Took a few tries but got the correct linking. Appears the software may be jumbling up the link address? Need to be careful not to mix up posting a https:// in the http:// box.
Originally posted by: handyman Well Im bummed. I did same day grading. Didnt even think to check the angle or size as it was from a pack. Guess Ill try again later or maybe try SGC. 1 N8: MISCUT 1959 Topps 1 Johnny Unitas
Hopefully the Maravich will do better.
That's sad to hear.
What I'd like to know is why does PSA sometimes put cards with funny cuts edges into holders with the baggie, and then on other cards with like centering, they simply reject them as miscut?
Your '59 Unitas should be an easy 8 or 8.5 without question. Compare yours to some of the other junky slabbed ones you see listed for sale. It's not even close. Your card blows those other sliders away.
Your '58 Unitas looks stellar. Another card that should've been an 8 or higher on the first grading go around. Maybe it looked 'too sharp' since it was from a recently opened cello pack. At least PSA got that one in a graded holder for you.
This is at least an interesting examination into the different ways your eyes can perceive images - or deceive you. It even applies to the 3rd party graders because no 2 people would necessarily view a single item in exactly the same way. To one set of eyes certain positive features will stand out causing permeable flaws to be overlooked. To a different set of eyes, the flaw could be the first noticeable feature to stand out because, perhaps, that particular person has been more inclined to habitually seek out flaws first. The psychological twists could keep a brain scientist busy for years. Or, maybe not. It's the way we see all things. They may be the same. But, each of us thinks there's a difference. If we expect to extract perfection from the process I suppose we'll be needing those robots.
Been there before with both minimum size and miscut. Just underscores how difficult it is to get a card into a high grade holder. Even when you pull one, there are no guarantees, as quality control at Topps was shoddy at best during this era. These cards were cut at the factory with no idea they'd ever be worth more than a few cents each.
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 wonder if it's time to submit video documentation of legitimate pulls for them and getting the words PACK FRESH added to the label. I bet people would go nuts.
Comments
Dad 1916-2014
58 cello
Let's see if this works. YEP!
Took a few tries but got the correct linking. Appears the software may be jumbling up the link address? Need to be careful not to mix up posting a https:// in the http:// box.
Dad 1916-2014
Well Im bummed.
I did same day grading. Didnt even think to check the angle or size as it was from a pack. Guess Ill try again later or maybe try SGC.
1 N8: MISCUT 1959 Topps 1 Johnny Unitas
Hopefully the Maravich will do better.
That's sad to hear.
What I'd like to know is why does PSA sometimes put cards with funny cuts edges into
holders with the baggie, and then on other cards with like centering, they simply reject them as miscut?
Your '59 Unitas should be an easy 8 or 8.5 without question.
Compare yours to some of the other junky slabbed ones you see listed for
sale. It's not even close. Your card blows those other sliders away.
Your '58 Unitas looks stellar. Another card that should've been an 8 or higher on the
first grading go around. Maybe it looked 'too sharp' since it was from a recently
opened cello pack. At least PSA got that one in a graded holder for you.
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.
NEAR MINT 7 1970 Topps 123 Pete Maravich
If the grade does not fit, you must resubmit!
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
NEAR MINT-MINT 8 1970 Topps 123 Pete Maravich
All right.
That's more like it. Congrats. Thinking you might submit later on for a bump?