I had been flying under the radar for quite some time there Henry. Figured I might catch you off guard on that one Though I didn't get it at any bargain..... lol
Nice job MM - I miscalculated on that bid, happens I don't know that you overpaid even at that price. I bet we now have the only 2 full-sized 9s, that card hardly ever even comes up for auction. If it is really a legit pop 2 then under 700.00 would be a bargain wouldn't it? I figured if your 9 was legit you would be out and I would win it easily for under 400.00 and the true pop would be 3...who knows? This was only the 2nd time it has come up for auction since 2006
Just received it in the mail..... it is truely an amazing example! Though I can't say the others are non-legit. It is a card that shows up as a legit factory short. But I get your meaning..... your's and mine probably are the only two 9 nq's that fill the holder. So the price was really close to market for a 2 pop with none graded higher. I do consider myself lucky that you didn't bid higher. You have on past low pop 9's. You would have needed a much higher bid to have actually won the card. I really wanted this one
Super tough card to be sure but registration and surfaces (and back centering) were borderline for the Mint 9 grade, imo.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Jim, That's pretty much where I'm at with the #322 Goodman...... simply look at all the other examples.... it's no surprise why this one is worthy of the 9. I've seen other 9's with similar print defects on the back. This card is a legit PSA 9. Perhaps the scan is indicating things that are not actually on the card?
As I'm looking at it.... it is very clean on the front and very well centered. Holding this card in your hand and observing it with the naked eye, you'd be knit picking about the print defects on the back, and to claim it should be an 8.... maybe from the G.O.D.? Anyone who know's this set would grade this a PSA 9 NQ'er every day of the week and twice on Sunday!
Everyone has their own opinion based on scans they see on the bay. I'm here to say, the card is sweet, and I'm thrilled to own it! That's pretty much all that matters to me
MM, just to be clear, I never said I thought the card was a NM-MT 8, but I do think it is a borderline 9 due to registration and surface issues (PD) on the front. (I know back centering is also within parameters for a 9, though personally I like my cards better centered on back for the Mint 9 grade.) As I also stated, this card is no question one of the very toughest in the set to find in higher grade, but I also take issue with justifying the grade based on the difficulty of the card in question. Do I think this card is a solid 9? No, but I don't think it's an abomination either. I'd personally grade the card 8.5 today, as there is also little question that PSA has gotten stricter on surface issues from the time that card was graded (several years ago, at least) to the present.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
The problem is that grading is and always will be a moving target. Sure, PSA posts their standards, but humans grade. This will not get better over time. It will be more like baseball where different eras had different standards. We have seen a dead ball era right after the short fiasco where even 9s were impossible. A steroid era in the shorts. Many others where t/b centering was death and others where it has been lenient. We have seen tilts gather 10s and a time where a tilt was lucky to get an 8. We have seen little emphasis on print with mad fish eyes and snow on high grades and others where 2 flecks of snow are a PD.
Definitely true, Jim. And as you well know, even at any given time grades can (and will) vary depending on the grader.
I would have to say, though, that generally speaking, PSA is tougher on centering nowadays (particularly T/B, whereas in older graded cards I see a notable difference in leniency there), and with PD. In the past couple of years, most cards I submit with any kind noticeable amount of snow will come pack NM7 or 9PD.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
It used to be a very minor snow ruled out a 9, but got an 8 on a good card. Now it is an auto pd or 7. It's always made me nuts when they will allow a tilt in a 10. Which detracts more from eye appeal?
All I know is that Goodson is a great card - and has been up for auction very few times. Do we really think that there are 5, 4, or even 3 more at that level raw? I doubt it. The ONLY way these pops go up at this point in the game is if someone is sitting on, or can create and cut sheets (my bet is no). I think the Davis 9 I have is much worse than the Goodson under discussion but I like the card anyways. Also, I tend to agree with Jim (if that is the intent of the criticism) that eye appeal should carry the most weight in grading. I am personally much more willing to accept a bit of snow than I am questionable centering and yet it seems that centering is given no more weight than other criteria. For example Beckett basically averages centering among the 4 main criteria. In the end, as long as the rules are consistent then we can adjust. Finally, I also get pissed when a 10 has tilt! What really sets me off is it seems that only certain submitters consistently get these grades on tilted cards - no need to name the company
Definitely the tilt. Centering is first thing you notice when looking at a card, so I would certainly agree with you there, though PSA does not necessarily. I also don't think a razor sharp well-centered card should be automatically relegated to an EX 5 or at best EX-MT 6 grade due to the slightest surface wrinkle that is hardly visible to the naked eye.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Tilt is the worst factor for me as well; even as an 8 or better collector. Next would be low centering top to bottom. Fish-eyes on some of the color combos are more detracting than other color combos (pink/purple). Lastly, I only collect cards that are full-sized.
Fortunately for me the scan on the bay is simply not an accurate depiction of the card I actually received. The scanner used to scan the card was obviously littered with dust. I don't see all that snow (that shows up in the scan used on the bay) on the actual card. So without all that snow the card looks like it's an easy call for a 9 NQ'er. Not sure why folks dog a card they only have a bad scan of? If the card actually had all that snow I'd be agreeing with those that are having issue with the card (based on the lousy scan). Lucky for me the card is clean with no snow to the naked eye. I've seen many Goodson's with PD's, and this is not one of them. Appears it's worth every penny I paid and then some. Good thing graders don't use bad scans to grade cards. Best not to judge a card regarding PD's until you actually have it in hand.
B, I don't believe anyone has questioned the PD's and centering issues regarding the back of the card. Thanks for beating the point to satisfy your need to support the obvious on the back side, and (IMHO) the clearly not so obvious on the flipside. You are remarkable in your ability to recognize flaws resulting from an inferior scan, unfortunately, not so remarkable at recognizing that they are not all actual card flaws? It certainly sounds like you are complaining about PSA's grading of this card? You say you don't do that, so, I guess we should believe you?
<< <i>Did the scan cause the registration issues on front and the stain/centering on the back?
It's a fine looking card as far as front centering goes, but being able to recognize issues like those above is why you don't hear me complaining about grades I receive from PSA. >>
So let me get this straight......you are complaining about the card being graded a 9 because of the flaws you pointed out, yet you don't complain about grades you receive from PSA?????
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.
The card appears to me to fit that description. The only significant "flaw" I see is maybe the out of register "Giants" coloration. The nitpicks noted disqualify it from a 10, but not from a 9 IMO. But regardless, the only opinion that really matters here is that of the grader on the day the card was graded and that of the buyer.
Nice job MM! That is one fine example of that card.
In my first 300 cards submitted, I averaged nearly a full 30% returned as minimum size. Since then -- with the exception of a couple green/yellows that I attempted to slide by in otherwise good material -- I've only had maybe 4 or 5 returned for minimum size out of 200+ cards. One of them was a beautiful #125 Singleton that does, in fact, measure slightly over 80mm.
So either PSA is making larger slabs for minis now, or this very recent submission somehow passed the N6 test.
Hey everyone, I am currently looking for a very clean (full size-no print defects) George Brett or Robin Yount PSA 8 or 8.5. Please PM me with details, thanks.
Off topic, but I thought I would share. My all time favorite card is the 1971 Nolan Ryan. Just the classic shot with the RC in the background. It was also the legendary card that one of the older kids in the neighborhood had and we all agreed, it was the best card ever (this was as a 10 year old). I am also a lover of the offbeat (minis anyone?), like opc, tiffany, leaf, etc., so last night I combined both to snag a card I have wanted for many, many years:
<< <i>Im looking for a PSA brooks Robinson 1975 mini...I have PSA 6 and would like to upgrade to a PSA 8 >>
That is actually a VERY tough sleeper card. I have a few but am still actually a buyer of that card. A really nice 8 won't come up for auction very often. A large percentage of the graded B. Robinsons will come up significantly short in the holder. In fact, I have bought a couple really nice 7s that fill the holder and I like them more than some of my 8s. I believe that there are only around 6-8 legit 9s in existence...
<< <i>In my first 300 cards submitted, I averaged nearly a full 30% returned as minimum size. Since then -- with the exception of a couple green/yellows that I attempted to slide by in otherwise good material -- I've only had maybe 4 or 5 returned for minimum size out of 200+ cards. One of them was a beautiful #125 Singleton that does, in fact, measure slightly over 80mm.
So either PSA is making larger slabs for minis now, or this very recent submission somehow passed the N6 test.
Nice prices, but ugh on back centering on the Rose. Is Jackson right sized?
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Jackson has been on my double-secret hoarding list ...but the problem is that I haven't been able to find full-sized examples ANYWHERE! Pop is 25, however, check this out...in my cert sheet I have recorded 9 short Jacksons and 3 full-sized! I have no freaking clue how many legit Jacksons are actually out there. I have 3 really nice 9s in 7 years of searching. The 10 is short.
