review for half grades a frank discussion
celesterussell
Posts: 354 ✭✭
Have not sent in cards for review as of yet.
Just as a guide, what has been some of your experiences with such. What in particular do you look for, is it more of a "gut feeling" or is it really based upon the centering mostly.
Your thoughts.
In the USA all men are created equal but some are more equal than others....
0
Comments
high end for the grade. Centering has been mentioned
as an important factor then said it wasn't. Personally centered
cards will be the first thing that I look at, then registration/printing and finally
corners.
I may do it with my Mars Attacks set.
If I send in ten "high-end for the grade" cards for review, IME I can expect 3 of them to bump a half or full grade
Even if they are all super nice 9s and all deserve 10s, PSA will only bump a few at once.
I've reviewed really nice 9s four or five times if they are 10-worthy.
I sent in a '71 PSA 8 Garvey five times in different review subs, took about a year, but the $120 jump in price was obviously worth the eventual bump to 8.5
If you don't send cards in for review, you are basically saying that the graders always get it right the first time.
<< <i>I've sent in many cards for review
If I send in ten "high-end for the grade" cards for review, IME I can expect 3 of them to bump a half or full grade
Even if they are all super nice 9s and all deserve 10s, PSA will only bump a few at once. >>
Hold on a minute....Are you implying that PSA may not be grading each card on its own merit just because they don't want to
upgrade too many cards too quickly? That is potentially "poofable", no?
Also, the review process was supposedly for 0.5 point bumps. Other than 9s going to 10s (since there is no
9.5) do people have experiences with full point bumps?
Dave
Honestly, when they first came out and said what kinds of things will give that .5 increase, Im not seeing it happen consistently.
Here is my Topps Brett rookie ...
i picked up on ebay. it was obviously graded before the half point days. My thinking on the card is when it was graded the grader felt that it was too good for a 7, but not quite good enough for a 9. So the only place it could have landed was in the 8 (as it was)
i am not a grading expert, never claimed to be. i have thought about having it reviewed. But with my luck, it would come back a 7.5 rather then 8.5! lol
WTB: PSA 1 - PSA 3 Centered, High Eye Appeal 1950's Mantle
<< <i>
<< <i>I've sent in many cards for review
If I send in ten "high-end for the grade" cards for review, IME I can expect 3 of them to bump a half or full grade
Even if they are all super nice 9s and all deserve 10s, PSA will only bump a few at once. >>
Hold on a minute....Are you implying that PSA may not be grading each card on its own merit just because they don't want to
upgrade too many cards too quickly? That is potentially "poofable", no?
Also, the review process was supposedly for 0.5 point bumps. Other than 9s going to 10s (since there is no
9.5) do people have experiences with full point bumps? >>
I sent in 138 cards about 9 months ago and received one 1/2 point grade. Keep in my mind that I only sent in cards that were as centered as they could possibly be. If i felt the card was 60/40, I wouldn't send it in. it had to look 55/45 range or better. Weird, HUH.
<< <i>
<< <i>I've sent in many cards for review
If I send in ten "high-end for the grade" cards for review, IME I can expect 3 of them to bump a half or full grade
Even if they are all super nice 9s and all deserve 10s, PSA will only bump a few at once. >>
Hold on a minute....Are you implying that PSA may not be grading each card on its own merit just because they don't want to
upgrade too many cards too quickly? That is potentially "poofable", no?
Also, the review process was supposedly for 0.5 point bumps. Other than 9s going to 10s (since there is no
9.5) do people have experiences with full point bumps? >>
Bumping a card on review is essentially second-guessing the original grader. I do not feel they are inclined to do this in large numbers. As to grading a card on its own merit, it is still a judgment call by a grader who is prone to error like anyone else, and the difference between top-end 9s and 10s is very small, so any bump (or non-bump) can be justified depending on how you look at the card. It's not a blatant refusal by PSA to ignore a card's merit and intentionally withhold a bump.
<< <i>I've sent in many cards for review
If I send in ten "high-end for the grade" cards for review, IME I can expect 3 of them to bump a half or full grade
Even if they are all super nice 9s and all deserve 10s, PSA will only bump a few at once.
I've reviewed really nice 9s four or five times if they are 10-worthy.
