Mr. Adderly - what a long, strange road it has been

gregm13

Need I say more...




LINE # CERT # CARD CARD CO. CARD # CARD NAME VARIETY GRADE
1 07316100 1964 PHILADELPHIA 71 HERB ADDERLY N/A 8

Date Received: 11/30/2007
Date of Grades Posted: 01/25/2008
Date Shipped: 01/25/2008

Greg M.

JasP24

Greg,

What are you trying to say? You've become a good card doctor? LOL

JasP24

Here's one of my older pop and re-sub PSA 6 to PSA 8...

envoy98

Funny...

One question though, did you open the holders with your teeth? Looks like a rat chewed on them. lol

I hope I can manage a couple nice bumps like that. Was that 6 or 7 the one you sent in with me?

JasP24

<< <i>Funny...

One question though, did you open the holders with your teeth? Looks like a rat chewed on them. lol

I hope I can manage a couple nice bumps like that. Was that 6 or 7 the one you sent in with me? >>



LOL...I was thinking the same thing..Lucky the card survived the case opening...

WinPitcher

True EX/MNT cards can be graded anywhere between 6 and 8. It depends on the grader. The amount of honest wear on the corners could be so slight that one grader sees it as an EX/MNT card while another sees it as an 8.

I had an SGC 6 that was just like that, centered, colorful, no problems, just the slightest of honest wear on 3 corners that when cracked and sent in raw received a PSA 8. Value of card went from 60.00 to 600.00 That is why whenever anyone asks my advice on building a mid grade set I urge them to choose only true EX/MNT cards and not cards that are net graded 6. Those sets/cards always do well.

I do not see what the problem is with it.

Now if a card that graded net 6 gets bumped to an 8 then I'd have a problem.

Steve

jradke4

so if the same card can go from a 6 to 7 to an 8. please tell me how they can accurately determine on a 0.5 scale.

WinPitcher

Not all cards are created equal, some are cut properly, have great color, no PD, etc. These are cards that were born as GEMS. Not all cards are born this way. It is these cards that if for lack of a better word get abused (honestly) are true to the grade. WE have 3 grades that these cards fit into, EX, EX/MNT and NMNT. Now depending on the severity of the abuse the card will be graded.

1 strong touch on an otherwise GEM produced card will get that card the NMNT grade.

2 slight touches on said GEM and you have an EX/MNT card

3 slight touches and you have an EX card.

This is how I was taught to grade back in the 70's

Now if I had a card that right out of the pack had a Manufacturing problem it could never be called a GEM, best it could be called was NMNT.

Same card with corners touched and the grade goes automatically to EX at best it never sees the EX/MNT grade as those cards were GEMS to begin with.


Steve

WinPitcher

<<<<<< so if the same card can go from a 6 to 7 to an 8. please tell me how they can accurately determine on a 0.5 scale. >>>>>>>>

AS long as the card begins its life as a GEM it is possible.

Grading is subjective. just another layer. What is 8 to you may be 7.5 to me and most importantly it is what PSA says as they are the ones we have entrusted this to.

I don't see all the confusion.


Steve

WinPitcher

Jasp are the Macks the same card? the one graded 9 has a print dot while the one graded 10 does not. Or is it the scan?? If you look at the 'R' in Rams the nine has a dot.


Steve

jradke4

if one set of graders see the card as a 6, then another set a 7, then a thrid an 8. i dont see how they claim that they can accurately grade on a 0.5 scale. maybe its that my job requires me to be more exact, that makes be sceptical that they can do this well. i could see that if greg sent the card on the third try and it came back a 6 that they could grade on a 0.5 scale. but that it came back a 8 makes me really wonder. so what if greg sends it in again and it comes back an 8.5 now. wouldnt that make you wonder about all the grades that you currently have. even more so on modern cards. i have some that are graded as 7 but look much better than older cards with the same 7 grade when comparing to photos off of ebay.

when i was in high school i use to work at a major card shop in milwaukee, the owner use to set up at the national every year and still may. i asked him if he grades older cards on a scale that was different than modern cards. his answer was quick...no all cards are graded on the same scale. age should not factor into the grade, now it may factor into the price. ie a mint t206 common is worth more than a mint 58 topps etc. i have a sense that psa has problems keeping graders working off a same scale. of course we are all human and everyones eyes see things differently. but they could only have so many sets of eyes that have graded gregs card. afterall its not some of the modern crap.

