PSA & wrinkles
 

Got a PSA 5 '55 Bowman in the mail yesterday which had unusually sharp corners for a 5. Upon closer examination, I noticed some very light - nearly imperceptible surface wrinkles on the front of the card. The kind that you can look at and find only under bright light and then may have trouble finding again.

Has anyone else seen this with a PSA 5? I have seen SGC grade wrinkled cards EX before, but not PSA - at least not personally. It's not a showstopper for me all things considered (dinged corners on a garden-variety 5 would be much more noticeable...) but I just find it interesting.

Thanks.

I've never had PSA grade a card with faint surface wrinkle higher than 2.5

I have another PSA 5 (a '57 Banks) that also has better than normal 5 corners and a very very tiny what looks like the beginnings of a surface wrinkle - like less than a millimeter long.

Who knows. Neither of them bother me, and I have other PSA 5's that of course have considerably worse corners if the surface is technically better. Eye appeal can be a funny animal...

Same
 

I had a recent submission to PSA at the end of 2015 in which I sent in two cards that seem to be similar to what you describe. I expected EX-MT PSA6 on both. I missed the small surface wrinkles:
The card with the very faint front surface wrinkle = PSA4
The card with the wrinkle on the back = PSA4.5

In "my" interpretation of the published PSA grading standards, wrinkles/creases should max at PSA4.5

Either your EX PSA5 looks like a NM PSA8 or your card hit the grader on a good day.

Dave

PSA's grading standards (posted online) for a PSA 5 used to allow for surface wrinkles. I just looked at their grading standards and they've changed them. It no longer says that, but that IS what it used to say.

I agree with this. In fact, at one time, SGC was stricter on surface wrinkles than PSA. I know when Baker was grading for PSA , he was more lenient on surface wrinkles. Years ago I tried crossing a couple PSA 5's over to SGC and they would not cross due to surface wrinkles. PSA has become more strict over time so I don't doubt they have changed their grading scale descriptions to reflect that. '

The '55 Bowman Kaline in question with wrinkles is an older slab, so maybe that's it.

I've also seen PSA blatantly ignore their own published standards apparently if eye appeal is good enough. A miscut card (even on the back) should have a MC qualifier or it should be a 1-Poor, the way I read their standards. I have a '66 Koufax that looks like a PSA 7, but it is miscut on the back (decently centered on the front). It's slabbed a 6.

I never heard of PSA 5s with wrinkles...PSA 4s arent that common but happen more than i initially realized.

I have seen as high as a 6
 

They are tougher now than they used to be but 4-5 for nm or better cards with a surface wrinkle is not uncommon. The reason you do not see more are they are often either kept by the buy the card not the holder crowd for sharp discounted prices or they are scooped up by the card doctors and pressed or spooned out and resold as 7,8, and 9 grade cards.

I would agree with that. I have an older SGC slab on a '56 Ted Wiliams. The card has what I've always considered a wrinkle, but it's more noticeable because in a place it breaks the color surface - so SGC probably considered it an outright crease. Otherwise the card is a 5 all day long based on corners and eye-appeal. They gave it a 3. Slab is probably at least 10 years old. The card was a part of the only grading submission I have ever made; I've had it since I was a kid.

http://www.psacard.com/Photograde/1/...key-mantle-311

Look at the PSA 5 Mantle and then read PSA's own description which allowed for surface wrinkles.

On a side note, sometimes "creases" and "wrinkles" are used interchangeably. A wrinkle only breaks the surface - either the front or the back - but not both. A crease goes through both surfaces - the front and back.

A PSA 5 can have a surface wrinkle, but shouldn't have a crease.

I must have hit the grader on a good day, it's definitely not an 8. I would say 6 at an arm's length if I didn't notice the wrinkle based on everything else. It has one NM corner but definitely not 4...

PSA website also says a PSA 6 can have a wrinkle...out of the thousands of postings on ebay that are psa6..show me 5 that say there is a wrinkle in the description...nice job with that useful link..hard to find in psa 5 as well

I meant to say hadnt heard before (just like the poster jchcollins ) but know it could....nice insult ...not sure what i said to illicit your kind response..really makes you sound intelligent.....rather be insulted as a collector than as a person...great job

Thanks for posting the photograde link. I was not aware this existed. Nice for them to actually reference a card in a certain grade and tell why it got the grade it did as an example. Does SCG or Beckett have anything similar?

