How does PSA handle wrong backs?
ReggieCleveland
Posts: 3,818 ✭✭✭✭✭
I just ripped an '88 Fleer Update Glossy set and was sorting everything into yes, no, maybe piles (mostly no) when I realized my Biggio rookie has a checklist back. Upon further examination, my Mark Grace has a Walt Weiss back, David Wells has a wrong back, etc. I also realize looking through the pop reports that I don't recall ever seeing a wrong back notation.
Is this something PSA refuses to do? Will they just send your card back to you with a voucher?
Arthur
0
Comments
They definitely grade wrong backs, but I don't know if it has to be part of certain issues or not. If you're putting a sub together, I'd just send it in and see what happens.
My only experience with getting wrong-back cards graded in PSA holders is with 1948 Leaf; nearly all of them on the pop report were deemed "Authentic" though a few on there have numerical grades. Not sure if this means they try to hold to an Authentic-Only determination or not.
I subbed one and got it returned...the submission wasn't charged and the card was sent back.
I sent in two both were graded as if they were the player on front. When I sent them back to be "fixed" PSA removed them from the holders and returned them. Cards were from 1974, lots of them happened that year.
Why aren't these variations?
Just send in like regular card with the players name on the front and maybe they will grade it. PSA does not like to label variations.
https://kennerstartinglineup.blogspot.com/
Variations and variants are two different things. A variation is an identified issue that the company corrects (think 1958 or 1969 YELLOW/WHITE names) and variants are one-time or limited differences that occur such as a wrong back, color shift, miscut edge, or WRONG BACK etc. The company did not make a "correction" to these issues it just so happened that something different happened with that printing occurrence etc.
I don't want to try to sneak the card past PSA to get it graded, I was hoping to get it notated since it's unique and any value it has would be due to the wrong back. Its top to bottom centering would prevent a high grade, plus it has a bit of wet sheet transfer on the bottom left front. Here's a scan. The more I look at it the more I'm really taking a liking to it. I love the inverted checklist back.
Here's the Mark Grace with the Walt Weiss back.
Arthur
Arthur,
Unless something has changed over the last 5 years or so, I don't think PSA will grade these. I remember talking to a PSA rep at one of the National shows about grading wrong backs and the person told me they did not grade them as that was not the way the card was intended to be issued. The wrong back cards probably had the front sheet turned 180 degrees when the back was printed.
Donato
Edited to add: I think it's a neat item for a player collector.
Donato's Complete US Type Set ---- Donato's Dansco 7070 Modified Type Set ---- Donato's Basic U.S. Coin Design Set
Successful transactions: Shrub68 (Jim), MWallace (Mike)
I've seen plenty of wrong backs but never 88 Fleer Update Glossy ones. Back in 1988 that Grace/Weiss would have been a good one to have.
James
Thanks guys, that's kind of what I figured. Too bad, I would gladly take just an Authentic on them.
Donato, the weird thing is that most of the set is normal. Only 18 cards out of the 132 had the inverted/wrong back. I know the regular '88 Fleer Glossy set contains cards from two distinct sources but not sure how many were involved in the Update set. One of life's great mysteries.
Arthur
I generally agree with this distinction from a personal standpoint. I don't collect wrong backs ( or fronts depending on your viewpoint), or one offs, but do collect variations and recurring print defects. However I know of no standard hobby definition of a "variation". While I tend to agree with Mintacular that variations are cards changed intentionally by the manufacturer, the hobby itself has recognized many recurring print defects as variations, among them the 57 Bakep, the 58 Herrer and 52 Campos. To those who say this occurred before the definition was refined, consider PSA and Beckett's "fairly" recent recognition of the of the 61 Fairly with a green smudge in the baseball on the back as a variation....even though it is a recurring print defect in several 61 cards
And what about differences in cards like the 52 Mantle or the 62 green tints ( putting aside pose differences), which were likely not intended per se but resulted from intentional decisions in the printing process ( DPs or second printer). And was the 90 Frank Thomas no name a intentional change or just a recurring print defect. In fact how can anyone know for sure a recurring print defect was corrected intentionally or not.