WinPitcher

No, grading is not a science, if it was then I'd be worried. Grading is strictly an opinion.


I did not know that this was another .5 thread.


I tried to explain how I was taught to grade that is all.


Steve

WinPitcher

no all cards are graded on the same scale.


Your guy gets it.


Steve

gregm13

The card was originally graded a 7 (in an order that I graded w/ Josh), then I cracked and re-submitted and it came back a 6. I cracked again and now its an 8. The centering is nearly perfect, however 2 of the corners have slight touches. I think graders put varying weights to the different characteristics. For instance, one grader may be more lenient on corners if the centering is solid, while another may let centering slide if the corners are sharp.

I knew the card was an 8, which is why I kept trying. I did the same thing w/ a Mackey rc that graded a 7 twice and is finally sitting in an 8 holder.

I agree w/ Jay that the rationale for moving to a .5 scale is shaky at best. At least PSA made the wise decision of not having a 9.5 grade. That would have really pissed me off to have all my cards sitting in 9.5 holders because 10's were reserved for "pristine" cards which would be nearly unobtainable.

Greg M.

drewsef

there's no question grading isn't a science, but for a card to go from a 6 to 8 is a mistake on one end of the scale, or there are not enough qualified graders on the card, it really is that simple

WinPitcher

Not if the card began life as a gem.


Steve

WinPitcher

however 2 of the corners have slight touches.


I rest my case.


Steve

JasP24

<< <i>Jasp are the Macks the same card? the one graded 9 has a print dot while the one graded 10 does not. Or is it the scan?? If you look at the 'R' in Rams the nine has a dot.


Steve >>



Yes, it is the same card, sent in via review process...Hence the reason the cert # is the same...

Jason

JasP24

<< <i>No, grading is not a science, if it was then I'd be worried. Grading is strictly an opinion.



Steve >>



100% correct..You could ask 10 experienced collectors their opinion on what a card should grade using the half point scale and get 8 different opinions...You could ask 10 PSA graders their opinions and get 4 different opinions...PSA is more accurate then your average collector or dealer and that's why they are in business. But to think different PSA graders won't also see things different on different cards is simply crazy.

If you haven't got a grasp on the grading process and how it works, how it helps the value of your cards, etc. you should probably either collect raw only or find a different hobby. It is an opinion based on PSA published standards. When the difference between the PSA 6 and PSA 8 is how someone sees the level of wear on a corner, I mean that is subjective as it comes.

The key to success is to teach yourself what PSA looks for, and hope you get a grader who agrees with your opinion. If took Greg a couple of tires, but he absolutely ended with the correct result.

Jason

drewsef

<< <i>

<< <i>No, grading is not a science, if it was then I'd be worried. Grading is strictly an opinion.



Steve >>



100% correct..You could ask 10 experienced collectors their opinion on what a card should grade using the half point scale and get 8 different opinions...You could ask 10 PSA graders their opinions and get 4 different opinions...PSA is more accurate then your average collector or dealer and that's why they are in business. But to think different PSA graders won't also see things different on different cards is simply crazy.

If you haven't got a grasp on the grading process and how it works, how it helps the value of your cards, etc. you should probably either collect raw only or find a different hobby. It is an opinion based on PSA published standards. When the difference between the PSA 6 and PSA 8 is how someone sees the level of wear on a corner, I mean that is subjective as it comes.

The key to success is to teach yourself what PSA looks for, and hope you get a grader who agrees with your opinion. If took Greg a couple of tires, but he absolutely ended with the correct result.

