Old Card Grading a boondoggle???
 

I'm pretty new here and not trying to start WW3, but I've been in the market for some old T205 and older "Braves" cards (Rustlers,Doves..etc) and so have been scouring ebay looking for the right matchup in quality to budget. I have noticed that some PSA 2's look better than some 4's and some 5's look awful compared to another one right below it. It's enough to drive ya batty!

It just seems to me that for the prices they charge the grading could be a bit more consistent. I now they are human beings and prone to error (and the old "monday/friday" issues.) But when one considers how much stock people put in grading, and how the sellers use it like granite in pricing, Iwould like to see a PSA4 and know, within reason, what i'm getting.

thoughts? opinions? pithy comments? :-)

I have noticed and noted that many times myself but have learned, yes, it depends on the grader, the mood of the grader, the time of day, how the moon aligned, etc, etc, but don't forget newer slabbed cards are graded tougher nowadays compared to just a few years ago.

I have also noticed many cards graded low only to find out there was defect in them that I did not notice.

I am not defending them as I have seen some, like Leon's 51 Mantle, that just make you shake your head, especially when you see 3's and 4's in far worst condition, but from what I have learned here time and time again is, buy the card, not the slab.

Good luck. :)

It's got me thinking I may try and focus more on raw cards that i like the condition of rather than graded cards. Not that I am turning my nose up at em, if i see one i like at the price I like then sure, but not going to make that a condition of purchase.

Here's another generalization: anyone who hates grading is either new to the hobby or doesn't remember how badly sellers behaved before the TPG's appeared. Grading is the punishment we all deserve.

My main concern with higher priced raw cards is trimming. Just be sure if you buy them raw you can get your money back if they're trimmed or altered.

Well said. It sucks but it beats the alternative. How well I remember those old SCDs full of mint (allegedly) cards.

I find it's usually this.
Even with good scans it was hard to find the flaw on this card.

Glue Residue
 

I looks like SGC is matching PSA's policy of low grades for cards soaked out of a scrapbook. If they detect a little glue residue or sticky substance they are extremely harsh on the grading.

It's interesting that SGC is super harsh on any paper loss on the back of a card. PSA is super harsh on an ink mark or pencil indentation on the back, or a card with tiny wrinkles. I would say that many collectors love a card that is beautiful on the front and well centered, like that Pastorious T206 which is awesome! Too bad SGC and PSA aren't more focused on the condition of the front. They should take into account the overall condition instead of marking off for minor flaws.

When PSA held a <a href="http://www.tradingcardcentral.com/news/2004/07/30_001.php">"World Series of Grading"</a> contest (grade 30 cards in 15 minutes) at the National several years ago, the winner was Derek Grady, who had been the head grader at SGC. That, my collecting friends, was likely not a coincidence.

There are so many reasons to not like grading: their standards, the fees, some obvious mistakes they've made, the people in charge, Gary Moser, Gerry Schwartz, etc. However, they do a hell of a lot better job at describing a card than, say, Steve Verkman and Lew Lipset used to do. If you're newer to the hobby, consider yourself lucky to have missed that.

Grading
 

Bill - Thanks for posting that link. Andy Broome who either was/is a grader with Beckett came second. I liked the idea behind the contest and the fact that so many dealers scored poorly trying to show grading was not that easy.

My issue with the contest was that they had 30 seconds per card. In some cases that makes sense but in trying to determine alterations for vintage cards that is not nearly enough time. If the grading companies really take only 30 seconds to review all cards, it is no wonder there are grading mistakes that happen.

I just got back 50 T205 cards from SGC. In general happy with the grades but compared tp other issues, they seemed to be rather lenient on the T205 cards. I am collecting T205 cards with assorted backs so you basically have to set your own standards for price and condition. When I send cards in, it is mainly for protection of the cards when they get handled.

I'm not new, I started collecting as a kid in the late 70's and seriously in the mid 90's, lost my entire collection to Katrina and am now getting back into it.

Grading was around when I stopped, but it was only really popular with the super rare cards. There seemed to be fewer of them and the grading seemed to be a bit better. I don't "hate grading" it just seems a little uneven.

Maybe it's because I only bought cards in person back then? The internet scans can make it hard to see defects I guess. But as others said, if I saw a centered T205 with an scratched back, I think that's more desirable than a rougher looking all around card that has no "major flaws".YMMV

Grading is inherently subjective. Thus, there will always be differences, not only from one grader to the next, but even as to cards reviewed by the same grader from one time to the next. I can accept this result, given the vast improvement over pre-TPG transactions. But, what continues to baffle me is the enormous disparity in values at the upper end that one would think would be more appropriate for circumstances involving clearly objective judgments.

