Options
WHY NOT 9.5 ????????????????
Hubcap
Posts: 293
I was reviewing the Mile High auction catalog that just came yesterday, and on pages 22 & 23, there are several cards graded PSA 9 that are slightly off center. Specifically, the 1958 Ted Wiliiams, 1957 Brooks Robinson, 1956 Yogi Berra and 1958 Mickey Mantle.
So why not have a 9.5 grade for those PSA 9 cards that are perfectly centered, but do not meet whatever the criteria is for a PSA 10?????? I am assuming that centering above all else is going to be the major criteria for .5 grade bumps in other grades 8 and lower.
AZ
So why not have a 9.5 grade for those PSA 9 cards that are perfectly centered, but do not meet whatever the criteria is for a PSA 10?????? I am assuming that centering above all else is going to be the major criteria for .5 grade bumps in other grades 8 and lower.
AZ
0
Comments
1954
A PSA 10 with 50/50 perfect front centering and 65/35 or better on back?
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
LTNS! PSA has stated that centering is only one of the criteria for cards getting a bump. From what i was told all the other attributes must be met and be better then the old standard. Corners, registration and color all have to be better too.
Simply sending in nicely centered cards is not going to meet the new standard.
Steve
<< <i>Why not a 10.5????????
A PSA 10 with 50/50 perfect front centering and 65/35 or better on back? >>
That to me should be ok for a 10. A 9.5 would be anything in the 75/25 range and a 9.0 can be 90/10. JMHO
<< <i>
<< <i>Why not a 10.5????????
A PSA 10 with 50/50 perfect front centering and 65/35 or better on back? >>
That to me should be ok for a 10. A 9.5 would be anything in the 75/25 range and a 9.0 can be 90/10. JMHO >>
Well, I think that's the issue..All previously graded PSA 10's have already been graded on a 9.5 scale. Talk about devaluing cards, what happens to current PSA 10's if they were to change the standard on what equals a PSA 10?
With the new half grades, the only changes were UPGRADES.. PSA 8's are still graded on the same PSA 8 standards as always.. Same for all the other grades. Only difference is that the cards that fall on the higher end of the grade get a bump, nothing gets downgraded. If they went to 9.5, it would mean a change/tightening to current PSA 10 standards because really PSA 10's have never needed to be 100% perfect. But with a 9.5, they would have to be.
This would cause all current PSA 10's to nosedive in value because they would then be the equal to new PSA 9.5s. That is the reason PSA didn't go with the 9.5 in the new scale and won't unless they create 10.5 or above.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
DiBergi: "Why don’t you just make 10 louder and make 10 be the top number, and make that a little louder?"
Nigel: "These go to 11."
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
<< <i>Nigel: "You see, most blokes will be playing at 10. You’re on 10, all the way up, all the way up...Where can you go from there? Nowhere. What we do, is if we need that extra push over the cliff...Eleven. One louder."
DiBergi: "Why don’t you just make 10 louder and make 10 be the top number, and make that a little louder?"
Nigel: "These go to 11." >>
1990 leaf in (10)
1986 topps mets (10)
2008 ring kings cut signatures
any Darryl Strawberry, Dwight Gooden, Keith Hernandez cards in (10)
"PSA has decided to implement a new half-point system to reward trading cards that exhibit high-end qualities within their respective grade."
Not ALL trading cards, those 9s are above inspection, each and every 9 must be similar, equal, identical in qualitly, centering, corners, gloss, reverse sides, Etc., no rewards for the high end types.
Protect those existing tens, at the cost of accross the board consistent logic that ALL cards might have high-end potential.
Maybe, perhaps, some owners of tens might feel they have an overgraded one, it was more likely to be a 9.5 ?
It might actually be percieved to be worth less on Feb 2nd than it was back in Jan.
Awww, too bad for those "investing" in PSA 10 slabs, they cant possibly accept a lesser grade potential.
Only guys with 8s or less can feel thay may have an over-rated card, to heck with collectors who can understand a consistent theme that ALL TRADING CARDS might posssibly exhibit high-end qualities, only SGC, BGS, GAI, and others who have used half grades constantly, for ALL grades, must be used if one wants to have a 9.5 in his collection.
It's kind of funny, for 18 years no cards at all needed half grades, now a new awareness, so why not be consistent and HONEST, and admit ALL cards might be able to exhibit high-end qualities within their respective grades ???
<< <i>Somehow only 1-8, the lower scale grades, are among trading cards eligible;
"PSA has decided to implement a new half-point system to reward trading cards that exhibit high-end qualities within their respective grade."