Jason >>



that all sounds nice and dandy, but in reality, if PSA has people grading a card 6 while one grades it an 8, that is a problem that the senior graders there need to address when they see someone grade that card a 6. I absolutely know the grading process from an insider's perspective and can tell you my previous sentence is absolute fact. How do you know Greg absolutely ended with the correct result? And if all that matters is the end result as you say, what do you have to say if I sold Greg the card after getting it back from PSA as a 6? I would definitely be correct in being pretty ticked off that PSA has graders letting cards out that can't tell a 6 from an 8 and I just took a major hit in the difference of value due to relying on the "experts."

JasP24

<< <i>

that all sounds nice and dandy, but in reality, if PSA has people grading a card 6 while one grades it an 8, that is a problem that the senior graders there need to address when they see someone grade that card a 6. I absolutely know the grading process from an insider's perspective and can tell you my previous sentence is absolute fact. How do you know Greg absolutely ended with the correct result? And if all that matters is the end result as you say, what do you have to say if I sold Greg the card after getting it back from PSA as a 6? I would definitely be correct in being pretty ticked off that PSA has graders letting cards out that can't tell a 6 from an 8 and I just took a major hit in the difference of value due to relying on the "experts." >>



I'd say that's your mistake for not recognizing the PSA 6 was incorrectly graded. There isn't a huge difference between a nice 6 and an ugly 8...Just isn't..Especially when the separating factor is level of corner wear...

I know he ended in the correct result, because it ended up in the holder he believed that it belonged in..He thought enough to pop the card and resubmit twice..It's what any collector who cares about maximizing their card value would do.

My advice to you would be to rely more on your own expert opinion and use PSA to verify those beliefs rather than have them tell you what they want you to think.

Jason

drewsef

<< <i>

<< <i>

that all sounds nice and dandy, but in reality, if PSA has people grading a card 6 while one grades it an 8, that is a problem that the senior graders there need to address when they see someone grade that card a 6. I absolutely know the grading process from an insider's perspective and can tell you my previous sentence is absolute fact. How do you know Greg absolutely ended with the correct result? And if all that matters is the end result as you say, what do you have to say if I sold Greg the card after getting it back from PSA as a 6? I would definitely be correct in being pretty ticked off that PSA has graders letting cards out that can't tell a 6 from an 8 and I just took a major hit in the difference of value due to relying on the "experts." >>



I'd say that's your mistake for not recognizing the PSA 6 was incorrectly graded. There isn't a huge difference between a nice 6 and an ugly 8...Just isn't..Especially when the separating factor is level of corner wear...

I know he ended in the correct result, because it ended up in the holder he believed that it belonged in..He thought enough to pop the card and resubmit twice..It's what any collector who cares about maximizing their card value would do.

My advice to you would be to rely more on your own expert opinion and use PSA to verify those beliefs rather than have them tell you what they want you to think.

Jason >>



You are still passing up the obvious point probably because you and alot of people here are not part of this group, but what good is the service for those who rely on PSA to get their card grade right and maximize their value without becoming experts themselves if one day a card is gonna grade a 6 and sell for $3 and the next be an 8 and sell for $50. Come on, that is not a tolerable difference and everyone should expect more from those who say they are the best in the business.

JasP24

<< <i>
You are still passing up the obvious point probably because you and alot of people here are not part of this group, but what good is the service for those who rely on PSA to get their card grade right and maximize their value without becoming experts themselves if one day a card is gonna grade a 6 and sell for $3 and the next be an 8 and sell for $50. Come on, that is not a tolerable difference and everyone should expect more from those who say they are the best in the business. >>



In that case, it isn't a good service for you and if it hurts your feelings or your pocketbook to sell a card that someone else can get upgraded you should find a new hobby or collect raw only. If you think the difference between a nice 6 and a low end 8 is that large, you are simply an uninformed collector. And if that's the case the disservice here is to yourself. PSA offers a human opinion, its not a computerized system...Its subjective, and its built to be that way, read the grading standards.

And that's not just PSA..Every grading service is subjective and you can get different grades on the same cards to any of them if they are borderline between grades...

Jason

WinPitcher

I just took a major hit in the difference of value due to relying on the "experts."


