Some general questions about grading...
Ichiro51fan
Posts: 379
Hey everyone,
I just recently had my first ~100 cards graded by PSA and wanted to ask a few question of those of you who have been doing this for longer than I have. I really appreciate your time and insight.
1- I have come to the conlusion that any card with even the slightest fraying on even one corner cannot receive a grade higher than 8. Would someone please comfirm this?
2- I got 2 84 Fleer Mattingly rookies graded. One got a 9 and the other a 6. The thing is, when I look at them side by side, I can't see any difference between them, much less 3 whole grades. Centering and corner are nearly identical on both and there are no stains or marks on either. I can try to post scans later but this one perplexes me. Anyone experienced anything similar?
3- I just sent a 72 Topps Nolan Ryan in and it only got a 7. I was expecting no lower than an 8 as this card appeared no worse than about 20 1972 Topps Commons that received PSA 8's only 2 weeks ago. I actually thought this card was a bit better than most of those 8's but certainly not worse. Again, nothing notably different in centering or stains/marks, and corners actually seemed better. Obviously I'm not claiming to be an expert pre-grader but this just baffles me.
4- Has anyone ever cracked a PSA graded card that seemed under-graded, then resubmitted to either PSA or Becket in an attempt to receive a higher grade? I'm seriously considering doing this with the 72 Ryan as the price difference and sellability between a 7 and 8/9 is fairly significant.
5- What is the recommended method to crack a PSA case? Can this be done without risk of damaging the card?
6- What is the recommended method for analyzing cards for PSA submission and possible 9's/10's? I've tried just eye-balling my first few under a bright light (out of the holder) with mixed results. Should I also be using a magnifying glass or loupe? I've heard of people using a loupe but wouldn't you have to slide that over the card, risking damage to it?
Again, any and all tips would be highly appreciated!
I just recently had my first ~100 cards graded by PSA and wanted to ask a few question of those of you who have been doing this for longer than I have. I really appreciate your time and insight.
1- I have come to the conlusion that any card with even the slightest fraying on even one corner cannot receive a grade higher than 8. Would someone please comfirm this?
2- I got 2 84 Fleer Mattingly rookies graded. One got a 9 and the other a 6. The thing is, when I look at them side by side, I can't see any difference between them, much less 3 whole grades. Centering and corner are nearly identical on both and there are no stains or marks on either. I can try to post scans later but this one perplexes me. Anyone experienced anything similar?
3- I just sent a 72 Topps Nolan Ryan in and it only got a 7. I was expecting no lower than an 8 as this card appeared no worse than about 20 1972 Topps Commons that received PSA 8's only 2 weeks ago. I actually thought this card was a bit better than most of those 8's but certainly not worse. Again, nothing notably different in centering or stains/marks, and corners actually seemed better. Obviously I'm not claiming to be an expert pre-grader but this just baffles me.
4- Has anyone ever cracked a PSA graded card that seemed under-graded, then resubmitted to either PSA or Becket in an attempt to receive a higher grade? I'm seriously considering doing this with the 72 Ryan as the price difference and sellability between a 7 and 8/9 is fairly significant.
5- What is the recommended method to crack a PSA case? Can this be done without risk of damaging the card?
6- What is the recommended method for analyzing cards for PSA submission and possible 9's/10's? I've tried just eye-balling my first few under a bright light (out of the holder) with mixed results. Should I also be using a magnifying glass or loupe? I've heard of people using a loupe but wouldn't you have to slide that over the card, risking damage to it?
Again, any and all tips would be highly appreciated!
Jim G
All-time favorite athletes:
Steve Sax, Steve Garvey, Larry Bird, Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Andre Agassi, Karch Kiraly, Wayne Gretzky, Ichiro Suzuki, Andres Galarraga, Greg Maddux.
"Make the world a better place... punch both A-Rods in the face (Alex Rodriguez and Andy Roddick)!"
All-time favorite athletes:
Steve Sax, Steve Garvey, Larry Bird, Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Andre Agassi, Karch Kiraly, Wayne Gretzky, Ichiro Suzuki, Andres Galarraga, Greg Maddux.
"Make the world a better place... punch both A-Rods in the face (Alex Rodriguez and Andy Roddick)!"
0
Comments
2--probably a small surface crease (look very, very closely at the card)
3--either you missed something or the card fell victim to the subjectivity of grading (or the mood of the grader)
4--happens all the time, often with good results
5--you could cut off the corners with a saw to break the seal and then run a butter knife between the slabs, or do only the latter. A search of this forum will yield many ways.
6--using a loupe is one of the most frequent ways, and I have never heard of one damaging a card.
Looking for Jonny Gomes cards, especially Triple Threads and printing plates. Will consider all cards, though. Got something? Contact me at c_u_l_1@yahoo.com
Depends on what you call slightest fraying....such a card could get a 9.
"2- I got 2 84 Fleer Mattingly rookies graded. One got a 9 and the other a 6. The thing is, when I look at them side by side, I can't see any difference between them, much less 3 whole grades. Centering and corner are nearly identical on both and there are no stains or marks on "either. I can try to post scans later but this one perplexes me. Anyone experienced anything similar?"
