Just picked up this PSA 9 2nd year Jordan - legit shot at a 10?...OH YEAH!

burke23 · August 27, 2009 8:57AM

I have to crack and send in...I don't see any issues, but could use some better trained eyes.
Edit - those white specks are from the scanner

larryallen73 · August 27, 2009 9:02AM

I don't know that issue very well but I assume they all have fuzzy photos like that?

Is that a spec of something on the B in Bulls? Or just on your scanner?

BunchOBull · August 27, 2009 9:06AM

I wouldn't, the centering is off L/R and T/B. I know it falls within specs, but it's a double whammy. The bottom right corner looks too touched as well.

dizzle · August 27, 2009 9:07AM

Can't really give a valid opinion going off this scan let alone a good scan.. Maybe you could try scanning it with a darker background so the corners can be seen better? The colors look kind of dull too but I'm thinking it may just be the scan.

storm888 · August 27, 2009 9:08AM

I don't much like the very slight variations in the L/R white borders.

I still might try the crack, though; just for fun.

(Blown-Up BIG, I see some scratches, but I guess those are not on the card.)

DrJ · August 27, 2009 9:30AM

Corners look too soft. That card could end up in an 8 holder instantly losing $125 in value.

Wouldn't risk it unless you don't have too much money into the card.

jimrad · August 27, 2009 9:34AM

Looks lucky to be a 9.
Don't take the chance of dropping - no way a 10.

CDsNuts · August 27, 2009 9:38AM

Centering is fine, there are uglier 10s from this set. Bottom corners look touched but it could be the scan. Loupe the corners and if they are nice and sharp crack it. If not don't bother.

burke23 · August 27, 2009 11:23AM

Corners look square to me - poor scanner. This better? You can see the whole top and bottom edge are blurry - that's what you get for $80 I guess.

hammered · August 27, 2009 12:03PM

It's where it belongs, especially for a Jordan

initialD · August 27, 2009 12:09PM

WHy does the bottom right side of the card by the lower gray stripe not look straight?

First impression L/R centering is a tick off but noticeable too, although there are uglier 10's out there

I would be weary of cracking it in fear of EOT?

thunderdan · August 27, 2009 12:35PM

The centering is within PSA 10 guidelines. I've seen worse centering on PSA 10s. Mine has nice centering but not perfect. Here's one from my collection to compare to. Personally, I'd give it a shot.

dizzle · August 27, 2009 1:09PM

CDsNuts · August 27, 2009 1:16PM

That's a 10 at least three times out of 10. I'd crack and resubmit until my fingers bleed. Is the card a little OC? Yes. So are about 80% of the PSA 10s out there.

burke23 · August 27, 2009 2:10PM

Centering was my concern more than corners or edges. I think it is a tiny bit diamond cut (vs trimmed), which is disappointing. The thought of a 10 is so tempting...might have to go for it, consequences be damned. Thanks for the input...and for catching the dc Dizzle.

rbdjr1 · August 27, 2009 2:18PM

The surface is also important to the PSA grader. It is difficult to judge the surface area via a scan, also the plastic PSA slab itself may "mask the surface" a little.

Good luck to you, if you do decide "crack and submit"!

rd

CDsNuts · August 27, 2009 2:23PM

Here's how you need to look at whether or not to bump: It's an odds game. Based on the price difference between a 9 and a 10, you would need to guess that this card will be bumped at least 1 out of 10 times. If you think it has a better than 10% shot to be bumped then go for it.

Like I said, I think it has around a 30% shot and have seen a ton of 87 Fleer cards with the same or worse centering in a 10 slab. Just doing searches of PSA 10 '87 Jordan's that ended in the last 90 days I found these:

A lot of the people chiming in here have never submitted an 87 Fleer basketball card. I've submitted several hundred, possibly more than a thousand. I can honestly say you're leaving money on the table if you don't crack and resub this card based on the assumption that there are no noticeable flaws that aren't apparent on the scan. I'd be happy to pay PSA 9 money for this card.

burke23 · August 27, 2009 2:28PM

Yeah - its a set I'm not really familiar with, but for a 10-fold potential return, and seeing another ten or two with a similar tilt...I don't think I can miss out on the chance...will try to "hide" it with a few other '87's...cause that will work.
Lee - you will be proud - sending in 5 solid '92 fleer all-stars too, and will be submitting to PSA to add that set to the registry. One is a great looking jordan with a 10 front, but back might keep it a 9.