I sent in a '71 PSA 8 Garvey five times in different review subs, took about a year, but the $120 jump in price was obviously worth the eventual bump to 8.5
If you don't send cards in for review, you are basically saying that the graders always get it right the first time. >>
Hold on a minute, dont they keep track to see if a card was sent in for review/possible bump, I would hate o think that they would review the same card over and over, dosn't seem "ethical" on their part
~WalterSobchak
<< <i>
<< <i>I've sent in many cards for review
If I send in ten "high-end for the grade" cards for review, IME I can expect 3 of them to bump a half or full grade
Even if they are all super nice 9s and all deserve 10s, PSA will only bump a few at once.
I've reviewed really nice 9s four or five times if they are 10-worthy.
I sent in a '71 PSA 8 Garvey five times in different review subs, took about a year, but the $120 jump in price was obviously worth the eventual bump to 8.5
If you don't send cards in for review, you are basically saying that the graders always get it right the first time. >>
Hold on a minute, dont they keep track to see if a card was sent in for review/possible bump, I would hate o think that they would review the same card over and over, dosn't seem "ethical" on their part >>
That's a good point, I don't know if they track them. My assumption is that they don't, and that just because one grader doesn't consider it bump-worthy, that another won't. I don't think it's an ethical question - grades are just opinions, I'll bet even PSA realizes that their graders don't always see the same card the same way. They allow for a review process, after all.
<< <i>do people have experiences with full point bumps? >>
Yes they have.
<< <i>Hold on a minute, dont they keep track to see if a card was sent in for review/possible bump, I would hate o think that they would review the same card over and over, dosn't seem "ethical" on their part >>
From what we were told, NO they don't keep track. Why is it unethical? If someone keeps sending in a card over and over they review it.
<< <i>Bumping a card on review is essentially second-guessing the original grader. >>
Maybe for cards graded during the new system, but NOT for cards graded before the .5 system was in place.
Lastly the review process was instituted NOT because a grader may or may not have graded it properly the first time.
It was instituted so those cards that fell in between grades could be regraded. Example. A card that was not good enough
as a 9, but better than the average 8. The 8.5 grade was created.
Agree with Barry (Yankeeno7)
In my opinion I think if your happy with the card dont bother spending the money, its a crap shoot.
please raise your hand if you reviewed only because you thought a higher number on the slab made the card prettier.
<< <i>Or unless the bump results in substantial value added.
^^^^^^^^^^ Agreed!
<< <i>
<< <i>do people have experiences with full point bumps? >>
Yes they have.
<< <i>Hold on a minute, dont they keep track to see if a card was sent in for review/possible bump, I would hate o think that they would review the same card over and over, dosn't seem "ethical" on their part >>
From what we were told, NO they don't keep track. Why is it unethical? If someone keeps sending in a card over and over they review it.
<< <i>Bumping a card on review is essentially second-guessing the original grader. >>
Maybe for cards graded during the new system, but NOT for cards graded before the .5 system was in place.
Lastly the review process was instituted NOT because a grader may or may not have graded it properly the first time.
It was instituted so those cards that fell in between grades could be regraded. Example. A card that was not good enough
as a 9, but better than the average 8. The 8.5 grade was created.
Agree with Barry (Yankeeno7) >>
I would have really thought that they keep track and I am sure that they do INTERNALLY as an audit/control system.
I would bet a nickel that they do in fact keep track.
I assumed as well that they do because of the UPC on the slab,
it was Storm who was adamant that they would not
and could not because they could face legal issues.
I don't recall if Joe or Carol ever addressed the issue.
Steve
Some simply review because it will raise the GPA (Crandall)
Steve
i see your point, however, your example exists in a sphere most of us will never know.
<< <i>Lastly the review process was instituted NOT because a grader may or may not have graded it properly the first time.
It was instituted so those cards that fell in between grades could be regraded. Example. A card that was not good enough
as a 9, but better than the average 8. The 8.5 grade was created. >>
Joe himself came here and that is exactly what he said.
<< <i>No, that's NOT my opinion it's a fact.
