Home› Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

Has anyone looked at the 1991 O-Pee-Chee pop report?

ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,818 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum
It's ridiculous. Someone with an impeccable eye is submitting all the cards and batting close to 1.000. Out of 1,248 cards submitted, there hasn't been one common (non-HOFer, non-star/registry) that's been submitted and NOT gotten a PSA 10. Not a SINGLE card. Everyone else that has a non-PSA 10 submission is either a HOFer or a star player/registry player.

That's insane. The weird thing is that there isn't even a 1991 O-Pee-Chee set registry.

Comments

  • otwcardsotwcards Posts: 5,291 ✭✭✭
    Actually, there's a simple explanation...
  • sportscardtheorysportscardtheory Posts: 1,786 ✭✭✭
    Does it rhyme with more carp horders?
    tradingcardcommunity on reddit - CLICK HERE, JOIN AND POST!]
  • zurbs17zurbs17 Posts: 442
    I wonder what it would cost to hire a grader away from PSA. Seems that would be a wise investment to make if you are submitting a large amount of cards at greatly reduced rates.
  • MapleleafMapleleaf Posts: 506 ✭
    Rhymes with sleet sputters?
  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,818 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think we can put the tin foil hats away. If you notice, I said that all the cards are non-HOFers and non-player registry cards. There isn't a single registered 1991 O-Pee-Chee set in the registry. I don't think anyone is making a fortune selling 1991 OPC Paul Assenmacher PSA 10's.
  • OcTrAdInGOcTrAdInG Posts: 176 ✭✭


    << <i>I think we can put the tin foil hats away. If you notice, I said that all the cards are non-HOFers and non-player registry cards. There isn't a single registered 1991 O-Pee-Chee set in the registry. I don't think anyone is making a fortune selling 1991 OPC Paul Assenmacher PSA 10's. >>



    I have to admit that I'm not sure I understand your initial comment. Wouldn't submissions for these types of cards (newer and with little value) request minimum grades in the first place?
  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,818 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>

    << <i>I think we can put the tin foil hats away. If you notice, I said that all the cards are non-HOFers and non-player registry cards. There isn't a single registered 1991 O-Pee-Chee set in the registry. I don't think anyone is making a fortune selling 1991 OPC Paul Assenmacher PSA 10's. >>



    I have to admit that I'm not sure I understand your initial comment. Wouldn't submissions for these types of cards (newer and with little value) request minimum grades in the first place? >>



    Not in my experience of looking at pop reports. Most results indicate that people just submit cards.

    Even if that's what's going on here (minimum grade of 10), I still think it's funny that not one other person has submitted a common from this set other than the person requesting min grade. My initial post wasn't meant to be fodder for the conspiracy theorists, it was just an observation of a collecting anomaly.
  • mygottamygotta Posts: 1,652
    I would imagine that getting 10's are not very difficult with some of these years as centering, cutting, etc., became better and less problematic. I could be wrong, but that would be my assumption.
  • ReggieClevelandReggieCleveland Posts: 3,818 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I would be shocked if there were another set that met this criteria with the same results. I like to peruse the pop report (which is odd, admittedly, since I don't collect high grade cards other than Mike Greenwell) and I've never seen anything like this. While OPC improved their quality control in 1991 compared to earlier years it's still not on par with Topps.
  • PorkinsPorkins Posts: 615 ✭✭✭
    Whoever it was sure whiffed on the Eck...
  • TheCARDKidTheCARDKid Posts: 1,496 ✭
    I haven't gone through every pop report (of all 4 major sports), but some years are kind of interesting.

    -1972/73 Topps basketball has many PSA 10's. Many more 10's as a percentage than 72 Topps baseball for example.

    -Some vintage years are kind of crazy. I think it's the 52 Bowman Casey Stengel? There's like 42 9's, much higher as a percentage vs other HOF'ers. 55 Topps football, there was a small hoard of 10's.

    Then there are other cards....the 1986 Topps Steve Young rookie? That one has never gone up. Much tougher than the Rice. I don't remember much about statistics from college. I'm sure someone who was very analytical could have a lot of fun with the pop report, dissecting and analyzing the anomalies.
  • OcTrAdInGOcTrAdInG Posts: 176 ✭✭
    A quick search on ebay for 1991 O-Pee-Chee cards shows a number of listings from 4SC. I am certainly no expert on this set (or any newer material, for that matter), but I do think you're just witnessing the anomaly because of the minimum grade requests (by 4SC and others like them). If the cards are actually selling for the prices that 4SC charges now, the pop report should change pretty dramatically in the future as average PSA customers attempt to create more value from the hoards (assuming they exist) of 1991 O-Pee-Chee cards. I will admit that the pop report looks a little funny in its infancy.

    I'm pretty sure there was a thread on the board a while back questioning results from a particular cert run. If I'm not mistaken, one revelation that came to light was that there are big PSA customers whose favorable rate structures are determined by results and physical holdering from submissions with minimum grade requests.
  • miwlvrnmiwlvrn Posts: 4,266 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Nonetheless, it is an interesting statistical observation. I has me considering ripping a 1991 OPC box I have here to look for more than just Chipper.
  • vintagechrisvintagechris Posts: 468 ✭✭


    << <i>I haven't gone through every pop report (of all 4 major sports), but some years are kind of interesting.

    -1972/73 Topps basketball has many PSA 10's. Many more 10's as a percentage than 72 Topps baseball for example.

    -Some vintage years are kind of crazy. I think it's the 52 Bowman Casey Stengel? There's like 42 9's, much higher as a percentage vs other HOF'ers. 55 Topps football, there was a small hoard of 10's.

    Then there are other cards....the 1986 Topps Steve Young rookie? That one has never gone up. Much tougher than the Rice. I don't remember much about statistics from college. I'm sure someone who was very analytical could have a lot of fun with the pop report, dissecting and analyzing the anomalies. >>



    IIRC, the 1952 Bowman Stengel used to be tough to find in high grade and then I believe one person had been hoarding high grade ones for awhile. I don't remember the exact specifics, but something like that. Maybe someone else knows the story better, but it seems like they all came up for auction at one time or something.
  • japhijaphi Posts: 223


    << <i>I would be shocked if there were another set that met this criteria with the same results. I like to peruse the pop report (which is odd, admittedly, since I don't collect high grade cards other than Mike Greenwell) and I've never seen anything like this. While OPC improved their quality control in 1991 compared to earlier years it's still not on par with Topps. >>



    See Mapleleafs comment above. A guy ripped a few sheets.
  • miwlvrnmiwlvrn Posts: 4,266 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well, this thread inspired me to open a box of 1991 OPC, but wish I had left it sealed. It must have taken a tumble somewhere in its life before I got it, since there wasn't anything that would grade higher than an 8 and most were 5's, 6's and 7's (of course, that is not including the one-tenth of them that are lost to gum too). Oh well, glad it wasn't that expensive a box.
Sign In or Register to comment.