Yes you would have, that is why it is imperative you too know how to grade. And then percervere <sp?> and send it back in as many times as it takes to get it intop the holder you feel it should be in. I have no problem seeing that card in either a 7 or 8 holder.


Jasp I did not notice the certs. So it was the scan? lol


Steve

drewsef

<< <i>

<< <i>
You are still passing up the obvious point probably because you and alot of people here are not part of this group, but what good is the service for those who rely on PSA to get their card grade right and maximize their value without becoming experts themselves if one day a card is gonna grade a 6 and sell for $3 and the next be an 8 and sell for $50. Come on, that is not a tolerable difference and everyone should expect more from those who say they are the best in the business. >>



In that case, it isn't a good service for you and if it hurts your feelings or your pocketbook to sell a card that someone else can get upgraded you should find a new hobby or collect raw only. If you think the difference between a nice 6 and a low end 8 is that large, you are simply an uninformed collector. And if that's the case the disservice here is to yourself. PSA offers a human opinion, its not a computerized system...Its subjective, and its built to be that way, read the grading standards.

And that's not just PSA..Every grading service is subjective and you can get different grades on the same cards to any of them if they are borderline between grades...

Jason >>



The main fact you are not addressing is that maybe you can't tell a high end 6 from a low end 8, but at PSA, they should be within a much smaller range than a 6 to 8. Sure it is a human opinion, but if they do not have senior graders and finalizers who cannot tell or are allowing such a wide margin of acceptance of grades, then they are not all on the same page and grading according to the standards in place at PSA, which is what counts, not their personal opinion, but their expertise used in accordance with PSA standards.

If you don't understand the whole point behind grading and encapsulation of coins, stamps, sportscards, and other collectibles that have such services that are widely accepted, then you are quite uninformed. I know the people who created the standards and these services and the point is to provide an expert, unbiased opinion backed with a guarantee to make these collectibles easier to trade sight unseen and maximize the value of any given collectible. If you can't see that grading a card one day a 6 and the next an 8 is not providing that service, then you don't get it. I understand calling the card a 7 or an 8, but a 6 to 8 is not acceptable.

WinPitcher

backed with a guarantee to make these collectibles easier to trade sight unseen


That was the theory when they started PCGS it lasted about a month. People started to see the wide variances between grades.


Steve

WinPitcher

but a 6 to 8 is not acceptable.



So then you are saying that the lowest 8 is still better then the highest 6?

That lowest 8 could be a dog for the grade, could have 4 sharp corners yet be centered at the lowest possible standard, could have a dot on the players face yet it is an 8. The 6 on the other hand could have been a GEM, it has the sweet color, no dots, it only has 2 slighty touched corners seen under a 10x loupe?


Ill take the 6 every time.

And then if it is worth it I'll crack and submit it until it gets into the holder I feel it could be in. Not the one it should be in, the one it could be in.

JasP24

<< <i>

And then if it is worth it I'll crack and submit it until it gets into the holder I feel it could be in. Not the one it should be in, the one it could be in. >>



Great quote...On the money...

Drew, you're right though..I guess I don't understand the grading game...If what I've done the last 9 years is wrong, I don't want to be right...lol

I'll continue to trust my own eyes above all others and as Steve's quote says, will ensure ALL of MY CARDS end being the best they can be. If you have any high end 6's for $3, let me know..I'll show you how to turn those into $50 cards!

I'll never understand the guys who buy plastic slabs rather than the cards themselves...

Jason

Davemri

I've got tons of these examples...Not all football.. Here are my 2 biggest jumps. I have had multiple 2 grade bumps as well..

JasP24

The big jumps are easiest to explain..Grader caught a crease or stain the first time that either the next grader didn;t catch or the crease or stain magically disappeared before the 2nd time..

Same goes for cards that are graded once and come back trimmed or altered another time..

Jason

drewsef

Never bought a card for the plastic Jason, if that was meant for me you just pulled that one right out of nowhere, but hey, who cares, Jasp24 said so he must be right. You seem to be more happy with making the profit off PSA's grading inconsistencies than using your voice to help them be more consistent.

jradke4

<< <i>

<< <i>
You are still passing up the obvious point probably because you and alot of people here are not part of this group, but what good is the service for those who rely on PSA to get their card grade right and maximize their value without becoming experts themselves if one day a card is gonna grade a 6 and sell for $3 and the next be an 8 and sell for $50. Come on, that is not a tolerable difference and everyone should expect more from those who say they are the best in the business. >>



In that case, it isn't a good service for you and if it hurts your feelings or your pocketbook to sell a card that someone else can get upgraded you should find a new hobby or collect raw only. If you think the difference between a nice 6 and a low end 8 is that large, you are simply an uninformed collector. And if that's the case the disservice here is to yourself. PSA offers a human opinion, its not a computerized system...Its subjective, and its built to be that way, read the grading standards.

And that's not just PSA..Every grading service is subjective and you can get different grades on the same cards to any of them if they are borderline between grades...

Jason >>



Then why does it make a big difference in the set registery then??

jradke4

<< <i>I just took a major hit in the difference of value due to relying on the "experts."


Yes you would have, that is why it is imperative you too know how to grade. And then percervere <sp?> and send it back in as many times as it takes to get it intop the holder you feel it should be in. I have no problem seeing that card in either a 7 or 8 holder.


Jasp I did not notice the certs. So it was the scan? lol


Steve >>



you already said that grading is subjective so how do you know drew doenst know how to grade but is a harder critic than some at psa. if grading isnt a science then its all a crap shot/roll of the dice. just like greg's card has shown. we all have our own opinions on what is most important to us in terms of card (centering, corners, gloss etc).

JasP24

<< <i> You seem to be more happy with making the profit off PSA's grading inconsistencies than using your voice to help them be more consistent. >>



More of a matter of trusting my own eyes over all else....

I'd love to hear your ideas on how to make it more consistent...

Jason

JasP24

<< <i>

Then why does it make a big difference in the set registery then?? >>



Who said it does? Certainly not I...It makes more difference in the value $$$ of your cards. The Registry affects that as well, but what grades you have on the Registry only matters as much as you want it to..For me, I could care less where I am ranked on the Registry..I have my own goals on what I want in minimum grades and how much I will pay for a card.

Jason

TheMcgwireMuseum

Anybody else playing "Photo Hunt" between the 2 pictures of the Hinkles?

JasP24

<< <i>

<< <i>I just took a major hit in the difference of value due to relying on the "experts."


Yes you would have, that is why it is imperative you too know how to grade. And then percervere <sp?> and send it back in as many times as it takes to get it intop the holder you feel it should be in. I have no problem seeing that card in either a 7 or 8 holder.


Jasp I did not notice the certs. So it was the scan? lol


Steve >>



you already said that grading is subjective so how do you know drew doenst know how to grade but is a harder critic than some at psa. if grading isnt a science then its all a crap shot/roll of the dice. just like greg's card has shown. we all have our own opinions on what is most important to us in terms of card (centering, corners, gloss etc). >>



PSA is what it is..You can choose to collect graded cards or not...You can choose to collect raw cards or none at all...

It seems these boards lately are 50% guys whining and complaining about PSA's inconsistencies and blah, blah blah, yet they are here on PSA's message board, buying PSA graded cards, etc, etc. If you have an idea on how to better PSA, let us know. Better yet let Joe Orlando know. And don't just say, they need to be more consistent. Tell me exactly how you accomplish that? I've inspected literally THOUSANDS of PSA graded cards, not to mention thousands of raw cards over the last few years and I am not 100% certain on where EVERY SINGLE CARD falls on the grading scale. There are cards out there that can go either way simple as that. If you own one, and don't give bumping it a try then don't come in here to cry about it.

I'm speaking for myself as well as many others who aren't posting on this thread that many of us get sick of hearing it...Go to SGC board and cry about it, or give us a feasible way that they can make it better.

Jason

gregm13

<< <i>Funny...

One question though, did you open the holders with your teeth? Looks like a rat chewed on them. lol

I hope I can manage a couple nice bumps like that. Was that 6 or 7 the one you sent in with me? >>



I gnawed through the holder until the card finally popped out..lol.