There is likely in indent on the PSA 6, or something like that which is hard to see. I imagine if you took it out of the case and studied it closely you will see what they saw.
"4- Has anyone ever cracked a PSA graded card that seemed under-graded, then resubmitted to either PSA or Becket in an attempt to receive a higher grade? I'm seriously considering doing this with the 72 Ryan as the price difference and sellability between a 7 and 8/9 is fairly significant."
Happens all the time...in all graded fields.
6- What is the recommended method for analyzing cards for PSA submission and possible 9's/10's? I've tried just eye-balling my first few under a bright light (out of the holder) with mixed results. Should I also be using a magnifying glass or loupe? I've heard of people using a loupe but wouldn't you have to slide that over the card, risking damage to it?
A loupe is no different then a magnifying glass. In other words, you would not want to slide it over the card as the focus would not be right. (Am I the only one on this board that has a loupe on them at all times? I do not for cards however, but rather rocks and minerals....and hopefully meteorites.)
Mark
Raw: Tony Gonzalez (low #'d cards, and especially 1/1's) and Steve Young.
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I never leave home without it; 16X. But, many folks prefer 10X.
The correct way to use it is to press the top edge of the circle
under the eye-brow; keep the loupe in a fixed position at all
times. With the other hand, move the item you are examining
toward or away from the front of the loupe until sharp focus
is obtained.
NEVER move the loupe from its place in front of your eye. ONLY
move the object you are looking at.
6. You can buy a 10x loupe for about $10 incl S/H off Ebay. Well worth the investment.
Also, in terms of centering, some (most?) folks here use digital calipers to measure centering. A card you think might be 65/35 l/r, might actually be 67/33, which could be the difference between an 8 and 9.
I'm definately gonna crack and re-submit that 72 Ryan when I get it back from PSA.
Was wondering is some of you could post some of your most succesful re-submissions... would be interesting I think.
Thanks again!
All-time favorite athletes:
Steve Sax, Steve Garvey, Larry Bird, Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, Andre Agassi, Karch Kiraly, Wayne Gretzky, Ichiro Suzuki, Andres Galarraga, Greg Maddux.
"Make the world a better place... punch both A-Rods in the face (Alex Rodriguez and Andy Roddick)!"
This lack of understanding is reflected in the language that people use to describe cards and their expected grade. You will constantly hear stuff like 'this card is an easy 9', or ' this card deserved a higher grade', or 'this card is over/under graded'. Now I use these terms all the time as well, so I'm not pointing fingers or belittling anyone, but when someone talks like this it's clear that they either can't or won't accept the fact that all a grade represents is the opinion of a certain grader at a certain time, and that it's no more than that.
I think of card grading the same way that I think of grading essays or term papers. When I'm grading papers I work my through the paper and attach a numerical grade from 1-100. One day I give a paper an 86, while if I read it 4 days later I may give it a 79--- or a 91. Who can say why? Such are the vagaries of human judgment. And while you can rail on about how this is an 'inconsistent' process the fact is that there's no viable alternatives to it, so you might as well get used to it. It DOES suck to get a card back in a PSA 7 holder that you thought was a PSA 9 candidate, but as long as you're courting opinions you just have to resign yourself to the fact that opinions are mutable, and they won't always jibe with your opinions. C'est la vie.
I didn't see any thread to ask this question so I figured I'll ask it here .
I have never sent in any of my cards for grading and I am about to start .
Just have one question about the 97 Topps Finest , I have a Barry Sanders Rare Refractor and it has some kind of plastic coating on the card , do I remove the plastic before sending it in , or will they grade it with it still on the card .
When I first pulled the card, it looked so beautiful it went right into a hard plastic case as soon as I got it out of the pack and never bothered to remove the plastic , matter of fact , I haven't removed any of the plastic from any of the Finest .
<Edited for poor grammar >
And typos like crazy
1. Correct. PSA is very strict on the corners, which is great in opinion. However, I've also found that they tend to be more lenient on the edges than their competitors, although not by much.
2- Probably a surface wrinkle of some type and it was probably there on the raw stock when the card was printed. They are hard to see. I suspect the grader found something that you missed.
3- From the ones I've sent in, older cards seem to be scrutinized more than the modern ones. Also, here is where I suspect the "eye appeal" judgement call may be made more often. If the card is borderline and just doesn't stand out in any particular way, the lower grade is usually assigned.
4- I've had some good success going from BGS to PSA. Either they've stayed the same or gotten a bump up.
5- I usually crack a corner and just work the slab loose with a screwdriver.
6- I just a bright light and a magnifying glass.
<< <i>I just know I'm gonna get smacked for this question.
I didn't see any thread to ask this question so I figured I'll ask it here .
I have never sent in any of my cards for grading and I am about to start .
Just have one question about the 97 Topps Finest , I have a Barry Sanders Rare Refractor and it has some kind of plastic coating on the card , do I remove the plastic before sending it in , or will they grade it with it still on the card .
