'55 all americans

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p><br>I have just had approx. five hundred 1955 Topps All American cards graded. They are all from unopened cello packs and only I (and PSA) have seen and touched them. The gradings have been all over the map, with many inconsistencies throughout every submission. Obviously the cards main concern is centering, however, it seems more often than not, cards centered well within the printed PSA guidelines for grade 9 or 10, do not achieve that grade. Particularly 10's. It seems there is this unwritten rule for graders not to give out 10's, even if everything is well within the framework of their guidelines. It is frustrating and unfair. It seems that having Vintage cards from unopened packs does not overcome the nuances and subjectivity factors from the graders. It almost feels detrimental. Also, I know many of these cards would grade 9.5 if there was such a thing. Why there is not is utterly ridiculous. How can PSA leave out that half grade and only include half grades through 8.5? That is just moronic. Comments? Suggestions?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>I agree that it is dubious to have have half grades on some numbers but not others. My guess is that PSA wanted to preserve the perceived sanctity and market value of the 10s. Obviously, market value should not be used as factor in determining an objective grading system for condition, but PSA is a business and they're not going to introduce a grading system they believe will lose them money.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Doug</b><p>Did you get any 10s at all? I used to submit a ton of early '80s Topps cards that I personally pulled straight from packs and I only got three 10s out of all the cards I sent in.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Glyn Parson</b><p>If you had posted prior to submitting we all could have told you not to expect many if any 10's. Also you should be happy if you pulled alot of 9's on 55 AA They will bring big money even on commons. I never submit anything before 1980 expecting 10's, no matter how nice. that is just the way it is, not saying its right or wrong that is just how it is. PS should be on Football or postwar board. Also how about some scans.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>Most buyers of high end cards are going to both look at the number grade and the card itself. Their pricing isn't based strictly on what SGC or PSA says. The real 9.5 may be when bidders price one 9 over another 9 because they agree the first card is superior.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Just because a card comes straight from a pack does not mean <br>it is a mint card.<br><br><br>Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>Out of approx. 500 cards submitted for grading, with attention paid to centering and corners before submission (the gloss and sharpness is always pack fresh), I rec'd 18 Gem Mint 10's on my AA's. Thus far, the Pop report went from 7 to 25. I'm not yet done with submissions for reviews, as some 9's have already bumped. I am pissed as I recently submitted a perfect Rockne and a perfect Horseman to be done same day and paid $250 each for grading, and they only came back as 9's. They are so immaculate, it is impossible for them not to be 10's. I calipered the borders and they are both about 47-53. I'll post some scans of 10's at a later date. The best 10's thus far are Hutson, Baugh, Rockne, and Nevers. Again, I understand PSA does not want to give out 10's on anything vintage, however, why have standards then? The only standard I see is &quot;subjectivity&quot;. In addition, I won't be satisfied until I have a Four Horseman grade 10. That is now my life's mission.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Matt</b><p>Just one man's opinion, but if the card is perfect in your eyes, then be happy with it. It shouldn't matter if PSA agrees with your assessment. Maybe my eyes are bad from looking at too many caramels, but you could show me a mix of 100 9s and 10s blind and I'm sure my guesses would have little correlation to what PSA thought was a 9 vs. a 10.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>dan mckee</b><p>I love grading. You should have had an auction house submit them for you, you would have received more 10's.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric Pugh</b><p>there is only one problem with grading: some people think it is actually objective. <br><br>the fact is that grading is so darn &quot;subjective&quot; it is a bit of a joke really.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>To the original poster. First of all welcome to our forum. If you will read at the top of the page this particular forum is for Pre-wwII cards. We have a forum for post war cards and, for the most part, that is where this should have gone....take care

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>I understand the categories, however, I wanted the opinions and feedback from far more collectors, like yourself, then the few and far between on the Postwar football blog. The pre war category seems to have tenfold any thing else here, and seems likely to find more intelligent and serious collectors. If I crossed the line, accept my apology. Also, having found several unopened 53 year old Topps cards and sharing my experiences with them I would think to be found as interesting to most everyone here.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Tom Boblitt</b><p>that had an auction company had them graded on your behalf to be auctioned, that they would have gained a half grade or two here and there.<br><br><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>Or a large dealer? I have been recommended to consider utilizing Steve Hart's services at the Baseball Card Exchange. I know he is now used by PSA for veryifying the authenticity of unopened material. He seems like a straight shooter. Anybody have experiences with him good, bad or otherwise?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>I agree with Tom. Years ago I had a major auction house tell me (upon my submission) that they were going to submit my cards for grading because they could get higher grades than I could. Draw your own conclusions....

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>It's not a national security issue for posting post war here but there are rules for a reason. I, more than anyone, understand the participation across all of our forums. I fully appreciate what you said. That being the case the correct way to do it would have been to post over there on the post war side...and, after a day or two, if there was very little response, then post over here. For the record I don't consider our post war friends any less intelligent (most are the same that post here anyway) than us pre war guys...Once again, not a big deal but I thought I would let you know how it would be preferred....take care and happy holidays

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>Fyi - I posted the same at the same time on both the Baseball and Football Postwar blogs and thus far have a grand total of one response. Again, if my '55 All American questions and experiences are out of line here, I am gone...............No big deal.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>If you post on both sides at exactly the same time what do you expect? Most of our post war guys are pre war also so they would answer here instead.... In the future if you post over there give it a day...then try the other sides if you get little, or no, response.........And if you have any questions you can always email me....thanks again for your participation and happy collecting

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve Murray</b><p>I think we're being a little too technical on the &quot;Vintage&quot; versus &quot;Postwar&quot; distinction.<br><br>I don't think the post has anything to do with 55 All Americans though it was titled as such. It just as easily could have applied to unopened packs of 1933 Goudeys and had the same effect, i.e. questioning the third party grading system.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Todd Schultz</b><p>I believe the original poster would have more success on the CU/PSA boards: <br><a href="http://www.psacard.com/message_boards.chtml" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.psacard.com/message_boards.chtml</a><br><br>Sorry to be a Grinch, but I disagree with Steve a little on this one--to give an educated or at least useful response one would need to be familiar with the set in question. Here we are being asked about a post-war football set and the nuances of PSA 9s and 10s. This is a pre-war baseball forum, and you would be hard pressed to find many if any who chase even pre-war baseball PSA 10s. So wrong time-frame, wrong sport and wrong focus. <br><br>Still, I'll gladly abide the flurry of comments from others in this forum who chase '55 All-Americans in PSA 9 and 10, just as much as I'll appreciate the flow of insightful comment on why there should or should not be a 9.5 grade.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>I saw the main point of the initial post as PSA's grading and half grades. 1955 football cards were merely the vehicle that lead to the post. Thus, I saw it as an appropriate topic for this section. Notice that the post produced responses mostly about grading.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jodi Birkholm</b><p>I will side with Steve and David on this one, as it's a topic that is of great interest to most card collectors. After all, I'm sure PSA would treat a 1950's issue in the same fashion it would the Goudeys of two decades before. In actuality, I think it is a pertinent topic which could/should be posted in every card forum. It's a very interesting subject, even to this non-card collector.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>John S</b><p>Steve,<br><br>Well put. The topic is more about grading. The poster has received little(and will not receive much more) attention in the football section. There are about 8 to 10 regular posters over on the dark side. <br><br>Thanks for the post and welcome to NET54. The grading issue aside; sounds like you have some incredible cards!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I guess the small issue I had was really with the title itself. If it had said...issues with PSA Grading....instead of something that is in conflict with what this forum is, then I might not have taken it the wrong way...But ya know what.....who cares....happy holidays...

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>davidcycleback</b><p>It has Jim Thorpe in it, and Amos Alonzo Stagg coached Pre-War college baseball at the same time he coached football.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anthony N.</b><p>To answer a previous question, I can't say enough good things about Steve Hart. Honest, personable, a pleasure to deal with.<br>I&quot;d say the same for Levi as well, who also seems to have a strong relationship with PSA. I don't know if either is taking submissions, and not sure if it would make a difference to your grades if they did, but you can't go wrong with either one.<br>I think the bigger issue is that grading is very subjective. As the saying goes, if the grade doesn't fit, you must resubmit!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jodi Birkholm</b><p>Johnnie Cochran collected cards?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Bobby Reynolds played minor league baseball.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>David Smith</b><p>My take on this?<br><br>1) PSA is happy because they just made some money in a bad economy.<br><br>2) Anybody who owns unopened packs of 1955 Topps All American football cards is happy because they now have something that is rarer and probably more valuable than before.<br><br>David

