Effects of tighter grading
 

Not to beat the grading mule to death......but, with all the talk over positive centering qualifiers and tougher grading from newer PSA flips, I'm wondering how this is changing buying habits? Also, how does this further pollute the already questionable population reports from the big 3?

PSA's recent trend could shift the overall grading distribution to the left. Additionally, crossovers from SGC or BGS could further imbalance the historical distribution. I realize the pop reports are already a giant mess.

In the prewar space, PSA and SGC both used to be fairly equal when measuring grading characteristics for a particular grade. More recent opinions suggest SGC grades are roughly -1 from equivalent PSA new-flip grades. Is there a significant difference in price between old and new PSA flips? Depending on the card, it seems the price gap seems to be widening between SGC and PSA (even old flips).

Why do different grading companies' grades have to be the same? Why do their criterion have to be the same. Why does a SGC 3 have to be equal to a PSA 3? If a SGC 4 = a PSA 3, how does that make one better than the other and not merely different? If SGC grading remained the same but changed their numbers from -5 to 4 would that suddenly make them better? (Answer: Of course not).

There's this sudden fetish over perfect centering? Is it just that: the latest thing? I assume many of you have seen the 'perfectly centered' '52 Topps Mantle in the current Lelands auction. The title and description are no doubt a tongue-in-cheek in this perfectly centered fetish that has swept the land. (For those who have not seen it, the card is pounded to pemmican and graded Auth but has perfect centering).

Me personally?
 

I am done with graded cards. Kinda.

P S looking for a 66 Topps Clemente Rub-offs in a PSA6. Dont really care which PSA flip.

The mistake is relying on grading company numbers as anything more than helping identify hidden flaws in a piece of cardboard. If you're relying on PSA or SGC to tell you whether a card is off-center, you're really missing the boat.

For me, I have traditionally played in the PSA 5/SGC 60 area of the T206 market. I also really dislike spider wrinkles and light creases. I have never -- really never -- seen an SGC 60 T206 card with a wrinkle or a crease. I would guess they exist, but it certainly is not common.

On the other hand, I once tried to cross 40 PSA 5 T206 cards over to SGC, and only 30 of them made it because of wrinkles and creasing in the remaining 10. That was 10+ years ago, so maybe standards have changed.

SGC has always been easier on corner wear and tough on creases, which I appreciate more than tough on corner wear and easy on creases because corner wear is obvious. Creases are tough to see.

So, I do not think it matters whether TPGs use the same numbering, provided you know what to expect by the standards each provide before purchasing a card encapsulated by one of them.

There is a slight premium paid for PSA graded cards in new flips, but not nearly to the point of the additional premium for well-centered cards. It's kind of in the noise right now. However, the tougher PSA grading gets, the less cards that get high pops and the increased value on the current PSA 9 and 10s out there.
PSA told some people at the National that the 1955 Bowman Mantle they graded a 9 was the first to get a 9 in like 20 years. So part of it is that most Mint cards from 1960s and earlier are already graded. And people are less likely to break out PSA 7/8s of yesteryear to resubmit raw because they likely wouldn't get 7s or better again. That would lead to more cards being reviewed in PSA holders, and the pop report would reflect the changes because the same cert number would just be updated with a new grade.

The Effects of tighter grading? Personally, I've decided to wear looser underwear.

Brian

And how, pray tell, do you maintain centering with this approach.:eek: