Possible first Subs

Nikklos

OK that was good learning on the '82 Ryan...

Here are some other thoughts for my first submission. Want to test this PSA thing out with nothing too fancy. Sorry for the Card Saver glare. I don't trust taking them out of those things. But I can see why they are recommended for shipping.


























As always, don't hold back!

brianwintersfan

Rose looks like it has a little bit of chipping on the bottom border.

Johnsteph10

It's funny...by the time I got 1/2 way down looking at that Seaver...I thought it HAS to be OPC. Pretty chippy/rough edges..

Nikklos

A couple more - have to replace the 82 Ryan...:

onlyanumber

As nice as the Clemens is, I'd drop it from consideration. After all, it is Clemens. I'd drop the OPC Seaver as well as I think that bottom left corner will detract from the grade. 83 Ryan is a 9 at best. Aaron is an Aaron, so it has to be considered (don't like the bottom though).

'68 Dietz is iffy--centering top/bottom bothers me. 83 Rose looks like there is some chipping on bottom border. may want to scrutinize that one more. 70 Seaver I'd need a better scan for the corners to say anything...

Like the OPC Murphy.

Nikklos

Out of these submitted the following and received:

1968 Dietz - 7
1979 OPC Murphy - 9
1983 Ryan - 9
1983 Rose - Gem Mint 10
1985 Clemens - 8 (??!!)

Grading is definitely arbitrary and capricious.

Rico got an 8(?)

StickNutzman

Can someone help me understand how PSA grades those fuzzy-bordered OPC cards? I've got some '79s that look good, but are nothing but fuzz all the way around. Do they just ignore the corners? They are far from sharp (just like the pictured Dale Murphy card) but match the fuzzy texture of the rest of the card borders. Is it just assumed that OPCs are gonna be fuzzy?