When I first pulled the card, it looked so beautiful it went right into a hard plastic case as soon as I got it out of the pack and never bothered to remove the plastic , matter of fact , I haven't removed any of the plastic from any of the Finest .
<Edited for poor grammar >
And typos like crazy >>
I think I read PSA's rule regarding this somewhere on their site or in the membership packet. You can do either or. If you send the card with the plastic coat still on, then they will have to grade the surface of the plastic coat since they can't really grade the surface of the card itself. This can hurt or help your chances for a high grade depending on the condition of the plastic coating. Personally, I'd send it in with coat on unless it was fraying or had a lot of surface scuffs from being handled.
<< <i>The most important thing to remember about grading, I think, is that a grade is only an opinion, and opinions change all the time. It's only natural. You hear people bemoan PSA's lack of consistency, but what they don't seem to understand is that no card is 'PSA 8 quality' or 'PSA 9 quality' in it's raw state; i.e., no card 'deserves' a certain grade. All cards may deserve a RANGE of grades, with different probability values assigned to each grade in that range, but that's as far as it goes.
This lack of understanding is reflected in the language that people use to describe cards and their expected grade. You will constantly hear stuff like 'this card is an easy 9', or ' this card deserved a higher grade', or 'this card is over/under graded'. Now I use these terms all the time as well, so I'm not pointing fingers or belittling anyone, but when someone talks like this it's clear that they either can't or won't accept the fact that all a grade represents is the opinion of a certain grader at a certain time, and that it's no more than that.
I think of card grading the same way that I think of grading essays or term papers. When I'm grading papers I work my through the paper and attach a numerical grade from 1-100. One day I give a paper an 86, while if I read it 4 days later I may give it a 79--- or a 91. Who can say why? Such are the vagaries of human judgment. And while you can rail on about how this is an 'inconsistent' process the fact is that there's no viable alternatives to it, so you might as well get used to it. It DOES suck to get a card back in a PSA 7 holder that you thought was a PSA 9 candidate, but as long as you're courting opinions you just have to resign yourself to the fact that opinions are mutable, and they won't always jibe with your opinions. C'est la vie. >>
Boo,
I assume you're a professor. Do your students consider you very challenging, intellectually-speaking? I would imagine you to be a pretty tough grader!!
<< <i>
<< <i>The most important thing to remember about grading, I think, is that a grade is only an opinion, and opinions change all the time. It's only natural. You hear people bemoan PSA's lack of consistency, but what they don't seem to understand is that no card is 'PSA 8 quality' or 'PSA 9 quality' in it's raw state; i.e., no card 'deserves' a certain grade. All cards may deserve a RANGE of grades, with different probability values assigned to each grade in that range, but that's as far as it goes.
This lack of understanding is reflected in the language that people use to describe cards and their expected grade. You will constantly hear stuff like 'this card is an easy 9', or ' this card deserved a higher grade', or 'this card is over/under graded'. Now I use these terms all the time as well, so I'm not pointing fingers or belittling anyone, but when someone talks like this it's clear that they either can't or won't accept the fact that all a grade represents is the opinion of a certain grader at a certain time, and that it's no more than that.
I think of card grading the same way that I think of grading essays or term papers. When I'm grading papers I work my through the paper and attach a numerical grade from 1-100. One day I give a paper an 86, while if I read it 4 days later I may give it a 79--- or a 91. Who can say why? Such are the vagaries of human judgment. And while you can rail on about how this is an 'inconsistent' process the fact is that there's no viable alternatives to it, so you might as well get used to it. It DOES suck to get a card back in a PSA 7 holder that you thought was a PSA 9 candidate, but as long as you're courting opinions you just have to resign yourself to the fact that opinions are mutable, and they won't always jibe with your opinions. C'est la vie. >>
Boo,
I assume you're a professor. Do your students consider you very challenging, intellectually-speaking? I would imagine you to be a pretty tough grader!! >>
Right now I'm a G.A. as I'm working on my Masters in Economics. Re: grading, I'm pretty lenient. As long as people seem like their making an effort I'm usually happy to move them along.
<< <i>
<< <i>I just know I'm gonna get smacked for this question.
I didn't see any thread to ask this question so I figured I'll ask it here .
I have never sent in any of my cards for grading and I am about to start .
Just have one question about the 97 Topps Finest , I have a Barry Sanders Rare Refractor and it has some kind of plastic coating on the card , do I remove the plastic before sending it in , or will they grade it with it still on the card .
When I first pulled the card, it looked so beautiful it went right into a hard plastic case as soon as I got it out of the pack and never bothered to remove the plastic , matter of fact , I haven't removed any of the plastic from any of the Finest .
<Edited for poor grammar >
And typos like crazy >>
I think I read PSA's rule regarding this somewhere on their site or in the membership packet. You can do either or. If you send the card with the plastic coat still on, then they will have to grade the surface of the plastic coat since they can't really grade the surface of the card itself. This can hurt or help your chances for a high grade depending on the condition of the plastic coating. Personally, I'd send it in with coat on unless it was fraying or had a lot of surface scuffs from being handled. >>
Thanks for the reply Brian .
Much appreciated !