Not ALL trading cards, those 9s are above inspection, each and every 9 must be similar, equal, identical in qualitly, centering, corners, gloss, reverse sides, Etc., no rewards for the high end types.
Protect those existing tens, at the cost of accross the board consistent logic that ALL cards might have high-end potential.
Maybe, perhaps, some owners of tens might feel they have an overgraded one, it was more likely to be a 9.5 ?
It might actually be percieved to be worth less on Feb 2nd than it was back in Jan.
Awww, too bad for those "investing" in PSA 10 slabs, they cant possibly accept a lesser grade potential.
Only guys with 8s or less can feel thay may have an over-rated card, to heck with collectors who can understand a consistent theme that ALL TRADING CARDS might posssibly exhibit high-end qualities, only SGC, BGS, GAI, and others who have used half grades constantly, for ALL grades, must be used if one wants to have a 9.5 in his collection.
It's kind of funny, for 18 years no cards at all needed half grades, now a new awareness, so why not be consistent and HONEST, and admit ALL cards might be able to exhibit high-end qualities within their respective grades ??? >>
A PSA 10 IS a high end 9...PSA grading standard for Gem Mint 10 are equal to the BGS 9.5 and SGC 98 standards. You would have to RAISE the standards for a PSA 10, and with the 1 Feb change, PSA hasn't raised the standards of any of the other cards that currently reside in NON-half point holders. How would that be consistent? Please explain....
My advice? Use one of the other grading services if you want your high end 9s to say 9.5 rather than 10. PSA isn't going to do it, and it was an excellent decision on their part NOT to change the standards they've had in place for the last 18 years. PSA 10s from 5 years ago will be the same as PSA 10s from next year as they should be....
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
True, very inconsistent that PSA 7s will not, nor will PSA 2s, nor will PSA 5s, etc.,
so the new thinking that there is in fact a possible high-end card within a particular grade, is new thinking only for certain cards, not all cards, not the very highest priced ones.
Probably good for the investor, probably not for the collector.
Do you really, in all honesty, think there are NO high-end quality PSA 9s within their respective grade ???
<< <i>"PSA 10s from 5 years ago will be the same as PSA 10s from next year"
True, very inconsistent that PSA 7s will not, nor will PSA 2s, nor will PSA 5s, etc.,
so the new thinking that there is in fact a possible high-end card within a particular grade, is new thinking only for certain cards, not all cards, not the very highest priced ones.
Probably good for the investor, probably not for the collector.
Do you really, in all honesty, think there are NO high-end quality PSA 9s within their respective grade ??? >>
None that I own..I turned all of those in to PSA 10's...
PSA 7s, PSA 2's, all the other current grades WILL BE THE SAME STANDARDS...You could own a card that is either EQUAL TO or GREATER THAN a PSA 8 in a PSA 8 holder, but not lower...Only way to find out if it EXCEEDS the grade (according to PSA) will be to resubmit.
If they add 9.5 (which as I said, if you read the exact verbiage of what PSA considers "Gem Mint" it is equal to BGS 9.5 and SGC 98/9.5 already) they would have to CHANGE the current standard of what a PSA 10 is. That means you could own a card that is EQUAL TO or LESS THAN in the new grading system. That's why PSA didn't do, isn't going to do it, and never will do it, unless they extend the scale out to 10.5 or beyond.
If you own a "high end" 9 valued higher than $50 and you haven't resubbed it for a bump..All I can say is, one day, someone else is going to.
The absolute BEST PLACE to find PSA 10 cards raw...Is in PSA 9 holders..PERIOD...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Check out my Barry Sanders. He's my favorite all time player and this is the first RC I ever pulled of his. So I love this card, but it clearly a 9.5.
Most PSA 10s fall into this category for 1 reason or another. When they want to they can add a "10+" or a "perfect" rating. Then the few 10s that really qualify can have that rating. I think they will go to it at some point.
EDIT: Maybe it's a 9 after looking again. I don't care either way, I expected a 9 when I sent it.
SGC and BGS, both of whom already use the .5 scale, DO NOT have this grade. I'm assuming, and forgive me for a moment, that the clamouring for a 9.5 (a grade between PSA 9 and PSA 10) would be a MINT + grade. I'm sorry, but this just isn't a grade that exists or is accepted in the hobby at this time (PRO Grading tried). PSA could certainly undertake the implementation and utilization of such a grade, but at what cost to their collector base and Registry owners?
The confusion, I believe, is that SGC and BGC both have a grade beyond the PSA 10. The SGC 100 and a BGS 10. For PSA to have an equivalent grade would require either a PSA 10.5, a PSA 10 PLUS, or better yet, a PSA PRISTINE with no numeric rating.
