Would you grade this card a PSA 8, 8.5, 9 (or other)???

rbdjr1

Based on centering, what would you grade it?

PSA 8
PSA 8.5
PSA 9
other?

rbdjr1

Re "poof-proofed" it a little!

nam812

You may want to fiddle with the title of the thread too.

mkg809

poofy

lsutigers1973

I'm guessing a 9. It says so right there on the slabby thingy.

CrimsonTider

Corners maybe fine, but it is not 50/50 centered on the left to right. No one should be surprised when a modern card is not slapped a 10 when its not 50/50. Well thats my opinion

lsutigers1973

I think he was referring more to the fact that it shouldn't have gotten a 9 with centering that bad.

mkg809

8.5
That's an ugly 9 L/R.

gumbyfan

MINT 9: Mint.

A PSA Mint 9 is a superb condition card that exhibits only one of the following minor flaws: a very slight wax stain on reverse, a minor printing imperfection or slightly off-white borders. Centering must be approximately 60/40 to 65/35 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the reverse.

--------------------------------

According to my pixel count, this one is 42/58, so well within the range of a 9.

There is the distinct possibility that I can't count pixels, though.

MBMiller25

Im going to say Mint 9.

CrimsonTider

My bad, thought he was griping because it wasn't a ten, I haven't had my morning coffee

DavidPuddy

I think Gumby's right. It does fall into the 9 range, but as eye appeal goes, it just doesn't seem to be MINT. Some years 60/40 is more forgiving to the eye than others; 1986 is not one of them.
I'd give it an 8.5. JMO

itzagoner

that card is so nice that i intend to have my nose surgically re-attached to my left cheek so i can see it perfectly.

rbdjr1

<< <i>MINT 9: Mint.

A PSA Mint 9 is a superb condition card that exhibits only one of the following minor flaws: a very slight wax stain on reverse, a minor printing imperfection or slightly off-white borders. Centering must be approximately 60/40 to 65/35 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the reverse.

--------------------------------

According to my pixel count, this one is 42/58, so well within the range of a 9.

There is the distinct possibility that I can't count pixels, though. >>






I guess, I should expand my original post in this manner: Since PSA has added 1/2 grades, should the PSA standards for a PSA 9, for example as gumbyfan accurately explained, be reevaluated by PSA?

rd

Dboneesq

<< <i>I guess, I should expand my original post in this manner: Since PSA has added 1/2 grades, should the PSA standards for a PSA 9, for example as gumbyfan accurately explained, be reevaluated by PSA?

rd >>



It's bad enough they add half point grades AFTER people spent TENS OF MILLIONS of $$$ to get their cards graded. Imagine if they change the standards on what a "9" is now? I don't think that would be a good idea for the collector. If they make it harder, you are going to have cards floating around in PSA "10" holders that might now be only graded a PSA '9", ones in PSA "9" holders that will be graded only "8" under a "new" system.

Just a BAD idea IMO.

BunchOBull

Looks like a 9 all day long to me. I know centering is leftist, but it's sharp in every other way.

ezyshooter

I can't believe how many people try kissing PSA a$$. Card is a PSA 9(OC) period. Another PSA screw-up. People call it like you see it.
Remember the PSA 10 Yzerman rookie ? PSA screwed up somewhere along the way. Whether it was writing the grade down or when it was printed. Who knows ?
That is NOT a PSA 9 period.
Steve

digicat

<< <i>Card is a PSA 9(OC) period. Another PSA screw-up. >>



How? L/R centering is 41/59. Centering guidelines for a PSA 9 require 40/60 minimum.

How did they "screw up" by adhering to their own posted guidelines?

otwcards

The card EASILY falls within the grading criteria for a PSA 9. While it may not have the greatest "eye appeal," it is what it is based upon the criteria. I am still amazed at how many people still insist upon things being different than what the "rules" state. Why condemn PSA for grading something to the standards that are printed for all to see? Sure, they make their mistakes, but oft times the ones that are argued the most are ones that are technically correct. And it seems that those that complain want to offer their opinion based upon a set of rules that THEY want applied rather than the rules that we're all playing with.

That being said, I certainly wouldn't pay mid or high level PSA 9 prices for a card with this type of centering, and I think that is the case with most people. Buy the card, not the holder . . . and that is the primary reason for some of the wild ranges of cards within the same grade.

nightcrawler

<< <i>Based on centering, what would you grade it? >>






Based on the cetering alone... 9. Not trying to kiss anyones ass, the cards easily falls within the guidelines.

ezyshooter

So then this card should not be OC ? This has much better eye appeal then that card does.
Again my opinion as stated, PSA 9 (oc) or straight 8. I 've sent cards in for review with alot better centering then that card. I was luck and they actually had arrows or writing saying why the card did not get bumped. Alot of them was centering. They all had better centering then that and they were 8's.

