Home PSA Set Registry Forum

1977, 78 , 79, 80 Baseball Tough?

I have recently come into some very nice sets of late 70's product. On first inspection the sets appear to be NRMT/MT condition quality. Much of the material is MINT.
The paper quality on these cards, the cutting and printing process, and centering & diamond cut inconsistencies make these tougher in high grade (PSA) than you might think should be the case. There are 60's issues that seem to be of better material quality than these late 70's cards.
An interesting flaw universal to all the sets is occassionally seen on these cards. There can sometimes be a small "bubble" which appears below the paper surface but above the cardboard. Otherwise perfect cards need to be carefully inspected for this flaw. In many cases you have to tilt the card to the light to see it. Could be extremely tiny or as big as a shirt button.
Has anyone had experience to know what the deduct might be by PSA for this flaw, and is there a qualifier that this might fall under? My 1969 sets do not have a single instance of this type of flaw where with these late 70's product it shows up quite often.
Would appreciate answers addressed to late 70's product and any other product flaws that are not qualifier specific like OC for centering.
RayB69Topps
Never met a Vintage card I didn't like!

Comments

  • mikeschmidtmikeschmidt Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭
    Cards like that typically cannot grade higher than PSA 8.

    There are exceptions, however. For example, the same problem occurs in the 1981 Topps set, and I have a Mike Schmidt Leaders cards that has a minute bubble as such that still somehow achieved an SGC 98 GEM MINT grade. (I do not think it deserves such a grade...)

    MS
    I am actively buying MIKE SCHMIDT gem mint baseball cards. Also looking for any 19th century cabinets of Philadephia Nationals. Please PM with additional details.
  • I had a 1963 Aparicio card that had a similar surface bubble but was otherwise NM/MT. It received a 7. I think you'll probably get a 1 grade deduction for it although I haven't graded enough cards with that type of flaw to know for sure.
    Please visit my eBay auctions at gemint
  • mcastaldimcastaldi Posts: 1,227 ✭✭✭
    Ray> Your story is exactly why I think a good halogen desk lamp is essential for properly evaluating raw cards.
    I have had one or two 72s with nearly imperceptible surface bubbles come back as a 6 which were otherwise worthy of an 8 or a 9. As you say, they're sometimes very hard to spot - even in good light.

    Mike
    So full of action, my name should be a verb.
Sign In or Register to comment.