However, would such a grade be beneficial to the hobby? Sure, it would bring additional revenue via the review program, but I think the backlash from the hardcore PSA clients would be more detrimental than beneficial!
1957 Topps PSA
1961 Fleer SGC
<< <i>PSA opted to stay clear of the 9.5 Mint/Gem Mint presently but who knows if a year or two from now that won't change. Incidently SGC also skipped a half grade but lower down the scale as they have no SGC 82 6.5 so its either a SGC 80 6 or SGC84 7. >>
PSA didn't stay "clear of the 9.5," but wisely opted not to try to CREATE it.
Again, the confusion, I believe, is that SGC and BGC both have a grade beyond the PSA 10 GEM MINT. The SGC 100 PRISTINE and a BGS 10 PRISTINE. For PSA to have an equivalent grade would require either a PSA 10.5, a PSA 10 PLUS, or better yet, a PSA PRISTINE with no numeric rating. Not add a PSA 9.5 MINT+.
NO ONE has a MINT/GEM MINT grade! Likewise, what grade would a 6.5 be? It's very hard to define an EX+ card in comparison to an EX versus EX-MT card. I don't think that you'll see PSA utilize the PSA 6.5 EX+ grade very often. Tha is one of the main reasons that it is not included in the SGC scale. Heck, the difference between a strong EX card and a weak NM-MT card can often times be a matter of perspective!
Why not, why is a 6 not capable of having high-end qualities within that grade, any less than a 7 or an 8 or a 3 ???
As PSA proclaims;
new half-point system to reward trading cards that exhibit high-end qualities within their respective grade.
you seem to feel 6s are almost all excluded, and 9s of course MUST be completely excluded.
I am sure not all 9s are equal, some do, in fact, really show some high-end qualities within the 9 range !! Any serious collector can admit that.
It is too bad a full grade is needed to show those cards which have high-end quality, they unfortunately are the 10s.
Now is the time for PSA to realize they may have been a bit too easy on 10s and make a 10 an almost perfect copy, and those typical a 9, and those not quite perfect, but with high-end quality, a 9.5.
An older 10 card MIGHT be percieved to be a possible overgrade, SO WHAT, all the old regular 8s which are NOT sent in for re-evaluation MIGHT also be percieved as a possible overgrade. Why such a concern about investors in 10s ?
A change is happening, why not change the quality of future 10s into what they really should be ?
A 9.5 would then make complete sense and be completely consistent with the "new" revalation that trading cards can in reality, exhibit high-end qualities within their respective grade, WHATEVER that full grade is, even 9s.
<< <i>"I don't think that you'll see PSA utilize the PSA 6.5 EX+ grade very often."
Why not, why is a 6 not capable of having high-end qualities within that grade, any less than a 7 or an 8 or a 3 ???
As PSA proclaims;
new half-point system to reward trading cards that exhibit high-end qualities within their respective grade.
you seem to feel 6s are almost all excluded, and 9s of course MUST be completely excluded.
I am sure not all 9s are equal, some do, in fact, really show some high-end qualities within the 9 range !! Any serious collector can admit that.
It is too bad a full grade is needed to show those cards which have high-end quality, they unfortunately are the 10s.
Now is the time for PSA to realize they may have been a bit too easy on 10s and make a 10 an almost perfect copy, and those typical a 9, and those not quite perfect, but with high-end quality, a 9.5.
An older 10 card MIGHT be percieved to be a possible overgrade, SO WHAT, all the old regular 8s which are NOT sent in for re-evaluation MIGHT also be percieved as a possible overgrade. Why such a concern about investors in 10s ?
A change is happening, why not change the quality of future 10s into what they really should be ?
A 9.5 would then make complete sense and be completely consistent with the "new" revalation that trading cards can in reality, exhibit high-end qualities within their respective grade, WHATEVER that full grade is, even 9s. >>
You're right! Not all 9's are created equal and that's why those that really don't deserve to be 9's will now be in 8.5's! And if it's better than a 9, it's in a 10. Viola! Problem solved . . . Wasn't that easy?
Too many want to keep stretching this out. What's next? A 100 point scale? Then half grades on those 100? We're splitting hairs over the difference between most cards when talking about half grades and most of the difference will be that dreaded "eye appeal." I get the impression that the biggest squawk is coming from those that want PSA to create a way that allows them to make more money on the inventory that they already have. And I'm not necessarily talking about the collectors or the Registry owners, but the dealers that buy and flip and submit and resubmit.