My personal experience is that any attempt to come up with a definition of a true variation is an elusive journey in the hobby. I do like the term variant to refer to a card that differs in some way from it's common counterparts. To each his or her own.
Bowman Baseball -1948-1955
Fleer Baseball-1923, 1959-2007
Al
I would like to see some consistency. A Frank Thomas NNOF is simply a card missing some ink the Herrera card too, neither of these were corrected, but a card with a different players stats on the back isn't graded as a ""wrongback".
The way I see it a wrongback card is more of an error card than one with missing ink, but they both should qualify.
Variant/variation I don't care how you want to describe it. In a MASTER set, they should be in.
No argument Joe. people should be able to include anything they want in their master set. But if all the one off or recurring print defects are included I believe you would never have a complete master set or that a complete master set checklist.could even exist. Just consider the 1991 Topps,set.
That's ok for individual collectors, but it would seem catalogs , grading companies and the hobby in general have to have some reasonable parameters to work with
PSA needs a variations guru on staff, you should apply
Bowman Baseball -1948-1955
Fleer Baseball-1923, 1959-2007
Al
Arthur,
I'm thinking the rest of the cards from the wrong back sheet may have ended up in other boxes as I really don't know how you would have just a partial sheet printed upside down and the rest in the correct orientation.
Donato
Donato's Complete US Type Set ---- Donato's Dansco 7070 Modified Type Set ---- Donato's Basic U.S. Coin Design Set
Successful transactions: Shrub68 (Jim), MWallace (Mike)
I recently ripped an '88 Fleer Glossy set (the regular, not this update set that Biggio was in). It was obvious that the set was compiled by cards from two different sources. Basically, the set layout consisted of eleven (I'm guessing, I didn't count the exact number) stacks of 60 cards that you could see where they started and ended just from looking at the set from above. As I would go through the set by block of 60 cards, each block had one of two consistent set of condition issues. One group was centered perfectly L/R but they were all centered way too much to the bottom. The other group was centered perfectly T/B but it was a crapshoot whether they would have good L/R centering.
I suppose it's possible the Update set also was comprised of cards coming from multiple sources but the fact that there were only 18 wrong backs and the rest of the cards were correct makes little sense. Even if multiple sources were used the number 18 doesn't fit into 132 in any logical way. As I mentioned earlier, the Biggio also has some wet sheet transfer so I suppose it's possible (although also unlikely) that the bad sheet was caught in the process and removed or the majority of the sets the bad cards went into were pulled. Unfortunately, there isn't really a theory that makes any sense,
I'm going to send the Biggio in though. I know the odds are stacked against me but I'm going to ask as politely as possible for no grade and for them to simply authenticate the card. I have no desire to sell the card, I just enjoy its unique properties and would like to have PSA's authentic stamp of approval behind it. Fingers crossed.
Arthur
Arthur,
I see your point and as you say we will never really know what happened.
Good luck with your sub, hopefully then will at least authenticate and holder your card.
Donato
Donato's Complete US Type Set ---- Donato's Dansco 7070 Modified Type Set ---- Donato's Basic U.S. Coin Design Set
Successful transactions: Shrub68 (Jim), MWallace (Mike)
I see your point on the modern stuff. I do have a buddy that has most of it memorized, he puts me to shame!
Catalogs and grading companies SHOULD do their jobs, even the hard parts. As far as a catalog or other reference material is concerned, maybe the information could be offered in a supplement so you wouldn't have to buy (and they wouldn't have to print) an entire volume every time the information changed.
I'm just looking for a little consistency here. Common sense would be too much to expect.
The 1974 set must have had a pretty big production issue, there's lots of wrongbacks. I'm not expecting every single minute variation here............just the ones that affect my sets!
LOL