Has PSA changed it's grading standards?

olb31 · August 27, 2009 1:31AM

I am not very smart when it comes to putting a link on this post. Somebody clue me in on how to do that, please. But, I noticed that someone has posted a 1986 Nolan Ryan O-pee-chee PSA 10, Population 1. I looked at the card and could not believe my eyes. The card has 50/50 centering left to right, but has 85/15 or worse top to bottom. By PSA standards this card should be a 6 maybe a 7. To me, it looks like PSA has made a huge mistake, especially on a card that has no 10's before. You would think it would have to look perfect to get a 10. Maybe this is why there are so many 10's for the newer cards such as Donruss Maddux, Bowman Thome, Bonds rookies, etc. If they are not following their own standards and in this case, it is not even close, then this would skew what is really a 10. Let me know what you think.

nam812 · August 27, 2009 1:36AM

lsutigers1973 · August 27, 2009 1:38AM

T/B centering looks a lot closer to 55/45 at worst to me. If it looks 85/15 to you, then I have to assume you are not familiar with this set.

jamesgotpoorman · August 27, 2009 1:38AM

olb31 · August 27, 2009 1:43AM

Use you mouse and measure it. It's more than twice on the bottom than the top that may mean at least 70/30, but probably closer to 75/25, it certainly does not look like a 10. And I don't think they should change their centering standards from set to set. It should be uniform.

swartz1 · August 27, 2009 1:43AM

I have always thought the centering top to bottom on this issue has been a problem...especially if you go back and look at past 1986 threads...this is a bad looking 10 - but get your comments in...this thread wont last...

swartz1 · August 27, 2009 1:45AM

mtcards · August 27, 2009 1:46AM

I am sure the submitter of this card had several thousand others along with it. If this was in my 25 card sub, it would be a 9(OC) like my 77 Schmidt

nam812 · August 27, 2009 1:49AM

I have the top to bottom centering at 36/64.

olb31 · August 27, 2009 1:50AM

The Hoyt is better than the Ryan. The Holt appears to be a little more than 60/40, but close top to bottom. Still, probably should not be a 10 though.

joestalin · August 27, 2009 1:52AM

do you guys slip the 50 dollar bill in the front of the card saver or the back?

Kevin

MBMiller25 · August 27, 2009 1:52AM

38.3/61.7

olb31 · August 27, 2009 1:55AM

On the Hoyt or Ryan? The Hoyt appears to be about 65/35, maybe a little better top to bottom. The Ryan is at least 70/30, probably closer to 75/25, imo. It's a little better than I originally thought, but certainly not a 10, probably a 8 or 8.5.

alifaxwa2 · August 27, 2009 1:59AM

On the Ryan I got
7 pixels on top, 12 on the bottom = 37/63

jeffcbay · August 27, 2009 2:03AM

EOT

nam812 · August 27, 2009 2:05AM

<< On the Hoyt or Ryan? The Hoyt appears to be about 65/35, maybe a little better top to bottom. The Ryan is at least 70/30, probably closer to 75/25, imo. It's a little better than I originally thought, but certainly not a 10, probably a 8 or 8.5. >>

Maybe you didnt see what I typed above, so I will illustrate it for you.

ddfamf · August 27, 2009 2:06AM

Quick question - someone posted EOT above - what does that stand for?

initialD · August 27, 2009 2:08AM

Ryan looks SHORT too

Edit to say

Measure to the inside edge of the top inside of holder to

figure the size of the missing pixels

Then it may be a Ten?

burke23 · August 27, 2009 2:08AM

I don't collect '86's, but are they supposed to be centered evenly on the top and bottom? Never clear on these and the '75 topps.

billwaltonsbeard · August 27, 2009 2:17AM

anyone know who subbed that card? I have a guess.

dizzle · August 27, 2009 2:17AM

The right boarder looks funky too, it gets wider towards the bottom.. appears to be sitting straight in the holder and the left boarder looks straight..

OAKESY25 · August 27, 2009 3:08AM

I had a 9 o/c topps version with the same exact centering.. I just gave it away actually..

jeffcbay · August 27, 2009 3:12AM

<< anyone know who subbed that card? I have a guess. >>

Can I have "Four Silly Clues"? lol

gumbyfan · August 27, 2009 3:16AM

<< do you guys slip the 50 dollar bill in the front of the card saver or the back?

Kevin >>

Umm...isn't this pretty much the same comment that got BobaFett banned for life? Shame, Shame, stalin

olb31 · August 27, 2009 3:16AM

I agree it's either a 9 o/c or an 8 or 8.5.

lsutigers1973 · August 27, 2009 3:17AM

<< Can I have "Four Silly Clues"? lol >>

That's good stuff right there!!

gumbyfan · August 27, 2009 3:21AM

<< I agree it's either a 9 o/c or an 8 or 8.5. >>

...or a 6 or a 7 per your original comments.

Which is it? Or did you run out of darts?

digicat · August 27, 2009 4:01AM

<< The Hoyt is better than the Ryan. The Holt appears to be a little more than 60/40, but close top to bottom. Still, probably should not be a 10 though. >>

I'm not sure what you're measuring, but the Hoyt is around 48/52 t/b.

I'm judging t/b centering as such:

Top border = Top edge of card to top of letters in team name
Bottom border = bottom edge of cards to the bottom of the letters in player's name

CNote · August 27, 2009 4:10AM

I like my '86 10s...

gumbyfan · August 27, 2009 4:13AM

I much prefer the OPC Hershiser over the Topps, but that's why we buy the card, not the holder.

Good stuff!

storm888 · August 27, 2009 4:33AM

GEM MINT 10

"...The image must be centered on the card within a tolerance not to exceed approximately 55/45 to 60/40 percent on the front,...."

In some disciplines, "approximate" indicates a variance of "about" 10%.

The concept of buying graded items "sight-unseen" just does not work,
with that much slop in the equation.

High numbers on flips are nice, but "perfect" cards are nicer.

olb31 · August 27, 2009 4:41AM

My original thought process was a 7 when I glanced at it lat last night. But after second review, I would probably give it an 8.5. What do you think?

jswieton · August 27, 2009 4:42AM

I am very surprised this got a 10 with the top to bottom centering. What do you think this card will sell for?

olb31 · August 27, 2009 4:48AM

Yes, I agree the OPC definitely on the Hershiser looks better. Now compare the OPC Hershiser to the Ryan, big difference.

rbdjr1 · August 27, 2009 5:08AM

IMO, both '86 Topps and '86 OPC, PSA does give some leeway regarding T/B centering when grading. I think overall eye appeal and not just centering issues with certain graders, can be the deciding factor with '86s.

As evidenced by the two PSA 10 Ryans below:

rd

P.S. I got at bunch of raw '86 Ryans that I ripped, maybe I'll look at them again sometime?

Dare to compare?

metsfan · August 27, 2009 10:05AM

From speaking to a PSA rep years ago, he told me all cards have different specs. PSA won't grade a card until they have a spec sheet for that years cards. Don't believe 1986 Topps look the same on the top as they do the bottom. If you have a lot of 1986 Topps Baseball you can tell.

Has PSA changed it's grading standards?

Comments