new graded collectors out there, don't get caught up in the heresay about serial #'s, timeframes or certain graders. Educate yourselves on the graded process (PSA or others) and BUY THE CARD NOT THE HOLDER!

Enjoy,
Doug

MiniMaster

Doug,

Well stated

I've noticed a higher percentage of off center cards in the original "zero" cert# cards that I have observed. It appears that there may not have been as much emphasis on centering in the overall grading standards as there is today. But as Doug indicated......I probably have not observed enough of the cards to make a valid point.

Bottom line is collectors need not make to big a deal out of it as the card value's increased as a result of the raw card being graded by PSA! So if one does not think highly of the zero cert number cards....don't buy them. Better yet look closely at the card as many times the card is graded right on and if you have a false opinion on zero cert numbered cards you might just overlook a quality card

No matter what the cert number, there are questionable grades in all of them. Due to the grading process this will never change As others have stated.....buy the card not the cert number!

Happy Collecting!

interchanges

the old 02...... serial number didn't matter on this card I just sold