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>You said what I expected to hear about Steve Hart. I really appreciate your feedback and honesty. Sorry Leon, seems my title may have been inappropriate for the prewar forum, but it looks as if the topics are acceptable and insightful. <br><br>I must say, I have been treated well (service wise) by PSA. The only problems I have with over 500 submissions in the past few months is that major inconsistency in their graders sticking not adhering to their own printed grading standards, and not offering a half grade between 9 &amp; 10 (even if it is to maintain a certain &quot;aura&quot; about a gem mint card) is really doing a dis-service to the collector.<br><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Glyn Parson</b><p>Mr. Macdoube, could you please describe how you examine your cards and i may be able to give you a hint or two to let you better see the card in the same atmosphere and use the same methods as the graders. in all honesty though i can not feel sorry for your grades a 10 is fairly hard to justify in most vintage cases as their is always some flaw on any card, even modern, with the exception of some of these rounded corner metal cards that are produced today. Your best bet is to just keep submitting. Is this fair ,No, is this the way it should be, NO, but from 16 years experience submitting cards that is just the way it is. You are not going to come to the game this late and change the rules. I am sorry if you dont like that but that is reality. I agree with you that it should not be but it is what it is. With the $$$ these 10's will bring I just cant feel sorry for your grades. If your 9's are truly as outstanding as you state they will bring a premium over an average 9 anyway.<br>PS I am impressed with that nice a collection of one of my favorite sets.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric Pugh</b><p>If you dont mind sharing, what's the history behind these pristine specimens? I would love to know as i am sure most everyone here would like to know as well. It's not everyday we learn of such a find of mint 50 year old cards. THanks!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Andrew Saboley</b><p>Just wondering if anyone else is having doubts about somebody finding 500 mint 1955 Topps All Americans in unopened cello packs after 53 years?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p> OK - I may get in trouble for this post from Leon, but anyway, it seems a lot of you are interested in the AA's. Several cello packs were found in a Southern California closet by my close friend. His father was formerly an owner of a toy store that was in business in the 50's. His Dad had some Trading Card Guild boxes leftover from when he closed shop about 50 years ago. Apparently, he really liked the set (who doesn't?) and just tucked these boxes away for about 30 years. Upon his death in the late 80's my pal found them in his closet and showed them to me, as I have avidly collected cards since I was a kid in the 60's. I knew they were incredible even then, as unopened material was starting to get a lot of press and notoriety. I gave him some of the values then, and I think in the late 80's the Thorpe booked for around $50. I recommended that he sit on them, keep them unopened, and just monitor their values from time and time. Fortunately, money has not been a huge object for him, so the cards did not need to be sold, or even opened. <br><br>Just to be sure you understand '55 Topps AA's, it was their first football set, focusing on the greatest collegiate football players in history. A 100 card set starting with Herman Hickman and ending with Wilbur &quot;Fats&quot; Henry. Two top cards are The Horseman and Thorpe. There are several other stars, rookies, and Hall-of-Famers, and Heisman winners in the set. Two error cards exist (including Byron &quot;Whizzer&quot; White). The cards are colorful, and much like '55 Baseball, horizontally formatted (except for a few vert.'s)and each one has these classic black and white background gridiron shots taken of Pro (not college) football players battling in action at the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum. They are hugely known for being very poorly cut and extremely difficult to find in high grades. <br><br>These cellos originally sold for 10 cents a pack and contained 19 or 20 cards. The cellophane itself, for the most part, remains very well intact. Tightly sealed and not horribly discolored. We have cracked open several and know for certain now that Topps packaged half the cards in the set in cellos, and the other half in wax packs. Fortunately for us, almost all the key cards and short prints are in the cello packs.<br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>Dude, they are real. They are mint in every respect except for centering on some, and corners on very few (as tightly wrapped cellos sometimes bugger up the corners of the top and bottom card on the packs).