Greg M.

gregm13

I'm w/ Jason...I could generally care less what holder a card is sitting in. I make my judgement based on the condition and eye appeal of the card itself. There really isn't that much difference b/t a high end 6 and a low/mid end 8...especially if the card is centered.

I just got my grade back on a scorching 1959 Topps Jim Brown that I expected a 8 with a realistic shot at a 9. What grade did it come back??? A PSA 6! I can guarantee that card will be resubmitted because there is nothing wrong with it.

People need to realize that PSA is not the final authority. I think that PSA is valuable in 2 respects: to determine the card is original and unaltered (which they are generally good at detecting) and at spotting surface wrinkles which I will occasionally miss. Besides that, they are all over the place in assigning grades. I'm sure that many of the graders are highly experienced, however I have as good an eye as any of them....no offense intended.

And the dance goes on...

Greg M.

gregm13

Let me clarify that the Adderly was a PSA 7.5 / PSA 8 tweener. In my opinion, the centering pushed it over the edge into a PSA 8 holder and I was right. The purpose of my post wasn't to bash PSA....just to point out the inconsistencies that exist with full point grading scale....let alone w/ the upcoming change to a half point grading scale.

Greg M.

drewsef

well Jason, here's a common sense one for starters. Have you ever sent one of these cards that you have got an incredible bump (two or more grades) and sent it back to them or at least let Joe know what happened and how such wide spreads on the cards coming back is a major issue and hurts the marketplace as a whole. I can go on and on if you wish, especially with the 15+ years I have experienced in the coin business(which is light years ahead of the sportscards market and has already been there,done that with all the issues that will be upcoming in the sportscard grading business.) That is where I'm coming from.

Of all people here, you have apparently been appointed the voice of PSA football for these boards, and actively talk with the Registry people at PSA. I say, extend yourself if you are this voice and talk with Joe about these types of issues, it would certainly come off as more valid than a couple of guys just calling in to customer service to complain about such things, and to be honest, would give PSA alot of insight about what the collectors in general are seeing in the graded marketplace.

WinPitcher

Drew you saying you have never seen a coin go from AU 58 to MS 63? or a 64 go to a 66? Or a DM go to DMPL?


Steve

WinPitcher

..just to point out the inconsistencies that exist with full point grading scale....let alone w/ the upcoming change to a half point grading scale.


It may do the opposite and allow for more consistent grading, we won't know until we wait and see.


Steve

gaspipe26

AU-58 to MS-63 or 64. Ive never seen it. 58 to 60 yes. I disagree with your 6 to 8 depending on grader. Thats baloney. If it a graders "opinon" then why have a guideline. 6's are not 8's, and not even close , thats why they are 6's.

gregm13

<< <i>AU-58 to MS-63 or 64. Ive never seen it. 58 to 60 yes. I disagree with your 6 to 8 depending on grader. Thats baloney. If it a graders "opinon" then why have a guideline. 6's are not 8's, and not even close , thats why they are 6's. >>



Gaspipe,

PSA 6 can easily be PSA 8's if one asks for no qualifiers, which I always do. Maybe one grader thought there was too much snow or the centering was a little weak to be an 8, and consequently graded the card a PSA 6 while the second grader thought the snow or centering was within PSA 8 guidelines.

Greg M.

Vintagegolfcards

I would like to see more consistent grading above all else with PSA. I disagree that a two grade bump is fine. In my experience, multiple grade bumps used to be extremely rare unless a slight crease was missed, now not so much. One grade bumps have also increased for me. I used to crack out about 5% or my graded cards, resubmit and wound up with 10-20% single bumps and maybe 2% double bumps. Now, my single bumps have nearly doubled and my double bumps have tripled.

I don't have a problem with the half grades. How I read it, the half grade is more a secondary grade. For higher grade cards, it mostly distinguishes well centered cards from not so well centered cards within a grade. With that being the case, I have no problem with the 9.5 being left out.

Peter

cardbender

I'm w/drewsef on this one. Cards should never jump two full grades, period. If graders are missing wrinkles/creases then they shouldn't be employed at any grading companies. They should be given the boot out the door.

Centering is easy to judge, it can be calibrated and fully measured.
Corner wear has a supposed standard according to PSA's published guidelines. So if you have a centered 6 with slight to obvious corner wear and no wrinkles, this card should never land in a PSA 8 holder. If it eventually does, it's a slider 8 plain and simple. It might be a 7 with these characteristics, but it's not an 8 ever, eye-appeal or not.
That's called getting a bone.

The eye-appeal factor that is often quoted by PSA or even Joe Orlando himself is a complete grading loophole. This is the catch all phrase for bumping cards up a grading notch or two. I feel it's also the phrasing used to justify PSA's graders for mis-grading a card the first time around. In other words, inconsistant grading. Break outs, reviews, bumps, etc..... a huge grading loophole.

I think most of the issues with consistency have to do with either training problems and/or some graders having their own standards in their mind about what they feel is the most important aspect of the cards quality. Some like centering and this type of grader seems to allow more corner wear, while another grader likes corner sharpness but will allow some slight off-centering within the grading range.

There shouldn't be any range for centering. It should be a firm rule. For example a PSA 8 should be centered exactly 35/65 or better. None of this range of centering crap and then throwing in the 'eye-appeal loophole' into the equation to cover your a$$ for grading some cards incorrectly with sharp corners and 30/70 centering. I have many 7's like this from vending. They fall within the published grading centering guidelines for 8's but received 7's. Having a range of 30/70 to 35/65 only confuses collectors, which in turn helps create more submissions on borderline cards with close centering issues. Maybe there's a reason for this....... more submissions and crack outs. Geez I wonder...

Why do I see cards that are centered 25/75 top to bottom on ebay all the time that are sitting in straight PSA 8 holders? This has got to stop soon. How can these o/c cards 'slip by' the graders. And how are these cards graded by these professional graders, and then checked again?? by another employee per the PSA grading video on this web-site, only to still leave the PSA facilty in the wrong holder without a qualifier, when they should be residing in a PSA 6 or 7 holder? How does this happen on a continual basis? It's been going on for years now, even when Steve Rocchi ran the show at psa.

My major complaint with the new half grade system is the fact that PSA has always been the 1-10 scale grading company. For 17 years this was their basis for many of us to buy into the whole grading idea and eventually helped successfully launch the set registry with is fully supported by many of us collectors participating in that too.
PSA was in my opinion, the grading hobby leader, bar none.

Now PSA has joined ranks with all the others graders (BGS, SGC, and even GAI), for one reason only....... to generate more income for the review process. Sure the picky collector benefits but at the same time the set registry people suffer. Changing the rules after 17 years was a poor business decision and will turn off many longtime, core hobbyists.

The real reason to try to get bumps is simply to add slightly more value when you go to sell. That's fine for high $$ star cards or key RC's, so the new half grade system will definitely help that type collector. However the set registry guys who own or are building larger sets with 500+ commons in them will be getting screwed in this so-called half-point mania. Who in their right mind wants to pay psa TWO times the grading fees to have their nice 8's, called nicer 8.5's now? For what, to climb the set registry? Certainly not me. I'll let others pad PSA's pockets and bottomline.

Half my collection is raw and never will be in slabs, half is graded.
I have a few sets on the registry but I could care less about trying to inch up incrementally higher on the registry by getting a few bumps. I collect 8's and 9's from the fifties to the early seventies. This will not change. I won't be bidding much more for 8.5's in the future either as opposed to buying 8's. I'm not playing that game. With over 3000 PSA slabs in my collection that were 70% self submitted, I know I have at least 1000 cards that would bump up to 8.5. So that would run me $6000+ to have them bumped. It ain't happening....... these PSA cards are only pictures of men in ten cents of plastic.

Calling Joe O and expressing your displeasure with the new direction PSA is headed will not even help. Joe's a heck of a nice guy and he'll listen to anyone's complaints about almost any grading issue as he always has had a pretty much open door policy, but the decision to move to half-grades has been made. It's over and done with. Does anyone really think a call into him will help sway the corporate directors or whomever made this half-point decison to reverse course now?

The more I think about grading, the more I think it's a scam, or as me and some of my collecting buddy's call it: dart throwing.

drewsef

<< <i>Drew you saying you have never seen a coin go from AU 58 to MS 63? or a 64 go to a 66? Or a DM go to DMPL?


Steve >>



Steve, I have examined over one million coins personally graded and encapsulated in respected third party grading services holders', and have no hesitation to say what I have saw from PSA's inconsistencies, and that's not to leave SGC or BGS out either, they are not even close to the consistency in coin grading. The times coins will change two points or more, at the same grading company, especially considering your example of 64 to 66, is minute to the bumps that are possible with card grading.

WinPitcher

Ok I'm going to rephrase what i said earlier regarding a card originally graded 6 that gets bumped 2 full points upon resending in raw. Is it possible that the graders undergraded the card the first time?


I can't believe some of the oldtimers here do not remember that at one time we had a grade and it was called EX/MNT and what it meant back in the day. I am not talking about a net graded card that winds up in a 6 holder bumping to 8, I am talking about a card that came out of the pack with all the qualities of a GEM and that over the years was never abused and had the slightest (and I mean slightest) wear to its corners.


Steve

JasP24

Great points by cardbender..I agree about the eye appeal clause. It is exactly that, an out clause for misgradings. I've never been a fan of it...But I understand how it works, and that is because I choose to be an informed buyer/seller/collector.

Also agree that the move to half grades is a done deal. Does anyone really believe Joe Orlando alone made or controls this decision. CU is a publically traded company. This was a committee/board decision, so calling him to complain isn't going to change it. You can either choose to accept it, or move on. If you think SGC, BGS, GAI, whoever is ANY BETTER than PSA, have at it. I've used them all at some point, and while SGC (in my experience) tends to be a little more consistent, they do not have the same grading standards on centering. I've seen quite a few SGC 88's and SGC 84 cross into PSA 8 OC holders...So, pick your poison or collect raw...lol

To me, it doesn't make any sense for someone to be playing the grading game without fully understanding or knowing what they are looking for when viewing the actual card, not just what the slab says. Not saying anyone on this thread fits that category, but their are collectors out there who buy the slab without regard for the card inside of it. It would be like buying a house based on the stats listed on MLS.

Jason

JasP24

<< <i>well Jason, here's a common sense one for starters. Have you ever sent one of these cards that you have got an incredible bump (two or more grades) and sent it back to them or at least let Joe know what happened and how such wide spreads on the cards coming back is a major issue and hurts the marketplace as a whole. I can go on and on if you wish, especially with the 15+ years I have experienced in the coin business(which is light years ahead of the sportscards market and has already been there,done that with all the issues that will be upcoming in the sportscard grading business.) That is where I'm coming from.

Of all people here, you have apparently been appointed the voice of PSA football for these boards, and actively talk with the Registry people at PSA. I say, extend yourself if you are this voice and talk with Joe about these types of issues, it would certainly come off as more valid than a couple of guys just calling in to customer service to complain about such things, and to be honest, would give PSA alot of insight about what the collectors in general are seeing in the graded marketplace. >>



First of all, I'm not an appointed anything by PSA. I speak my opinion based on my experience, that's it. I talk to Cosetta, BJ, Gayle all the Registry folks because I care about the football sets that I helped create and I try and ensure they are run how the masses (or at least those of us who post here) want them run.

I don't carry any more or less weight with Joe Orlando than you do. I don't have the huge complaint that you seem to have, so why would I call and complain? I understand the grading game. I'm still waiting to hear exactly HOW you propse the graders become more consistent? Since you are the coin expert, can you honestly say you could look at 20 random ungraded coins and predict within 2 points of where they will grade by PSA? I'd really like to see that, I would be impressed if you could go 100% on that. The reason it would be so tough is because GRADING IS SUBJECTIVE. Anyone who thinks it is an exact science is in the wrong hobby, PERIOD.

Jason