No 9.5 grade ???

PSA will add a half-point grade within each of the 1-10 numbers with the exception of a 9.5 grade. We felt it was unnecessary to add a third “Mint” grade since PSA already had a Mint 9 and Gem Mint 10 grade as part of the current scale
WHY NOT ????????????
Only 1 thru 8 cards have possible high-end potential ???
Each and every 9 is absolutely similar........ and/or correct ???
A nine, somehow under-evaluated by a grader, MUST go up a full grade to Gem Mint ???
PSA has contradicted themselves by not using a 9.5 grade, and also fails to get in better, on the "Modern/Brand New" card market, just allows Beckett to continue to grade 2006 atomic chrome inserts, or whatever, with possible 9.5 grades and tell collectors, particularily those who enjoy submitting cards straight from the new pack, that Beckett can, in fact, actually tell the difference between a 9 and a 9.5 and a 10.
WHY NOT ????????????
Only 1 thru 8 cards have possible high-end potential ???
Each and every 9 is absolutely similar........ and/or correct ???
A nine, somehow under-evaluated by a grader, MUST go up a full grade to Gem Mint ???
PSA has contradicted themselves by not using a 9.5 grade, and also fails to get in better, on the "Modern/Brand New" card market, just allows Beckett to continue to grade 2006 atomic chrome inserts, or whatever, with possible 9.5 grades and tell collectors, particularily those who enjoy submitting cards straight from the new pack, that Beckett can, in fact, actually tell the difference between a 9 and a 9.5 and a 10.
This aint no party,... this aint no disco,.. this aint no fooling around.
0
Comments
Dave
1957 Topps 99% 7.40 GPA
Hank Aaron Basic PSA 7-8(75%)
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
MattyC has discussed this topic in a few threads in perhaps the most well-written beef I've seen thus far with the new system.
The bottom line is (at least in my humble opinion), even if you are in 100% agreement with the change, you have to admit that omitting the 9.5 makes no sense, as all of the arguments that you make in favor of the change have to apply to the 9 grade as well.
Just my $.02
Take it easy,
Jared
Caught between the Scylla and Charibdes,
Hypnotized by you if I should linger,
Staring at the ring around your finger" - Sting
Ray Thiel (1964-2007) - the man who showed me more wonderful games & gaming sessions than I ever dreamed possible... you ran out of hit points too young, my friend.
I think the reason why PSA chose no 9.5 is because of the number of 9.5's those rough 10's should have received
D's: 50P,49S,45D+S,43D,41S,40D,39D+S,38D+S,37D+S,36S,35D+S,all 16-34's
Q's: 52S,47S,46S,40S,39S,38S,37D+S,36D+S,35D,34D,32D+S
74T: 241,435,610,654 97 Finest silver: 115,135,139,145,310
73T:31,55,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,80,152,165,189,213,235,237,257,341,344,377,379,390,422,433,453,480,497,545,554,563,580,606,613,630
95 Ultra GM Sets: Golden Prospects,HR Kings,On-Base Leaders,Power Plus,RBI Kings,Rising Stars
Anyway...sorry for getting off topic, I just agree that if there are going to be 1/2 grades (which I don't agree with) that they shouldn't exclude 9.5 as it would doesn't make sense.
And by the way, I have to also agree with other posts, PSA can't tell the difference between a whole grade, so you can't tell me this will be any different. Also loved the part where they said they would put some estimated pricing in the SMR for the 1/2 grades until they start selling! What a friggin joke.....get the prices right on the rest of the grades first before you start adding other prices in!
I'm a small fish in a big pond with only a few hundred PSA graded cards, but this really feels like a kick to the cajones for me. I could continue my rant for hours on this like eveyone else, but alas, It's wasted in the end. We all know the truth is that PSA has to come up with a way to keep the business growing as there will be no vintage left to grade in a few years and who is going to want their 2017 Topps set graded at $8/card when the complete set isn't worth but $20.
***Please...back to the drawing board!!!
having a.5 all the way thru up to 9 ,with no 9.5, is pretty stoopid
i think with their mentality as of late they would call it "pert near mint"
While Joe had no problem kicking us small time 9 collectors in the nuts. He obviously didn't want the million dollar guys coming down on him.
The GEM 10 grade is actually a fake grade in the 1st place. created by third party graders to created false rarity. It gives collectors something to chase and prompts alot of submissions looking for that grade.
The fact that the "Gem 10" grade is not required to be perfectly centered contridicts the Name "GEM MINT 10" Its fools gold 10's are nothing more than nice high grade 9's hiding under a GEM 10 label. Its all subjective and always will be
A 9.5 is so obvious, IF.... THE HALF GRADES ARE NOW USED, still time to re-consider adding a 9.5.
Prome, I agree with you and mt too, essentially there are "9.6's" that they chose to grade 10, and thus they don't want to create a situation where yesterday's 10's are really today's 9.5's. Problem is, the same situation exists for grades 2-9. I don't understand why it's okay for a 7.7 to reside in an 8 holder but a 9.7 can't reside in a 10 holder.
But they CAN tell the difference among a NM-MT 8, NM-MT+ 8.5, and a MINT 9, right!!??!!??
God, this company is run by idiots.
a PSA 9 has a minor defect (such as a touch of white showing anywhere on the front)...
there is no room for a PSA 9.5 what would it be, a small touch of white (thats still noticable)-either way its a minor flaw and should fall to a PSA 9, even though the rest of the card is a Gem....THERE WOULD BE NO WAY TO DIFFERENTIATE a 9 or 9.5...impossible, and the graders and Joe knew this....
by not including the 9.5, it keeps the value steady on PSA 9's and 10's....
However, you also support my point regarding 8.0, 8.5, and 9.0.
Of course PSA cannot reliably differentiate among these grades.
a PSA 9 has a minor defect (such as a touch of white showing anywhere on the front)...
there is no room for a PSA 9.5 what would it be, a small touch of white (thats still noticable)-either way its a minor flaw and should fall to a PSA 9, even though the rest of the card is a Gem....THERE WOULD BE NO WAY TO DIFFERENTIATE a 9 or 9.5...impossible, and the graders and Joe knew this....
by not including the 9.5, it keeps the value steady on PSA 9's and 10's.....
What????
I stand by my first post. It is to protect the PSA 10's. I think 9.5's from the other company sells for equal if not more on most cards that have a pop above just a few.
Dave
1957 Topps 99% 7.40 GPA
Hank Aaron Basic PSA 7-8(75%)
<< <i>It would shame the PSA 10.
Dave >>
Kind of like how the 6.5 shames the PSA 7, the 7.5 shames the PSA 8, the 8.5 shames the PSA 9...
Dave
1957 Topps 99% 7.40 GPA
Hank Aaron Basic PSA 7-8(75%)
Nice 8's that are not .5's will still command what the market will bare. I do not see the advent of the .5 hurting the value of the nice straight graded cards.
The problem is we have so many series and so many different pressures on these cards that we just can't in good conscious make blanket statements.
JMO
Steve
There are plenty of 10s running around disguised as 9s. I've lost a ton of cash on these cards.
We can never allow ourselves to be fooled by this fact.