Is this an example of blatant inconsistency, or what??

Steve1124

Recently I submitted 2 cards from the 1952 Type 1 Star-Cal series, both of Bob Feller. One had a number, 74E, the other had no number. Other than this, they looked identical. They both had the outer red envelope. First off, they would only get an 'Authentic' rating, since they claimed the full card is not visible due to the envelope. Ironically, if you send them in withOUT the envelope, they could get a numerical grade! So this hardly makes sense--that an "incomplete card" could potentially be worth MORE than one WITH the envelope!! But my real beef is that PSA is saying that the card with no number will not "qualify" to be slabbed (and thus not be eligible for the Registry), since there's no documentation showing that there are cards in this series without a number. However, if you look at the 1948 R346 Blue Tint series (there may be other sets too, but I know about this one first-hand), there are several player cards in this set with, and without a number; again, with Bob Feller being one of them. Some have #43, others have no number. And neither is there any "documentation" for this series that there are cards with no numbers! THIS set however, PSA does recognize BOTH varieties!! So what's the difference with this series, and the 1952 Star-Cals?? They've basically just rendered my non-numbered 1952 Star-Cal Feller card worthless! Makes absolutely NO sense to me.

JoeBanzai

I have struggled with PSA often over their decisions. There are many inconsistencies in what they will and will not grade or add to a set.

A few years ago I found a 1963 Post Alpha Bits individual serving complete box (part of flap missing) with Harmon Killebrew on the back. Had it graded and it received an "authentic" grade. When I tried to add it to my set PSA only allowed it as an OPTIONAL addition to the set. According to the guidelines, it graded and was part of a set already recognized, so why not allow it to be added?

I was, and continue to be frustrated and confused by their refusal to add it. Bazooka, Milk Duds and Transogram complete boxes are in, why not this one? One of their reasons was because it was the only one graded, well I have a few items in my set that are the only ones graded, so how can that be?

I had been the top set for three years running and am neck and neck with the other Killebrew guy, he beat me this year and had this item been allowed in my set, I might have won. No huge deal, but who wants to finish second? Especially if he has the better (?) set?

Don't even get me started on the 1967 Punch-outs. LOL.

Good luck!

bishop

Oh , go ahead Joe, tell us about the Punch Outs

JoeBanzai

Three different variations of Killebrew's card. Had Tom Bartsch of SCD verify. PSA allowed all three in, but then changed their mind and now will allow only one of the three.

Each Punch Out has a different line up of players beneath a photo of "Team Captain" Killebrew.

Recently the Globe Import "card" had a variation added because of a different back (one is blank the other some kind of lines on it), same card with two different backs is in, but three different cards and only one allowed.

Oh well, have fun collecting :-)

bishop

I completed that set on a captain only basis, no line up variants. There are pose variations for 4 of the captains, F Robinson, M Alou, Mantle and Clemente. Still need 2nd Clemente.

I think Larry S has all the line up variations and would agree with you.

I think PSA has also been inconsistent with how they grade them. I have seen highly graded examples with even borders on both ends, which given the perforated 3 card format they came in means one end had to be trimmed.

JoeBanzai

I certainly can see being satisfied with Captain only basis for a collection (as long as the photo is the same LOL). My feelings are that in a master set, all legitimate variations should be included.

When first disputing PSA's original decision not to allow the variations, I was told that they couldn't add all three because they weren't listed as variations in any publication and PSA didn't determine this.

I then contacted Mr. Bartsch and he immediately agreed with me. It is noted in the 2008 "standard catalog" that there are variations of the Team Captains, so while they aren't individually listed, the documentation was there. These are completely different cards, not like some of the printing error cards that are allowed as variations because of missing ink. I have no problem with adding a Frank Thomas NNOF or a Pancho Herrera card as a variation but there is room for dispute there. They aren't different cards.

A Master set should include all legitimate variations. This seems like an obvious example.

You are correct on the grading of the cards if what you say is true. All of the cards issued should have at least one edge showing perforations. "Middle" cards should have both top and bottom edges perforated.

No one is perfect, with an obscure issue such as this, grading mistakes can be made, but it would be nice if we could strive to end up with an accurate decision on what goes into a Master set.

Next up 1966 and 1967 Bazooka complete boxes!