CDsNuts · August 27, 2009 2:39PM

Lee - you will be proud - sending in 5 solid '92 fleer all-stars too, and will be submitting to PSA to add that set to the registry. One is a great looking jordan with a 10 front, but back might keep it a 9.

Any time we can slide borderline cards into 10 slabs I consider it a win for the good guys. As we've discussed, those 92 Fleer inserts are tough as nuts. A few years back I bought a Team Leaders set for my personal collection and was shocked at how nice the Jordan was. Of course it had the obligatory chipping on the back, but I thought I'd sub it at least 3 or 4 times and see if I could get it in a 10 slab. First try I nailed it and sold it for $750, then bought another nice raw copy for $80 to re-complete my set. Any time the ebay/PSA gods give us a gift like this, we need to take it and run with it.

WinPitcher · August 27, 2009 10:17PM

What Dizzle said, also look at the top left it is the opposite of the bottom right.

Must be a MC?

Steve

vladguerrero · August 28, 2009 3:12PM

Ughh, the first one Lee posted is rough.

burke23 · October 9, 2009 7:00AM

2 1 15938331 GEM MINT 10 1987 FLEER 59 MICHAEL JORDAN Card US

SWEET!!! That's turning $120 into $850+ (I hope).

A small downer - I cracked 6 other PSA 9's from this set that I thought had a legit chance at a 10...clean, dead nuts centering, rock-solid corners. The results for those? 4 PSA 8's and 2 PSA 9's. Bleh.

Kdog08 · October 9, 2009 7:08AM

<< 2 1 15938331 GEM MINT 10 1987 FLEER 59 MICHAEL JORDAN Card US >>

Congrats. Did you have this for sale on the BST when it was in the 9 holder at some point this year?

hammered · October 9, 2009 7:10AM

Congrats on the 10
I probably would have had all 6 reviewed first. Who knows, one in 6 may have bumped, and you'd still have the others in 9.

burke23 · October 9, 2009 7:14AM

This was under the $4.50 special...the other '87's were so nice that an 8 never crossed my mind for them...they were cheap enough that it wasn't a big deal.

KDOG - to answer your question, never had this posted on BST...although it will be shortly.

MULLINS5 · October 9, 2009 7:16AM

<< Congrats on the 10
I probably would have had all 6 reviewed first. Who knows, one in 6 may have bumped, and you'd still have the others in 9. >>

no, I think the crack out was the best thing to do. I really doubt PSA would bump a Jordan second year from a 9 to a 10 in review.

But it just goes to show: a 9 is a 10 and a 10 is a 9.

btw- congrats on the submit

Patrick

thunderdan · October 9, 2009 9:38AM

Nice job! Love it when that happens!

ndleo · October 9, 2009 10:27AM

Congrats on winning the crack and re-submit game.

Just raise a point, when a PSA 8 is submitted to SGC and comes back a SGC 96, everyone piles on SGC. When an old PSA 9 comes back a PSA 10, people celebrate. Doesn't this imply that PSA's standards have decline or are inconsistent, just like every other TPG.

If I was the original PSA 9 owner, I would be upset with PSA.

thenavarro · October 9, 2009 11:04AM

He shoots, he scores!!

Nice bump Burke23, congrats.

Mike

burke23 · October 9, 2009 11:14AM

<< Congrats on winning the crack and re-submit game.

Just raise a point, when a PSA 8 is submitted to SGC and comes back a SGC 96, everyone piles on SGC. When an old PSA 9 comes back a PSA 10, people celebrate. Doesn't this imply that PSA's standards have decline or are inconsistent, just like every other TPG.

If I was the original PSA 9 owner, I would be upset with PSA. >>

As long as humans are doing the grading, its always interpretation to a point. PSA is no different there. Card looked great to me so I took a chance. It was a legit tweener - it just came out on the good side for me.
Now - fingers crossed that the SGC 98 Ozzie Newsome rc this is buying me will crossed to a PSA 10 (is a 1/1 98, and would be a 1/1 PSA 10 and sell for quite a bit more).

Mike - mailing out the cards for your group auto sub tomorrow!
Pete

bobbyw8469 · October 9, 2009 11:15AM

I agree with ndleo.....

ymarea · October 9, 2009 11:17AM

<< I agree with ndleo..... >>

Me, too.

dizzle · October 9, 2009 11:21AM

<< 

<< I agree with ndleo..... >>

Me, too. >>

Me, three.

CDsNuts · October 9, 2009 12:34PM

I think most of you guys all take grading too seriously. It's a money game and nothing else, especially when dealing with PSA 9 vs 10. There are almost no cards that will end up in the same slab 10 out of 10 times. Complaining about inconsistent grading is pointless because we should all know buy now it's never going to be consistent across the board.

Take this Jordan card for instance- most of you said don't resubmit because of 'x' flaw. I said it would be a 10 eventually regardless of whatever flaws you see. So either I am a genius, a lucky guesser, or I'm familiar with this particular card and know what some graders at PSA will let slide by. I would like to think I am a genius, but all forms of educational testing would suggest otherwise. I would also like to think I am a lucky guesser but several trips to Pimlico would suggest otherwise. I suggested that I would resub the card until it ended up in the 10 slab. Is it a strong 10? No. Do you think burke cares when that $700 profit drops in his pocket?

Grading cards should be looked at as a gambling proposition, especially when talking about 9 vs 10. A card has an x% chance at being a 9 and x% chance at being slabbed a 10. If you can take a good guess at the percentages based on grading similar cards in the past and act accordingly then there is money to win. If you go in blindly guessing based on your intuition and no real experience with grading similar cards you will probably lose. And if you only look at the results with happiness/displeasure and not try to learn from them you will continue to lose money.

Lee

VintageCardLover · October 9, 2009 12:48PM

Lee speaks the truth.

itzagoner · October 9, 2009 12:59PM

beats pizzin away more cash on wax. way to go.

Littletweed · October 9, 2009 1:17PM

<< I think most of you guys all take grading too seriously. It's a money game and nothing else, especially when dealing with PSA 9 vs 10.

There are almost no cards that will end up in the same slab 10 out of 10 times.

Grading cards should be looked at as a gambling proposition, especially when talking about 9 vs 10 >>

Good points and I agree. "Crack and Submit" is a game. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. I've been on both ends, but the payoff is what keeps me gambling.

Boopotts · October 9, 2009 1:21PM

<< I think most of you guys all take grading too seriously. It's a money game and nothing else, especially when dealing with PSA 9 vs 10. There are almost no cards that will end up in the same slab 10 out of 10 times. Complaining about inconsistent grading is pointless because we should all know buy now it's never going to be consistent across the board.

Take this Jordan card for instance- most of you said don't resubmit because of 'x' flaw. I said it would be a 10 eventually regardless of whatever flaws you see. So either I am a genius, a lucky guesser, or I'm familiar with this particular card and know what some graders at PSA will let slide by. I would like to think I am a genius, but all forms of educational testing would suggest otherwise. I would also like to think I am a lucky guesser but several trips to Pimlico would suggest otherwise. I suggested that I would resub the card until it ended up in the 10 slab. Is it a strong 10? No. Do you think burke cares when that $700 profit drops in his pocket?

Grading cards should be looked at as a gambling proposition, especially when talking about 9 vs 10. A card has an x% chance at being a 9 and x% chance at being slabbed a 10. If you can take a good guess at the percentages based on grading similar cards in the past and act accordingly then there is money to win. If you go in blindly guessing based on your intuition and no real experience with grading similar cards you will probably lose. And if you only look at the results with happiness/displeasure and not try to learn from them you will continue to lose money.

Lee >>

Only a poker player could offer this kind of analysis. Well put, sir.

Edit to add: Anytime you hear someone say 'That card will never grade an 'x', because....' you know they are either a) a very slow learner, or b) new to grading. In either case, take their opinion very lightly. When people act outraged because a card graded a certain way, or make dumb comments about how 'PSA gives it the wrong grade the first time in order to make you submit it twice', then that tells me that person knows extraordinarily little about TPGing.

dizzle · October 9, 2009 2:25PM

Hmm, I guess I'm a very slow learner and new to grading but I've subbed atleast 1,000 1986-1988 fleer basketball so feel I know the issues with each year rather decent. I just didn't care for the card much is all and had my doubts, (guess I was wrong).. anyhow, I'm not outraged I actually could care less... It's not my card so I won't be reaping the rewards of it being placed in a PSA 10 slab and I also wouldn't pay the going rate for it in a PSA 10 dead centered or not as the value will keep dropping on this card as pop reports rise...

burke23 · October 9, 2009 2:40PM

Dizzle - you bring me down.

Personally I have been quite burned with crack and submit too - so I am trying to more selective when I do it - being no expert I still don't know what I am doing. But it sure as schnit feels good to get a hit like this.

Littletweed · October 9, 2009 3:02PM

<< Hmm, I guess I'm a very slow learner and new to grading but I've subbed atleast 1,000 1986-1988 fleer basketball so feel I know the issues with each year rather decent. >>

If you've subbed THAT many cards, you are not a slow learner, or new to grading. I've subbed over 500 1980-81 Topps basketball - do I know the issues? Yes. Am I suprised every time I submit cards? Yes. Grading is subjective. I'm sure you know that.

With the '87 Jordan, it's a beautiful card... Is it a 10?... that's for us to decide from a scan and for PSA to decide in hand.

Very nice card anyway you look at it!

dizzle · October 9, 2009 3:24PM

<< Dizzle - you bring me down.

Personally I have been quite burned with crack and submit too - so I am trying to more selective when I do it - being no expert I still don't know what I am doing. But it sure as schnit feels good to get a hit like this. >>

LOL.. no man not trying to bring you down at all, Congrats on the bump..

You asked what we thought and we gave you opinions some said yes some said no.. the ones who were wrong were told they were slow learners etc..

There's no way any of us could actually grade that card based on the scan so we all guessed nobody knew for sure.. If it came back a 9 or EOT I wouldn't have came back to the thread to rub it in and say "see I told you".......... It looks like a tweener and you got the better end of the stick. good job.

italianstallionyankees · October 9, 2009 6:11PM

<< This was under the $4.50 special...the other '87's were so nice that an 8 never crossed my mind for them...they were cheap enough that it wasn't a big deal.

KDOG - to answer your question, never had this posted on BST...although it will be shortly. >>

Hey Pete, Congrats on the jordan card! Just wanted to thank you for the cards. they arrived yesterday morning and logged onto my registry last night thanks for the extra jordan card as well! Great deal man!

CDsNuts · October 9, 2009 8:26PM

Hmm, I guess I'm a very slow learner and new to grading but I've subbed atleast 1,000 1986-1988 fleer basketball so feel I know the issues with each year rather decent. I just didn't care for the card much is all and had my doubts, (guess I was wrong).. anyhow, I'm not outraged I actually could care less... It's not my card so I won't be reaping the rewards of it being placed in a PSA 10 slab and I also wouldn't pay the going rate for it in a PSA 10 dead centered or not as the value will keep dropping on this card as pop reports rise...

diz:

1) I love you, you know that. When this is all over we should get an apartment together.

2) We all miss grades every now and then. I was just told about a card that I sold in a $75 raw lot that graded 10 and is now a $400 card. Obviously I thought something on the card was holding it back so I sold it raw. I'm sure I've missed a ton of these in the past. It happens.

3) Your new picture freaks the hell outta me.

burke23 · October 10, 2009 1:01AM

<< Hey Pete, Congrats on the jordan card! Just wanted to thank you for the cards. they arrived yesterday morning and logged onto my registry last night thanks for the extra jordan card as well! Great deal man! >>

Glad you got them - again so sorry for the mixup and delay. Hope you got the Paypal refund too.
Pete

swartz1 · October 10, 2009 1:17AM

too many late nites at the Days Inn in Timonium...

that is what I say...

italianstallionyankees · October 10, 2009 1:37AM

<< 

<< Hey Pete, Congrats on the jordan card! Just wanted to thank you for the cards. they arrived yesterday morning and logged onto my registry last night thanks for the extra jordan card as well! Great deal man! >>

Glad you got them - again so sorry for the mixup and delay. Hope you got the Paypal refund too.
Pete >>

Thanks, you didn't have to do that though, that was a great deal anyways on the lot!

Boopotts · October 10, 2009 4:35AM

<< 

<< Dizzle - you bring me down.

Personally I have been quite burned with crack and submit too - so I am trying to more selective when I do it - being no expert I still don't know what I am doing. But it sure as schnit feels good to get a hit like this. >>

LOL.. no man not trying to bring you down at all, Congrats on the bump..

You asked what we thought and we gave you opinions some said yes some said no.. the ones who were wrong were told they were slow learners etc..

There's no way any of us could actually grade that card based on the scan so we all guessed nobody knew for sure.. If it came back a 9 or EOT I wouldn't have came back to the thread to rub it in and say "see I told you".......... It looks like a tweener and you got the better end of the stick. good job. >>

To clarify, I said that anyone who says 'there's NO WAY this card will grade 'x'' is a slow learner. And that's true-- if you've done this enough, you know that on any given day there is a very wide range of grades that any particular card could garner. I said nothing about people who simply offered an opinion as to the relative chances of the card getting a bump.

Just picked up this PSA 9 2nd year Jordan - legit shot at a 10?...OH YEAH!

Comments