Home› Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

Is there any difference between "grade" and "rating"?

Hank36Hank36 Posts: 175 ✭✭
in Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
Let me get this straight--once you complete a set, the "grade" and "rating" become identical numbers. Exactly what does this accomplish? For giggles, I just got out an actual calculator and determined that the average grade of each card in my set was an even 8, but the official PSA grade of my set matches my "rating", which is 7.41. I understand the rationale of the formula behind the "rating" statistic, but wouldn't it make more sense to have a "grade" number that simply reflects the average grade of the cards in my set, without my having to get out a calculator and figure it out for myself?

Comments

  • gameusedhoopgameusedhoop Posts: 3,594 ✭✭✭✭
    Rating is based on the "weight" of a card. You can take a 10 card set where 1 card is "weighted" a 10, and all the other weights are 1. The card weighted a 10 is 10 TIMES the value of the others when figuring out the rating. Click on "View Set Composition" on any PSA set to find the "weights", at the end is the "divisor", this is the total of points available. The set may have 264 cards, but the divisor could be 287.

    In my first example where 9 cards are rated 1, and 1 is rated 10, the divisor (or total possible points) would be 190 if you had all in a 10 grade. If you had all the wieght 1s in a 10 grade you have 90 points, if the weight 10 card has a 9 grade you get 90 points. Using the divisor 180 points divided by 190 (the divisor) would give you a rating of 9.47, not the 9.90 that you'd get if they all have the same weight.

    My explanation here seems complex, but I'm not real good at explaing the math involved, but I do understand it and I hope this helps you understand it a little more.
  • Hank36Hank36 Posts: 175 ✭✭
    Well, I understand the "rating" aspect of it, but when I finally managed to complete a set, my "grade" and my "rating" simply drew even. Apparently the divisor remains the same for the "rating" but not for the "grade". (Or else its the other way around). I just figured that "grade" would tell you the mean grade of each card in the set without the weight, but apparently the "rating" simply tells you the "weight" without the "completeness" factor factored in.

    I guess I'm the only person who simply wanted to know what the average grade of each card in my set was.
  • gameusedhoopgameusedhoop Posts: 3,594 ✭✭✭✭
    You'd have to check the weights, if they are all weighted a 1 then your rating and average will be the same. The more non 1's there are in a set the further apart the rating and average will be.
  • bkingbking Posts: 3,095 ✭✭


    << <i>Well, I understand the "rating" aspect of it, but when I finally managed to complete a set, my "grade" and my "rating" simply drew even. Apparently the divisor remains the same for the "rating" but not for the "grade". (Or else its the other way around). I just figured that "grade" would tell you the mean grade of each card in the set without the weight, but apparently the "rating" simply tells you the "weight" without the "completeness" factor factored in.

    I guess I'm the only person who simply wanted to know what the average grade of each card in my set was. >>



    Yeah, the average grade just isn't something most set collectors seem to care about; I know I don't. And yes, the numerator is the same for both rating and grade; it's the sum of all "weighted grades" for the cards YOU HAVE. By weighted grades, I mean the grade of each card times its weight. The difference between the two numbers is that the denominator is either the total of all weights for the set (the rating) or just the total of all weights for the cards you have (the grade)

    When working on a set, does it really mean the same thing if I have 9 commons in PSA 10 and one star in PSA 6 vs. nine stars in PSA 10 and one common in PSA 6?? That's why the simple average doesn't mean much to most collectors.
    ----------------------
    Working on the following: 1970 Baseball PSA, 1970-1976 Raw, World Series Subsets PSA, 1969 Expansion Teams PSA, Fleer World Series Sets, Texas Rangers Topps Run 1972-1989
    ----------------------

    Successful deals to date: thedudeabides,gameusedhoop,golfcollector,tigerdean,treetop,bkritz, CapeMOGuy,WeekendHacker,jeff8877,backbidder,Salinas,milbroco,bbuckner22,VitoCo1972,ddfamf,gemint,K,fatty macs,waltersobchak,dboneesq
  • MauriceMaurice Posts: 1,136


    << <i>I just got out an actual calculator and determined that the average grade of each card in my set was an even 8, but the official PSA grade of my set matches my "rating", which is 7.41 >>



    << <i>I guess I'm the only person who simply wanted to know what the average grade of each card in my set was. >>


    Obviously you purchased the major cards in 6-7 and the high pop commons in 9. The hooters girls will not be impressed.
  • Hank36Hank36 Posts: 175 ✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>I just got out an actual calculator and determined that the average grade of each card in my set was an even 8, but the official PSA grade of my set matches my "rating", which is 7.41 >>



    << <i>I guess I'm the only person who simply wanted to know what the average grade of each card in my set was. >>


    Obviously you purchased the major cards in 6-7 and the high pop commons in 9. The hooters girls will not be impressed. >>


    The rookie card is an 8(OC). I'm hedging on whether I want to upgrade. Oh, and it's not Chipper Jones, it's Darryl Sittler--I'm trying to impress the girls at Tim Horton's.
Sign In or Register to comment.