Henry, I agree completely about Jackson being a TOUGH card to find mint and full-sized...I have an 8.5 I pulled from a pack and self-submitted to PSA. I have pulled a bunch of Reggies but they are almost always OC or with some kind of PD.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I just wanted to alert you'all that the number of PSA graded Minis has dropped by over 1500; including a drop of over 30 10s and 700 9s. If you look further you might find some noteworthy realignment in the pop of key cards including a drop in the number of Brett and Yount rookies, (4 Brett 9s and Younts poofed), Palmer (now pop15), B. Robinsons (now pop11), Carew (now pop10), Garvey (now pop14); Morgan (now pop30 from 35); etc...Heidiman 9s went from 6 to 4. Other sleeper adjustments are: Tigers team card drops to pop11 in 9, and 553 Boccabella going from a pop16 to a pop12.
Huge bravo Henry. I just got done spending a half hour relooking the pop report. Amazing. Everyone really needs to look and get a new calibration on what is what.
Great work, Henry! I would venture to say this kind of reassessment is unprecedented to this extent with a particular set!
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Thanks Jim, Tim...there is some level of satisfaction looking at a significantly more accurate population report. BTW - when does the population report actually change? When the card is graded or when poppage occurs (mailed)?
BTW: there are now over 2.5 Regular 1975s graded for every Mini; I am pretty sure that within 5 years it will be over 3 times more Regular over Mini. However, as Indy indicated first there are vastly more collectors of the regular set. Any thoughts on implications for the mini going forward? If you look at the registry, however, it seems that there are a good many individuals building the set slowly between 7.5 and 8.0.
My only input here, with regard to Henry's statement on number of collectors, is that when I began my quest in May of 2011, there were only about 14-15 "serious" set builders. I'm defining 'Serious' as having over 50% completion.
Obviously Henry has added six sets to the mix since then, but even so, there are now 29 sets that fit the same definition of 'Serious'.
To add a little perspective to the discussion of "serious set" builders of the PSA graded 75 Topps Mini's. When I began my set in 2004 there were 1 or 2 individuals with over 50% set completion and a total of 19 or 20 collectors having posted any percentage of a 75 Topps Mini set on the PSA registry. There were zero collectors at 100% completion!
I hit 50% completion back on November 4, 2006 and at the time that was good enough to rank as the 7th ATF set! The popularity of this set really seemed to take off in 2007 because by the time I hit 100% on June 2, 2008, my set had dropped to 9th ATF in the rankings.
Well...I just had my 800 card submission pop and it was a total f-ing disaster of biblical proportions. Mostly 8s and only 2 10s? I believe I must have ruined a good number of cards by putting them in card-savers and storing them for 3-6 years - many without penny sleeves. It might be okay for newer cards, but maybe not so much for the sensitive minis - I am open to suggestions. Then the idiot that stole my collection probably banged the boxes they were in around a bit. I dunno. I am really too depressed to really rationalize it. 1. There are certainly grader effects, the cards were broken into 4 200 sized lots and some lots received substantially higher grades than others. Same thing with my 3 lots of 1975 regular. One of my 1977 lots received over 30 10s while the two, hardly any? These should have been consistent as no group of cards should have had higher grades - it was random. 2. I did get a few nice grades such as an Alou 9 (a full-sized beauty), Brett 9, F. Robinson 9, and two Aaron (660) 9s. However, I am certain that at least one of the Aarons should have been a 10. I sent in 6 great looking cards from 1 case-break and the 8s are all well-centered and strong. I got a boatload of low-pop red/yellow, green/yellows in 8s (including 2 C. Wash, and 3 Hughes among others). I now have way too many minis...I might have to sell-off a nice set or two in the next couple years - who knows.
Henry - Welcome to the joys of grading. Been wondering when that would pop for you. Many of us share the exact same experience. Same cards, same source, different graders, different results. My conclusion remains the same, humans grade. If you have cards you believe in and are worthwhile financially, crack em.
Grats on the good grades you did get. 30+ 77s 10s is jaw dropping.
I echo what Jim said. Grading is definitely subjective and will often vary from gtader to grader especially when it comes to the difference between 9s and 10s. Sounds like you did actually pretty well on some key cards. I'd take an Alou 9 over a couple common 10s anyday and same for Brett and Aaron. Grading is certainly an exercise in frustration but then again thats why we pay such insane money for high grade cards in the first place. I wouldhave also recommendheard penny sleeves for longthe term storage. Nice work on the 77s!! I have found that isuue to be super tough!