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>If I may ask, are you going to be selling these? And if so did you happen to get a Bobby Reynolds? About what should I expect to pay for a PSA 9 Reynolds?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>I am not that bad of a guy....we are already here and I, and we, appreciate you explaining the find. My only small concern at this point is that if you are going to talk about a grading company you need to be careful of anonymity. I think we are over the posting venue issue....again, when I see &quot;'55 all americans&quot; as the title, and it's not from an every day poster, and on the main board, I have a legitimate concern.....as far as this thread goes...please keep going. (It was never personal, btw).....take care

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>fred</b><p>i would just love to see the scans of these cards. i have a complete set in psa 6-7 with a coupole of 8s but i would love to see these

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>I think we only have two Bob Reynolds in grade 9 (no tens) and we will be keeping these for our registered sets. I will check that and confirm if you are seriously interested. I have a 8.5 that is damn good, and I can post a scan if you like. Thus far we have not yet sold any high grade cards. In 2008 one Reynolds 8.5 has sold ($430.00) and only one 8 sold ($390.00). The SMR lists an 8 at $390.00 plus. If I were to sell the 8.5, I would likely be looking for around $500.00.<br><br>Thanks,<br><br>Jim

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>I find this story and the pics very interesting. Add 10-11 years to each of the timelines. We could have 500 pristine, fresh from the wrapper, 1933 Goudeys.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>NickM</b><p>and you're complaining??????<br><br>As far as the complaint that there is no 9.5, there really isn't room between the 9 and 10 standards to create a whole separate grade (which would have to have some set of grading standards in between the existing 9 and 10 standards). Beckett and SGC have shown that the result of having half-grades at that level is to make the effective top grade the 9.5 (98), with the 10 (100) being almost a random luck event.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p><br><br><br>If you scrutinized every submission and grade we have received that is 9 or 10, the way we have, and if you are any kind of perceptive and intelligent person, you would understand that there should be many more tens. PSA has indicated on each review submission why cards do not bump, and several times, their indications are just dead wrong. For sure. It is obvious that you, and many high end collectors feel that there needs to be a mystique, an aura, a holy grail about the grade 10. How stupid and un-objective is that?<br><br>Just like only having half-grades thru 9. Why should 9 thru 10 be any different? To maintain the mystique? Come on.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scott Fandango</b><p>cant wait to see the scans! WOW PSA 10 PACKS!!!!! AMAZING

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Mac you can tell the difference between a nine and a ten?<br><br>Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>If you examine the 18 PSA 10's and 70 or so PSA 9's that we have had graded recently, knowing all are fresh from the same packs, you can definetely pick out several 9's that appear as good (if not better) than some of the 10's. In our pre-submission evaluations we use calipers, intense and proper lighting, and jeweler's loops. We feel that of those 70 or so 9's, at least 15 of them are as good as any on the 18 tens. Again, it appears PSA and many of you (The Prewar vintage baseball guys) feel that a GEM MINT grade 10 has this aura about it and needs preservation for the select few and far between. Not grading a card that qualifies well within PSA's grading guidelines a 10 because of this is nonsense. Duh!<br><br>p.s. - It is plainly obvious that many (not all) of the prewar dudes here don't see many 10's in anything, as they are freaking out ecstatically with a T206 or the like that gets a grade 3 or 4.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rob D.</b><p>What a relief to see this thread pop back up to the top. And with interesting, new information, too!<br><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Rob- I couldn't agree more. Since we are talking 10's I thought I would show the only 10 I am interested in....(besides my wife, of course)..<br><br><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1231092150.JPG" alt="[linked image]">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Mac is it possible that the 10's that you did get should/could have been 9's?<br><br><br>Is that thing turbo charged?<br><br><br>Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>Yes, there is one 10 in particular we were amazed that it did get a 10. It is the worst of the 18 and we thought it should have been a 9.<br><br>Leon, I will only finish and respond to my existing threads in YOUR forum if there are any pertinent and poignant comments. I have relegated myself to the WORTHLESS AND USELESS postwar forum section. thank you. <br><br>In the meantime, you can continue checking and adding your candid remarks re. my posts. It is no bother to me.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Scott Dango</b><p>this is such a great thread....still waiting for any visual proof of this &quot;story&quot;<br><br>ps... this post did not bump this thread to the top, it was already bumped to the top by the OP (again)