CARD

So why is this a PSA 9 ? I've seen PSA 9's with alot worse centering. This one i have to agree with PSA. Which is rare.. Should be a straight 8.
Steve

WinPitcher

The card you are wondering about is OC because of the T/B centering.

Now for my opinion on the Rose card. The way Robert asks the question
IMO should have nothing to do with PSA standards and thus IMO he was asking
what we would grade it as. So under these conditions I'd have graded that card
as a near mint card. NOT a PSA 7 but a near mint because IMO mint cards
had to be centered better then that one. Back in the day it was not uncommon for
cards to be NM right out of the pack.

Steve

otwcards

<< <i>So then this card should not be OC ? This has much better eye appeal then that card does.
Again my opinion as stated, PSA 9 (oc) or straight 8. I 've sent cards in for review with alot better centering then that card. I was luck and they actually had arrows or writing saying why the card did not get bumped. Alot of them was centering. They all had better centering then that and they were 8's.

CARD

So why is this a PSA 9 ? I've seen PSA 9's with alot worse centering. This one i have to agree with PSA. Which is rare.. Should be a straight 8.
Steve >>



Steve:

I'll agree with you on the LeFleur... It is better than a PSA 9 (OC), which is basically a straight PSA 7 and SHOULD be in a PSA 8 with no qualifiers. The T/B centering seems to be the issue, but it falls within the tolerance for a PSA 8 without question.

ezyshooter

As for guidelines i can pull 100's of example of cards that fall into guidelines. Whether it be centering, corners, wrinkles etc.. PSA is not consistant never was and never will be.
They are human and human's make mistakes from time to time. This cards grade is a mistake. There consistancy lately has been poor. I did a test and have e-mailed other PSA members and showed them the results. Cards ranging from PSA 7 to PSA 10. Yes PSA 10's i broke out. They were cheap PSA 10's. I didn't send all these cards under my name just to make things fair.
There were
2 - PSA 10's
2 - PSA 9's
18- PSA 7's
Results
PSA 10's came back PSA 8's Two grades lower( If 9 it wouldn't have been a biggie)
PSA 9's came back 8's
1 PSA 7 came back PSA 6
1 PSA 7 came back a PSA 7
15 PSA 7 came back PSA 8
1 PSA 7 came back a PSA 8.5 A full 1.5 grades higher ?

So out of 22 cards PSA went 1 for 22. 4.5 percent consistancy. Doesn't sound to good to me !!
So yes maybe card falls into guidelines but read the fineprint. If a grader feels a card basically looks ugly it is up to the graders decision. In this case he made a poor choice because that card sure looks ugly for a PSA 9.
Nothing is wriitten in stone.
Steve

digicat

I'm sure that if PSA made a robot that could grade cards, folks would still complain about the grades.

WinPitcher

And this is supposed to be news?

Of course they make 'mistakes' Lets take a card, any card.

The seller says it is MINT

The buyer claims it isn't

PSA says it is an 8 .

3 different grades, 3 different graders.


Steve

ezyshooter

Exactly my point !! That's why the saying came across to buy the card and not the holder !! I have people on the boards who e-mail me asking if they should submit there cards because isubmit more cards then them. They know PSA gets into phases from time to time. When to send cards in matters. Lately it's been hold onto them.
I have multiples and/or have had multiple cards in same grades or lesser. The odd time i would have a few cards come back wondering what the ?? Lately it's been over 50 percent. I'm not talking about 10's or even 9's on the most part. But 8's ? When you already have 8's and 9's to compare them to and the card comes back a PSA 6 or PSA 7 and even under magnification etc... looks as good or better then the PSA 8 or PSA 9 makes you wonder what the heck is going on.
All i know i'm not wasting my money right now on grading fees. Maybe if they were 2-3 dollars a card i would submit. But even a 5-6 dollar special is not a special if over half the cards are graded wrong and to top it off you have the the new cert's to prove it !!
Steve

otwcards

Steve:

Maybe it's not PSA. You're a Leafs fan and since they've tricked you into thinking you're watching hockey, maybe you're just not seeing anything right now...

Let's Go Devils!

ezyshooter

LOL !! Well they did beat Pittsburg !! I know my leafs have sucked for awhile but doesn't mean i will jump off the bandwagon !! Like the Red Wings fans do !! Or the Lions !! Or the Tigers !!
Steve

jeanpelch

I, as a lifelong Tigers and Wings fan, am for one in awe of the eternal support of a die-hard Leafs fan. Had my team gone so long without championship, I surely would have jumped off the bandwagon by now!!