Joe himself came here and that is exactly what he said. >>
My point was not that they created the review process to correct mistakes, but that they allow it because they recognize mistakes happen. Otherwise, they'd track the cert # and disallow reviews. That's why you see full-grade bumps, as you noted, not just the half grade bumps, which was the original intent. That is also why you see cards bump from 8.5 to 9, which honestly, confused me in the beginning. A card graded 8.5 should already meet the original requirements of the half-grade criteria - that is, an 8 with better-than-average centering. Seems to me based on what was originally said by Joe, an 8.5 shouldn't be bumped by PSA - in essence, it has already been bumped and rewarded as having outstanding characteristics for the grade. Yet cards with half grades bump up all the time. By going 8.5 to 9, following the original criteria of the half-grade requirements, PSA is basically saying, this card was an 8 with super centering, which made it an 8.5. Bumping it to a 9 they are saying, no we were wrong, it's actually nicer than a top-end 8, it has other characteristics that make it mint. So the first grader was in error. While the review process might have been originally intended to reward top-end whole-grade cards, my opinion is that it has changed into a process that simply allows current graders to overrule the opinions (and sometimes mistakes) of prior graders.
<< <i>
<< <i>No, that's NOT my opinion it's a fact.
Joe himself came here and that is exactly what he said. >>
My point was not that they created the review process to correct mistakes, but that they allow it because they recognize mistakes happen. Otherwise, they'd track the cert # and disallow reviews. That's why you see full-grade bumps, as you noted, not just the half grade bumps, which was the original intent. That is also why you see cards bump from 8.5 to 9, which honestly, confused me in the beginning. A card graded 8.5 should already meet the original requirements of the half-grade criteria - that is, an 8 with better-than-average centering. Seems to me based on what was originally said by Joe, an 8.5 shouldn't be bumped by PSA - in essence, it has already been bumped and rewarded as having outstanding characteristics for the grade. Yet cards with half grades bump up all the time. By going 8.5 to 9, following the original criteria of the half-grade requirements, PSA is basically saying, this card was an 8 with super centering, which made it an 8.5. Bumping it to a 9 they are saying, no we were wrong, it's actually nicer than a top-end 8, it has other characteristics that make it mint. So the first grader was in error. While the review process might have been originally intended to reward top-end whole-grade cards, my opinion is that it has changed into a process that simply allows current graders to overrule the opinions (and sometimes mistakes) of prior graders. >>
Well put. Especially your last sentence. Makes perfect sense.
I originally viewed the half point bump as a money grab by PSA too.
But after several years of having the half point deal in place, it's really more of a shared
money grab. PSA makes more on the reviews of course, and the owner of the card
being reviewed benefits too when the card bumps up a half grade or sometimes a full grade.
With grading being highly subjective I think it's a good process now.
I've only tried bumping five cards since the half point roll out and was successful on two of them.
One card jumped in value by $1000 after the bump. I sold that card and used that money
to buy other cards for my collection. A win for me, a win for other sellers as I was buying
cards from them, the buyer of the 8.5 card was happy, and PSA made money on the review.
In the above scenario, PSA made or benefited the least of the parties involved.
My buddy bought the 8.5 from me and I sold it to him at a fair below market price where he'll
make out just fine if and when he goes to sell it off.
<< <i>Always an interesting topic for discussion.
Here is my Topps Brett rookie ...
i picked up on ebay. it was obviously graded before the half point days. My thinking on the card is when it was graded the grader felt that it was too good for a 7, but not quite good enough for a 9. So the only place it could have landed was in the 8 (as it was)
i am not a grading expert, never claimed to be. i have thought about having it reviewed. But with my luck, it would come back a 7.5 rather then 8.5! lol >>
That's a fine looking Brett RC you have there. Could be an 8.5 in my opinion.
Joe
<< <i>On the Brett card. If I am not mistaken, on a review they won't lower the grade, only keep it the same or raise it.
Joe >>
Yeah if you send it in slabbed for review, they will not lower it. Grades can only get lowered when you crack it out and resubmit as a new item, as if it had never been at PSA before.
if a card was sent in for review, (say it was an 8) expensive, and during review
a wrinkle, or even authenticity which went unnoticed during the original grading was found.
Would PSA lower the card to a 5 and pay the owner the difference in value?
Or would they choose another option? That was a hot discussion if I recall.