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
I agree with the others Henry. Re-sub. Crack the best 100 or so that you feel are under graded and well centered, and send them in again, might be worth it. Some of the best 9s I've received we're former 8s or 8.5s Doesn't always work, but if its a difference of a couple hundred dollars in value, paying one or two additional Sub fees not always that big of a deal
Thanks guys; I definitely know that many of the grades should be higher eventually. It is hard to pick myself up from this. I really do understand the rants about the "grader from death" - it is comical to see a bunch of 10s in one group of 77s and then another lot all one grade lower with a large percentage of 8s compared with 9s and 10s (again these were totally random, all put together at the same time, and should have had similar grade distributions). The frustrating part is that almost all the minis (outside of the low pops) were very well centered. That was my number one criteria. The one thing I believe I may have missed is that I rarely checked the back centering - that might have been my big mistake.
EDIT: I must have screwed up something big-time because only 2 10s out of 800 submissions (many from broken cases and boxes) is just bad. I am trying to figure out my rookie mistakes. I was hoping for between 25-30 10s.
I did okay on about 100 78s. I actually received several low pop 9s on the 1975s but no 10s with 350 submissions. I still have about 880 1979s and 900 1976s left to be graded. I am hoping for a fair number of 10s on these as they almost all came from case/box breaks. It may take years for me to get around to cracking and resubmitting but there is no rush, sounds like a nice retirement project in about 10 years
Henry - Just curious, but since you mentioned you focused on centering, did you see a fair number of half grades? These seem to vary by grader as well. My experience is some graders rarely use them and others all the time. It is also my experience that the ones that use a lot of half grades tend to be harsher overall.
Put differently, some graders seem old school 1 to 10, where a half grade is saved for an exceptional example for the grade. Other graders seem to see a 20pt scale instead of a 10 and use them liberally.
Comments
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Super tough card to be sure but registration and surfaces (and back centering) were borderline for the Mint 9 grade, imo.
Agree to Disagree...... except for the part about the card being Super tough, I'm with you 100% on that part
Harder card than many realize and actually the last 8 I needed in my set back when. Was never able to buy one, had to self sub and it took 6 tries.
ebay id Duffs_Dugout
My Ebay Auctions
As I'm looking at it.... it is very clean on the front and very well centered. Holding this card in your hand and observing it with the naked eye, you'd be knit picking about the print defects on the back, and to claim it should be an 8.... maybe from the G.O.D.? Anyone who know's this set would grade this a PSA 9 NQ'er every day of the week and twice on Sunday!
Everyone has their own opinion based on scans they see on the bay. I'm here to say, the card is sweet, and I'm thrilled to own it! That's pretty much all that matters to me
PSA 9 1975 Goodson mini
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
ebay id Duffs_Dugout
My Ebay Auctions
I would have to say, though, that generally speaking, PSA is tougher on centering nowadays (particularly T/B, whereas in older graded cards I see a notable difference in leniency there), and with PD. In the past couple of years, most cards I submit with any kind noticeable amount of snow will come pack NM7 or 9PD.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
ebay id Duffs_Dugout
My Ebay Auctions
Also, I tend to agree with Jim (if that is the intent of the criticism) that eye appeal should carry the most weight in grading. I am personally much more willing to accept a bit of snow than I am questionable centering and yet it seems that centering is given no more weight than other criteria. For example Beckett basically averages centering among the 4 main criteria. In the end, as long as the rules are consistent then we can adjust.
Finally, I also get pissed when a 10 has tilt! What really sets me off is it seems that only certain submitters consistently get these grades on tilted cards - no need to name the company
Definitely the tilt. Centering is first thing you notice when looking at a card, so I would certainly agree with you there, though PSA does not necessarily. I also don't think a razor sharp well-centered card should be automatically relegated to an EX 5 or at best EX-MT 6 grade due to the slightest surface wrinkle that is hardly visible to the naked eye.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
<< <i>Not sure why folks dog a card they only have a bad scan of? >>
Amen, brother.
bobsbbcards SGC Registry Sets
<< <i>Did the scan cause the registration issues on front and the stain/centering on the back?
It's a fine looking card as far as front centering goes, but being able to recognize issues like those above is why you don't hear me complaining about grades I receive from PSA. >>
So let me get this straight......you are complaining about the card being graded a 9 because of the flaws you pointed out, yet you don't complain about grades you receive from PSA?????
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.
The card appears to me to fit that description. The only significant "flaw" I see is maybe the out of register "Giants" coloration. The nitpicks noted disqualify it from a 10, but not from a 9 IMO. But regardless, the only opinion that really matters here is that of the grader on the day the card was graded and that of the buyer.
Nice job MM! That is one fine example of that card.
And then there are those who want to ignore the fact that there is a subjective element to grading every card.
From a naked eye view of the card, and mainly by the fact the card has been graded PSA 9 nq'er, the point is moot.