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>I did post two scans of some GEM MINT 10's in this very forum last week. Problem is, Leon and most of the old prewar dudes are pissed off about me doing this here. Of course, I did post them on Postwar Football as well, along with scans of some great 8.5's and 9's, too. These are cards I have lying around. The really great cards I intended to get out of the vault and scan and post (in the football section) next week. We'll see.<br><br>Fyi - Posting on any other forum other than here gets virtually no results/responses and is a useless waste of time. That is why I have posted here, but if my story about what most consider an amazing 53 year old VINTAGE card find is unwelcome, so be it.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>This is a PRE-WAR (WW II, by the way), BASEBALL card forum. <br><br>Your cards qualify as NEITHER pre-war, nor baseball. <br><br><br>You complain that posting on the correct forum gets little or no response. So the solution is to post on the wrong forum and then get mad when people don't care? Sure. That makes sense.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>Leon gave me a solution after the very first post and that was to wait a day or two to see if there was any feedback on the Postwar Football site (where my original post was) and if there was not, then post here. Sorry for following instructions. Consequently, Leon asked to cease any/all of my '55 AA posts here, so after this thread is history, so am I and the AA topics in this forum. No worries dude..........<br><br>fyi.........My solution which would be a benefit to anyone with exciting and pertinent vintage card topics (and in my opinion, a 54 year old card is &quot;vintage&quot;)would be to have an open forum page to anyone with pre-1960 card topics, baseball, football, non-sports, et al. That is a much more sound cutoff period than WW II in this day and age.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rob D.</b><p>Ah, thank goodness for the daily, meaningless bump of this thread. It's as sure of a thing as the sun coming up.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>You are certainly entitled to your opinion(s). First and foremost this is a Pre-WWII Vintage Baseball card chatboard. It has been from day 1. You might not have been here since the beginning but I have. I always wanted a more focused chatboard and at one time even split off and made another. Rest assured that this front page chatboard will continue to be entirely what it is. We (myself and Brian M) made the other side of the board, which doesn't get the participation this one does, in response to our members that want to talk about other things. We try to be somewhat lenient while being FOCUSED on the front page. It is a balancing act. At first you did do as I asked and I appreciated it. It was still considered off topic on this main board but I/we made an exception. <br><br>The exception was not supposed to be the rule that basically said.....&quot;if I post on the other forums and get little or no response, REPEATEDLY, then I can post other stuff on the front page&quot;....That is not what was ever meant to be. I know you are taking this a little personally but it really isn't personal at all. You are probably a great guy and just want a good place to chat about other cards. Unfortunately this front page won't be one of them. I am sure there must be other chat boards that will be more to your liking for discussing football and other sports. I hope this sort of explains my feelings on the subject. BTW, there is no reason to disparage the other boards we have. best regards

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>From the Network54 Forum Rules (carefully hidden in an icon at the top of the page.):<br><br>About This Forum<br>This is an open, moderated forum created in September 2001 for discussions about Pre-WWII vintage Baseball cards. <br><br><br><br>You said: <br><br>My solution which would be a benefit to anyone with exciting and pertinent vintage card topics (and in my opinion, a 54 year old card is &quot;vintage&quot;)would be to have an open forum page to anyone with pre-1960 card topics, baseball, football, non-sports, et al. That is a much more sound cutoff period than WW II in this day and age.<br><br><br>Look, you are entitled to your opinion, but if that's the definition of a board you want, go ahead and start one. The people who started this board drew the line at WW II. They also drew the line at Baseball. They later created options for topics outside of these guidelines. You are trying to modify the stated purpose of this board. <br><br>You were certainly fine to follow Leon's advice by trying a post here after you got little response on the football board, but when you didn't get the response you wanted here, I think you took it too far. If people aren't interested in any given topic, they won't post. But you can't complain about it. <br><br>I will give you credit for being civil and decent the whole time. The other moron who plays golf and sings had 4 different threads going because he didn't get the grades he wanted. Between your posts and his, the whole board seemed to be off topic. <br><br>No hard feelings (at least from me.) Best of luck with these. <br><br><br><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>FWIW, I understand your frustration, but I don't think 17 10's is all that bad. I certainly do not see a call for a 9.5 intermediate grade. Is there that big of a difference between a 9 and a 10 that we need another half step? What would the difference be between the three. To me, and I could be wrong, but the only real difference between a 9 and a 10 is 60/40 centering vs. 50/50 centering. Maybe there is a minor, undistracting printflaw in an otherwise perfect card that would justify a 9 also.<br>jimB