They were the kind of wrinkles that were tough to see unless you tilted the card at an angle under a light source and did not show on the reverse. Tough to see but definitely there. Many of the PSA Mike Baker era 5's will have surface wrinkles. Not all of them, but it's possible for them to be there.

yeah understood now...what about 6s

I would say in general there won't be a surface wrinkle on a 6. Possibly on the back, not visible on the front, that would otherwise grade an 8 or 9 without the wrinkle.

right yet the psa website says a 6 can have a wrinkle....... so just because the psa website says something doesnt mean it happens much...that was my point about the 5s...i never seen one with a wrinkle so pretty rare..despite whatever it says on the psa website

top grade possible for surface wrinkle:

if on the front - 5
if on the back - 6

I'll take your word, and that of others in this thread. As a collector I would not be pleased if I purchased a 5 or 6 online to get the card in hand and find a wrinkle on the front or back. Assuming it was not noted in the description or visible in the scans. Personally I don't think such a card deserves more than a 4, but who am I to argue with PSA?

5
 

I've seen some wrinkles on 5's quite often, that's why i'm wary at buying psa 5s, sgc i have not seen this issue

I would
 

I would much rather have a 5 that looked nmmt but had an almost undetectable wrinkle than one that was a 5 due to being off center or corner wear. Most of these were considered mint or near mint pre grading The wrinkles are usually only detectable in correct lighting at the right angle. and one of the main things to look for when someone freaks about there card being 2-3 grades lower than it looks to them.

There's another thing that I've discussed with some colleagues lately that may explain it: PSA is damaging cards in the process. We've all received cards in the last few months that looked really sharp and clean submitting but that come back in 3-5 range holders with a wrinkle, usually the sort you might generate either pressing on the card in the card saver or pulling it out of one. I can accept I'd miss something occasionally, but for it to happen repeatedly to multiple submitters? No. Too much volume and speed to not expect to damage a few items, I guess.

Ok so here is where im confused. I picked this up. it's a PSA 4.5 but loosk way better.

Can they really knock it this much for having the slightest wrinkle ever on the back from the E in Joseph to the M in mills? Seriously?



https://sportscardalbum.com/c/k8nr5exe.jpg




https://sportscardalbum.com/c/l22zx788.jpg

ECV, like me, you're going to have to get use to the fact that there are a lot of variations between grades.

I can only guess, other than being new or older slabs and the known difference nowadays between the 2, but I have also concluded, that in all likely hood, due to differences we will never know, some cards are and will continue to be graded different depending on the day, who did the grading, what mood they were in, etc, etc, etc.

I'll admit, it is very hard to see imperfections in cards posted here sometimes, and this isn't a slam against graders by any means, it's just a conclusion one will eventually come to and have no choice but to accept, sadly. :(

[QUOTE=irv;1511529]ECV, like me, you're going to have to get use to the fact that there are a lot of variations between grades.

+1... This is a good sentiment to accept. And your card is a great example of "buy the card not the holder."

Regarding newer vs older holders. It does seem that PSA has been ridiculously harsh on grading over the last year or so. However, don't assume a new holder = a recently graded card. Many cards have been reholdered so you have to pay attention to the serial number get get a better idea if it's been reholdered or recently graded. PSA does not regrade the card when it's reholdered. So an earlier graded PSA 4 that wouldn't grade a 4 today, stays a 4. I sure hope I made sense with my rambling. :)

[QUOTE=DeanH3;1511546]I wondered about that?

Thanks for clearing that up.

What exactly are those that are choosing to get their cards re-holdered looking for?
I can understand if their original is all scratched or whatever, but if not, then why the reholding?
Is it to make it look like their card(s) has been recently graded in order to retain a higher value that came with the original grade?

Not a bad deal imo, especially since they will know, in most cases, their card(s) will grade lower if they were re-submitted rather than just reslabbed.

Lots of tricks in this business, and I learn more everyday.

[QUOTE=irv;1511554]I have had cards reholdered due to the original holder being scratched and beat up so I imagine that has a lot to do with it.

Another reason could be when people send in cards for a review, they ask for the card to be reholdered even if the card doesn't get a bump.

I imagine newer holders are more appealing to buyers than older holders. Although we know that doesn't always mean a more stricter graded card. We then go back to the one main mantra. Buy the card not the holder.

I think that card is fairly graded. What would it be with out the wrinkle? 5? 5.5? There is wear on all 4 corners and the bottom left is pretty severe. It could have been graded like this

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b1...mage%20496.jpg

Yikes thats a rough 3 :(

Could part of it be that the card is a bit more 'brownish' (more aged looking) than it would have been when issued? Does PSA (or any TPG) take that into consideration when grading? And to what extent?

It also could just be the scan, but it does look like it is 'browned' towards the edges, even inside the borders.