So either PSA is making larger slabs for minis now, or this very recent submission somehow passed the N6 test.
Shorty
Just whining bit...but I'm done now.
I am currently looking for a very clean (full size-no print defects) George Brett or Robin Yount PSA 8 or 8.5. Please PM me with details, thanks.
Mark
[URL=http://s610.photobucket.com/user/jimduffett/media/1971opcryan_zps00eb12f2.jpg.html]
ebay id Duffs_Dugout
My Ebay Auctions
ALL MY PSA SETS
ALL MY PSA SETS
<< <i>Im looking for a PSA brooks Robinson 1975 mini...I have PSA 6 and would like to upgrade to a PSA 8 >>
That is actually a VERY tough sleeper card. I have a few
<< <i>In my first 300 cards submitted, I averaged nearly a full 30% returned as minimum size. Since then -- with the exception of a couple green/yellows that I attempted to slide by in otherwise good material -- I've only had maybe 4 or 5 returned for minimum size out of 200+ cards. One of them was a beautiful #125 Singleton that does, in fact, measure slightly over 80mm.
So either PSA is making larger slabs for minis now, or this very recent submission somehow passed the N6 test.
Shorty
Just whining bit...but I'm done now. >>
I think PSA resized the well on the regular sized too? It seems every card I look at is short..
ON ITS WAY TO NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92658
ROSEmini9 449.00
JACKSONmini9 449.00
NICE!
<< <i>I was updating my MINI database and ran into these two recent hammer prices on PWCC
ROSEmini9
JACKSONmini9
NICE! >>
Nice prices, but ugh on back centering on the Rose. Is Jackson right sized?
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
It can be argued that every single Jackson image on VCP is short in a 9. The card is brutal.
Edited for typing on an ipad
ebay id Duffs_Dugout
My Ebay Auctions
Other sleeper adjustments are: Tigers team card drops to pop11 in 9, and 553 Boccabella going from a pop16 to a pop12.
Minis are never uninteresting
ebay id Duffs_Dugout
My Ebay Auctions
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
BTW: there are now over 2.5 Regular 1975s graded for every Mini; I am pretty sure that within 5 years it will be over 3 times more Regular over Mini. However, as Indy indicated first there are vastly more collectors of the regular set. Any thoughts on implications for the mini going forward? If you look at the registry, however, it seems that there are a good many individuals building the set slowly between 7.5 and 8.0.
Obviously Henry has added six sets to the mix since then, but even so, there are now 29 sets that fit the same definition of 'Serious'.
1. There are certainly grader effects, the cards were broken into 4 200 sized lots and some lots received substantially higher grades than others. Same thing with my 3 lots of 1975 regular. One of my 1977 lots received over 30 10s while the two, hardly any? These should have been consistent as no group of cards should have had higher grades - it was random.
2. I did get a few nice grades such as an Alou 9 (a full-sized beauty), Brett 9, F. Robinson 9, and two Aaron (660) 9s. However, I am certain that at least one of the Aarons should have been a 10. I sent in 6 great looking cards from 1 case-break and the 8s are all well-centered and strong. I got a boatload of low-pop red/yellow, green/yellows in 8s (including 2 C. Wash, and 3 Hughes among others).
I now have way too many minis...I might have to sell-off a nice set or two in the next couple years - who knows.
Grats on the good grades you did get. 30+ 77s 10s is jaw dropping.
ebay id Duffs_Dugout
My Ebay Auctions
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Congrats on the PSA 9 Alou and other assorted goodies!
Re-sub.
Crack the best 100 or so that you feel are under graded and well centered, and send them in again, might be worth it.
Some of the best 9s I've received we're former 8s or 8.5s
Doesn't always work, but if its a difference of a couple hundred dollars in value, paying one or two additional
Sub fees not always that big of a deal
The frustrating part is that almost all the minis (outside of the low pops) were very well centered. That was my number one criteria. The one thing I believe I may have missed is that I rarely checked the back centering - that might have been my big mistake.
EDIT: I must have screwed up something big-time because only 2 10s out of 800 submissions (many from broken cases and boxes) is just bad. I am trying to figure out my rookie mistakes. I was hoping for between 25-30 10s.
Doubtful - you had it pegged with grader variation. Crack away!
Bosox1976
It may take years for me to get around to cracking and resubmitting but there is no rush, sounds like a nice retirement project in about 10 years
Put differently, some graders seem old school 1 to 10, where a half grade is saved for an exceptional example for the grade. Other graders seem to see a 20pt scale instead of a 10 and use them liberally.
ebay id Duffs_Dugout
My Ebay Auctions