Grading
 

[ATTACH][/ATTACH][ATTACH][/ATTACH]I personally think they should add a 5th component to the grading categories. Centering, edges, corners, surface, AND PRESENTATION. This would lower the grade of uglier, but more technically sound cards, and raise the grade of the nicer looking cards that have technical flaws. Here is an example. Mine is the SGC 4 on the left (suffers from a nearly invisible 2 inch wrinkle). The other is a psa 5 that I found online. If you gave my card a presentation subgrade of say, a 7, and the psa received a presentation sub of 2 or 3, this would help even out the disparity i think.

yeah, I think that is mostly what I'm on about. From a collecting perspective a prettier card is more desirable . From a investor/speculator perspective a more technically sound card seems to be more desirable. It's like those of us who want the cards for collectible and more sentimental reasons are at odds with those who buy them hoping to flip in 3 years when the market gets hot. (or wtvr)

No, thanks. Presentation is in the eye on the beholder. I don't care if someone at PSA or SGC or BVG thinks a card looks nice. I'll decide that for myself.

The OP called grading a "boondoggle", which means that it's phony. That's not the correct word here.

In my neck of the woods a "boondoggle" is something that generates cash while not providing much in terms of value. I didn't call it a boondoggle either, i asked if others thought it was. I wanted to know what others here thought about grading. Did they find it oh so important? Did they not bother with it? Is it a pure money generation game for the speculators or does it provide value?

It seems odd to me that someone would say "I'll leave presentation to the eye thank you" yet turn around and defend grading as being "better' than before. So, is your eye good enough or isn't it?

Best advice, as noted by these two equally graded examples.

http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n...ey%20-%205.jpg

Eye Appeal
 

Eye Appeal and technical grade are not the same thing. This is a concept that many don't seem to be able to grasp. Eye appeal can be one component of technical grade but that is it.

no we grasp it, we just disagree with it (as I explained above). There seems to be two markets that grading applies to, but it favors the investor over the hobbyist.

Not true
 

I know many collectors that buy graded cards this whole snobbery by some against those that like to buy nice high grade cards I dont understand. But it sure seems those that care less about condition have this attitude and often mistaken air of superiority like only they are true collectors. It's just not true. Now are the investors going to gravitate towards high end material of course that's where the money generally is to be made but that does not mean everyone that likes high end cards is an investor. As for eye appeal being the only thing you think should matter go ahead it is a nice way to build an attractive collection at cheaper prices but to denegrade someone who prefers both or prefers technical grade just isn't right.

Just wanted to say I live Tom Waites..." every since I Put your picture in a frame "
The grading drives me crazy too...again ...buy the card not the grade
Scott

Alas, even baseball card collecting isn't immune from class warfare of sorts...

please point out where I made any negative comments about investors? (hint: i didn't)

I don't care why anyone buys cards, if they wanna put em in their bike spokes or hoard them like gold. My point is that the number of grading companies and the variability of the opinions makes the "a PSA 8 is worth XYZ" seem a little dubious. it made me wonder if the entire grading thing was created to separate collectors from their $$$. I never intended to slight any individuals or groups at all.

people get so defensive about simple questions....

Having been around before grading, I can say that it has been a big benefit to the hobby. The nonsense that was common before grading was excessive, and usually made little sense.

That 71 topps with the obvious marker touchups? That's just how the ink bled through to the sides. (Funny how it only did it at the corners)

That 33 Goudey the guy calls near mint despite the rounded corners and crease? It's "near mint for its age"

I wasn't a big fan of grading when it began, and I'm ambivalent now. Except that it made buying over a distance much easier, and made buying easier for investors. Some of those investors do in fact know a lot about cards. Just as some low end collectors don't. Yes, investing and easier sales either by mail or by internet have increased prices for the top condition stuff.(and in some cases held it down for the lesser stuff) But those rising prices have made a lot more cards available to everyone. How much great stuff would still be in attics or been trashed or recycled because it wasn't worth much?

Everyone in the hobby has a place, it's not necessarily the place I want to have, but it's all important.

Steve B

This reminds me of this post of mine a few months ago from a similar thread, and the accompanying article from 1973 by Lionel Carter, one of the few collectors back then who had a modern attitude toward card condition:

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=217914

Lionel was definitely modern concerning condition, but old school as far as collecting as an investment.

Brian

True. He stopped collecting new cards in the 1980s when the prices skyrocketed, and he said it was no longer fun.

It was a fair question. Answering late is fair, almost everything is fair, it's a chatboard.

And in general, just remember; every member is liable for what they say. :)

Ok, now I'm dying to know. What's the flaw with the Pastorius brown Hindu? I took the card into Photoshop, inverted it, and I can't see any clear indication of a major crease, or wrinkle, from the scan. I see two spots, one on the left border by his ear, and another on the right border by his glove, that could be paper loss. But nothing jumps out at me.

Edit: wait, is that a pin hole on the left side?

Hi Bill,

It was soaked and removed from an album or something and there are a
couple of tears in the paper on the back.
Attachment 235804

It was in the SGC holder when I purchased it but it was previously in PSA
holder with the same grade.
Attachment 235805

Thanks, Patrick. It presents beautifully. That's a hell of a nice looking card for the grade it received.