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>For the kind words and sincere suggestions. I've tried he PSA forums and they are not even close to having the informed and intelligent readership that this forum does, let alone the sheer volume. <br><br>Jim B - When you get down to brass tacks and are seeking to have the best set on the planet, and are trying to surpass what is already considred to be one of the highest grade sets for any PSA Set Regisrty, the difference between 9 and 10 is humongous. Just as the difference between 9 and 9.5 becomes monstrous. A half grade becomes very large indeed on a card weighted 4, 5 , 6 and so on..........<br><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jim Thierfelder</b><p>I haven't followed the various grading posts all that closely because I am not that interested in grading. Don't get me wrong, I am not against the concept and even have several graded cards. It can be reassuring when purchasing an a expensive card to know that it is, in someone's opinion, authentic and unaltered.<br><br>What I can't wrap my head around is why it is so confounded important for someone to have a 9 vs a 10 vs an 8. They are all nice cards and if busted out of their respective holders the casual observer would never tell them apart. It seems to me that the importance of a grade when speaking of higher condition cards is about competition for ranking in a set registry and having a better score than someone else. Competition is great in sports, business, industry, and many other places in life. However, I don't see why competition is so important in what should be a hobby. <br><br>Every day there are posts about how trimmed, recolored, doctored, and counterfeit cards are such a blight to the hobby but it seems like one that collectors have brougth on themselves by placing so much importance on a number.<br><br>I guess it is easy for me to have this perspective as I would rather have a pile of nice looking T206's than a PSA 10.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Steve</b><p>Jim <br><br>Great thought out post! One thing you failed to mention though is $$$<br><br>The $$$ spread between those grades can be great. But you are right<br><br>to most observers grades 8 thru 10 won't be noticed.<br><br>I have seen 9's that appear better then 10's and 8's that blow 9's away<br><br>(all from within the same set and in some cases the same card) <br><br>I recall one time a seller had two of the same cards up for sale,<br><br>one in a 9 the other a 10. I won the 9 and IMO it looked nicer then the 10!<br><br>And, because most were off bidding on the 10 I got the 9 for what I felt was 1/2<br><br>of what it could have gone for. As for the cards being discussed in this thread<br><br>$$$ was the underlying factor or money that the OP felt was being left on the table.<br><br><br>Steve

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Sure the $$$ difference could be big. And the ego difference could be big. But my question is: What are the differences in THE CARDS between a 9, 9.5, and 10?<br>JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Doug</b><p>Apparently the motto for 2009 is &quot;buy the holder, not the card&quot;.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Tom Boblitt</b><p>nail on head......E.....G....O.......<br>because to the naked eye, there is no major appreciable difference other than the shape of the number on the slab on some 8/9/10's of the same issue.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>The underlying factor in trying to ascertain above grade 9 is twofold: <br><br>1. Highest rank in Registry<br>2. Highest value<br><br>Ego? See number one <br><br>I emphatically disagree that the naked eye cannot discern between 8's, 9's and 10's. If yours cannot, get to an Optometrist.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>If cards are graded accurately, you can discern slight differences between 8, 9, and 10.<br><br>But I've seen overgraded 9's and undergraded 8's- at that point it becomes a blur and they all start looking the same.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Phil</b><p>Oh good, I was waiting for our daily bump about football cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>I agree with Barry. WHen properly graded, the difference between an 8 and 9 is clear. Though it would be more subtle, one can argue for a clear difference between a 9 and 10. But adding a 9.5 into that mix just seems like in practice it would be adding complete subjectivity since the diference between a 9.5 and a 10 (whatever that might be) would be so subtle as to be bordering between negligible to non-existent.<br>JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Nigel Tufnel</b><p>I think they should go to 11.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Doug</b><p>They need to go to 11.5 so we know what a high end 11 looks like!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>&quot;I think they should go to 11.&quot;<br><br><br><br><img src="http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb189/jvb6034/SpinalTap_Edith_503.jpg" alt="[linked image]"><br><br><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/1201/1210002.jpg" alt="[linked image]">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jason</b><p>c'mon.<br><br><br>I think it's fantastic that these are all for sale now on Ebay, as advertised on the BST.<br>I can't imagine why the thread was started last week

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rob D.</b><p>macb,<br><br>I'm disappointed there was no bump yesterday; you're slipping. Got any Wacky Packages scans?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>Jason, Rob, <br><br>In fairness to macboube, he posted this last night on the football board and asked Leon if he could post one pic on the main page, to &quot;vindicate himself.&quot; Leon told him it was OK if he posted it in the thread that already existed. (At the time, Leon was &quot;under fire&quot; over the &quot;noise maker&quot; and didn't mind bumping a few things around on the main board.) <br><br> <br><br>

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Jim is correct....anything to get out from under the bus <img src="/images/happy.gif" height="14" width="14" alt="happy.gif">.... <br><br>I didn't feel the same thread was a big deal but I asked for a new thread not to be started. So it's my fault as usual....best regards

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rob D.</b><p>Ok, my bad.<br><br>But if anyone has a scan of a PSA 10 Gadzooka, let's see it!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>Leon or any other moderator of this fine Board, because my issue is not with the management of this fine establishment, very honestly.<br><br>But if it is permissable or in good etiquette to now use the main forum for sending out teasers for upcoming sales of non vintage baseball materials, I would like to just add that I expect to be bringing to market the finest collection of beat-up Star Wars cards this place has ever seen - so stay tuned!<br><br><img src="/images/happy.gif" height="14" width="14" alt="happy.gif"><br><br>have a good weekend, everybody.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jim VB</b><p>Leon, <br><br>I think you were feeling more &quot;heat&quot; than really existed. <br><br>In any social setting (which this board is) there are some unwritten rules. Newcomers who try to inject themselves into an existing group often fail to sense these &quot;rules&quot;. On this board, it would be a major faux pas to intimate that Barry was a &quot;crook&quot;, Ted didn't know anything about T cards, or that Joann was a &quot;babe&quot;, a &quot;broad&quot;, or a &quot;hon&quot;. (there are lots more examples but those are just a few.) I'm not saying Marshall did ALL these things, but he did get into verbal disagreements with at least Joann and Barry. <br><br>By the same token, if a newbie said that Rob D, wonka, myself, et al, were wiseasses, they would be correct and no one would object. (Sorry Rob and John.)<br><br>MB3 tried to take the board by storm and crossed a few (OK, a lot) of those lines. He may not be a bad guy, but the personality is a little abrasive. Had he simply apologized to Joann it all would have blown over. Instead he took her suggestions as a personal attack and struck back. <br><br>But one of the problems with banning someone like that is that it deters other new members from posting. That's a bad thing. This board and this industry need new people all of the time. (We'll need somebody to sell our cards to someday!) How many times do we read &quot;I've been lurking for years but rarely post...&quot; That's another bad thing. <br><br>New people should never be afraid to post, as long as they keep within societal norms of decorum.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rob D.</b><p>Jim,<br><br>No apology necessary on the wiseass characterization.<br><br>You make valid points. I would add only that I lurked on this board for a significant amount of time before I ever made a post. And I made dang sure that my first post wasn't about Cleveland Indians pennants (and this was before a memorabilia side even existed). I quickly realized that the board is primarily about prewar baseball cards and respected that. So these days when someone makes his or her debut by posting about 1955 football cards -- and then argues that he or she is in the right to do so -- my opinion is that he or she shouldn't be surprised when board regulars ... wait for it ... BRING THE NOIZE.<br><br>Edited to add:<br><br><img src="http://image.minyanville.com/assets/FCK_Aug2007/File/Christy2/02%20-%20gadzooka.jpg" alt="[linked image]">

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>macboube</b><p>Being new, I find Jim's take very solid. Seems he has some sense and acumen re. we green people. For Jason who is upset about me &quot;advertising&quot; the sale of football cards here, you are incorrect. The only promotion for sale was done elsewhere, in the appropriate places and in private via email. In addition, I have had many favorable responses from people here who appreciate seeing a find like this. I personally appreciate most of the humor on my thread and am beginning to understand this group/forum. Should I say Bring the Noise now?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rob D.</b><p>Agreed. The numerous private e-mails that always are sent in support of off-topic posts are one of the best things about this forum.<br><br>Just don't send any to Barry.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I'm getting a lot of mileage out of my email moratorium.