Options
Same Card got 2 Different Grades
jraytay
Posts: 126 ✭✭✭
I submitted a 2018 Bowman Chrome Ohtani card #1 cert 71918914 in Feb this year. It came back a 7. I was surprised at the low grade expecting it to grade a 9. Cracked it open, re-examined it, could not see anything to justify the grade of 7, and re-submitted earlier this month. It came back as an 8 cert# 739377783. This tells me that the grading process is still very subjective depending on the grader(s) involved. My understanding is that PSA was going to start using more sophisticated methods in addition to humans doing the grading to improve consistency. It doesn't appear this has yet been implemented. Has anybody else experienced the same thing as this?
0
Comments
fairly common. until they have robots grading the cards there will be some level of subjectivity in the process.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I think a lot of folks have experienced this.
Grading is part card condition and part grader luck! Once got the Grader of God, gave me tens on what should have been 9's!
I have a rough time seeing really off-centered 9's and 10's. 50/50 centering should take precedent over a small surface issue.
thus an off-centered 9 looks like an 8 to me
a centered 9 with some issues I can't see easily, is much better to me.
Vintage is much more subjective and can get grade bumps more often. But it happens with modern, too.
One grade bump does not seem strange . If you said PSA 7 to a PSA 10 or a PSA 7 to a PSA 3 then I would say that would be strange.
I just received a PSA9 that I bought and it has 2 noticeably touched corners (naked eye, no loupe) and the 3rd corner is bent upward (easily seen by tilting card). It is centered though. LOL
But If that's a 9, I have stacks of cards I would be submitting. I would have given it a 6.
It's bad enough I'm considering sending in for review under the PSA grading guarantee.
Anybody go through review process? It's only a $40 card, but still.
Grading is on a continuum. Some cards just have to be very close to the border of 7 and 8. Perhaps this is one of those cards.
It's entirely possible those defects occurred after grading and during the holdering process, especially the bent corner, that has happened to me a number of times in the last couple years
Curious, with the corner cutout/relief area on the holder, how can it cause the bending.
Did you take any further action on any of your cards this happened to?
I disagree daltek
There is zero consistency with the grading. I can post slabs where I have had cards go from a 6 to a 9 and 8 to a 10. There is no borderline there
Just had grades pop on 160 1982 OPC Hockey. The grader I received has no idea how to grade OPC. I received a handful of 9s but 90% 8s
The last batch of 45 was the opposite. 90% 9s , that grader knew how to grade rough cut OPC. I basically threw a couple of thousand away because the grader was not in my opinion competent on OPC
A follow up to my original post above: So...the PSA Cert site still shows the original grade of 7 being current AND also shows the same card resubmitted as an 8. My point is that the PSA Cert site is very skewed and basically incorrect making it a joke. Given some of the other comments I of course am not the only person this has happened to SO the Cert site is not factual.
Good point but my point is the subjectivity of PSA grader(s) is something PSA should be addressing. One member said not until robots replace them. Please also see my recent reply/post that the Certification Verification Site has to be totally skewed due to resubmittals of cracked slabs since the original Cert is still listed on the site.
Did you let PSA know you cracked it out of its 7 holder and that they should remove that Cert from their database? If you didn’t, how exactly did they screw up?
Yaz Master Set
#1 Gino Cappelletti master set
#1 John Hannah master set
Also collecting Andre Tippett, Patriots Greats' RCs, 1964 Venezuelan Topps, 1974 Topps Red Sox
Its done by humans, does this surprise you?
Of course not. How is PSA supposed to know they've seen the card before, barring cards with serial numbers? If you have a non-destructive solution, I think all of us, and PSA, would love to hear it.
I didn't say they screwed up I said the site is SKEWED and inaccurate.
I dont think anyone would disagree that at this point the POPs are very much inaccurate.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Aren’t there numerous cases where the pop report could be off? Cards destroyed in fire, flood, lost, thrown away, …? PSA’s data is only as good as the community allows it to be. You’re free to send the cracked out flip back to them and they’ll remove the card from the pop reports. But once the card is out the door, they’re entirely dependent on the community to update them when there are changes - this is just common sense, and I don’t see any way the pop report could be more accurate.
You can safely view it as a high water mark - there shouldn’t be any more of a certain card and grade than the pop report shows, but there could be fewer.
Jim
Had to think about daltex' comment awhile regarding a non-destructive solution.....Here's what I came up with.....On the PSA submission form they could add this:
Have any of the cards you're submitting on this form been submitted to PSA before?
Yes/No...OPTIONAL: If Yes what are the original cert #s?
This wouldn't have to be a mandatory field to be completed in order for the submission to be accepted.
Might help the Cert page be a bit more accurate....might not.
This reminds me of a beautiful 1952 Bowman Large Otto Graham PSA 7 I had, I cracked and submitted twice and both times it came back a 7, I sold it to a Board Member who cracked it out and submitting it and Ofcourse it came back a PSA 7.5
This led me to believe they saw my sub history and figured it was the same card, I was not happy
As far as the pop report goes it is subjective since there is no humanly way possible to know how many cards have been cracked and resubmitted, that is not even debatable
When cracking out and submitting, you are supposed to send in the old "flip", I thought this was common knowledge.
If you are worried PSA will see they have graded the card already and not want to improve the grade, you can send it in at a later date. They should make the adjustment.
YES, the pop report is skewed, but the fault is mainly because of the submitters, not so much PSA's.
I use the pop report as a guide, realizing some cards have been cracked out and resubmitted multiple times without the submitter notifying PSA. The number of 10's should be accurate. That's all anyone's buying now........right?
I have many complaints about PSA, this is not one of them.
I doubt they took the time to look up your sub history. Your card probably "deserved" the .5 bump, which PSA ignores on most cases. I have sent in hundreds of cards and haven't gotten more than a few .5's.
>
This is correct, if submitters would send in their old flips, the report would be accurate.
Aren't they photo. many high end cards now? So same Mantle, AAron, Mays, etc. can be checked regardless of wh;o ssent it in.