Lets cut to the chase re. centering etc.
celesterussell
Posts: 354 ✭✭
Simple question, who thinks that the grading standards over the last 18-24 months have been consistant as compared to the past.
Serious answers only please, thanks
Serious answers only please, thanks
In the USA all men are created equal but some are more equal than others....
0
Comments
If you're a PSA graded card owner, and you're talking crap about them and questioning their credibility, then all you're doing is devaluing YOUR OWN CARDS.
To answer your question for the tenth effing time, I have personally noticed NO change in grading standards in the several years.
Isn't this stuff subject to opinion anyway? It's PSA's opinion to give a card a certain grade, it's your opinion that standards have somehow changed, and it's my opinion that you're a moron.
Is that serious enough for you?
<< <i>who thinks that the grading standards over the last 18-24 months have been consistant as compared to the past. >>
I don't think so.
WTB: 2001 Leaf Rookies & Stars Longevity: Ryan Jensen #/25
<< <i>This is the reason cards should not have borders!!!
lol
If you're a PSA graded card owner, and you're talking crap about them and questioning their credibility, then all you're doing is devaluing YOUR OWN CARDS.
To answer your question for the tenth effing time, I have personally noticed NO change in grading standards in the several years.
Isn't this stuff subject to opinion anyway? It's PSA's opinion to give a card a certain grade, it's your opinion that standards have somehow changed, and it's my opinion that you're a moron.
Is that serious enough for you?
maybe so, but you seem to be a PSA sycophant
had to look that one up, lol
1) There are NO two PSA 10s, 9s, 8s, 7s, 6s, etc. etc. and everything in between, which are exactly alike......there are PSA 7s out there which are gorgeous, with great centering, clean borders, glossy finish......and a dinged corner, and there are PSA 10s which leave us scratching our heads.
2) I've seen examples of cards graded during PSA's infancy, and by comparison, it leads me to believe that they are currently more consistent than they've ever been, although there will be occasions where they will still leave us scratching our heads.
3) Buy the card, not the holder, blah, blah, blah.....if you see a PSA 8 that looks like it's almost completely missing a border, don't buy it, sell it......if you see a PSA 8 that looks poifectly centered and bright and shiny and blah, blah, blah, prepare yourself to spend a lotta $$$ on it, cuz others will too.
LOL
I happen to feel that SGC, BGS, GAI are all inferior grading companies, and I stick with the one who I feel gives the most accurate and consistent grades. To each their own I guess...
OK. Lets get this one straight. Its an opinion. Thats it, its a 3rd party opinion that has no investment into the card. So if one person thinks its an 8 and a few months or years go buy and the next grader thinks its a 9 it doesn't mean PSA is getting lax on their grading standards it means somebody has a different opinion.
This is why I collect PSA graded cards. PSA dosen't have an investment into the card I am buying. I know the other graders don't either, but I trust PSA more and have seen them more consistant than the other tpg's out there.
The graders do a good job at forming an opinion, based
on the "written standards."
Any fault lies with the written standards. Those standards are
so loose on centering that they encourage and perpetuate
"market grading."
PSE - the stamp side of CLCT - uses logic-based centering
guidelines. PSA could do the same, but grading fees would
have to go WAY up BECAUSE submissions would tank.
Thus, the only solution is NOT to buy high-grade cards that
are NOT "visually centered." If you do buy them, discount
the price heavily, or be prepared to get croaked at resale
time.
It is a given that SGC is a bit more tolerant with regard to centering. It is also a given that there are PSA cards that exceed the centering standards for the grade.
However, I do not think there has been a significant change in the standards or the application of them with regard to PSA cards, regardless of the occasional example some may wish to provide suggesting the contrary. I also feel that SGC is equally consistent in the application of their standards.
When Akuracy mailed his Ford PSA 5 back he said, “I got the call today from Joe Orlando's assistant, the 1951 Bowman Whitey Ford PSA 5 I purchased has been deemed a mistake on their part.
The reason given to me it could've been an older grading standard and there was an obvious oversight, no specifics, just an honest mistake.”
link
In the Akuracy/Ford case I think it was just an honest mistake on PSA's part. They acknowledged it, addressed it, and did what a professional company should do.
I don't agree that the standards are lower, instead I think since there are more examples available of each grade because of mass submitting and lower grading fees than 4-5 years ago ($4-5 specials) and as a result these lower end cards get used as examples of the standards going down the tube. Nonsense.
As many have said in this thread and another: Buy the card, not the holder!
Over the past 15 years I've seen both a slightly higher percentage and slightly lower percentage than 95% of what I would call the 'correct grades' or a grade assigned that mirror my own opinion on a particular card. That goes with the subjectivity of grading and it's to be expected.
To me they've ranged between 90-98% graded right on the money.
This is for pre 1980 cards in all sports. The sample size I've submitted is over 10,000 cards. Just my opinion of course, but my opinion is based on many of my own submissions over the course of many years and changes at the grading helms of PSA. So bottomline is, they're fairly consistent over the years.
* I can't honestly comment on BGS or SGC grading standards because I haven't summitted nearly enough cards to warrant a valid opinion on them. *
As far as centering goes, it seems to vary like the Santa Ana winds......