PSA 2 with the Heart of a PSA 5
 

Long story short, I bought the below card for $63 on ebay this afternoon. When I saw my winning price, it seemed like a steal to me. although my collection normally adheres to pretty strict PSA 3-4 guidelines, in my eyes, this card was a PSA 5 if not for subtle (albeit somewhat large) crease in the middle. I tend to avoid creases at all costs, but to me the overall quality of the card totally trumped the somewhat visible crease (particularly for a 2 grade).

This got me thinking, is 2 a crazy grade for this card (or others like it)? Or is it really a pretty cut and dry rule of PSA that any creased t206 cannot get higher than a 2? I have seen so many PSA 3's who's overall condition and appeal seem worse than other 2's with a slight crease in them. Maybe I have my rose colored glasses on, but I feel this card deserves alot better grade.

I was wondering what everyone's thoughts were about how good of a deal I did/did not get, and a more general question on how you view creases in terms of grading and overall card appeal?

Cheers!

I think that is a solid '2'. Let Sonny show you HIS '2' though. We subbed one in the group sub!

https://imgsrv.sellersourcebook.com/...jpg?1660339633
https://imgsrv.sellersourcebook.com/...jpg?1660339662

Ha! that 2 grade seems criminal...even worse than mine. Did they potentially give a 2 instead of an A for trimming? Obviously hard to tell from a scan, but the card seems a bit short for the holder. Confusing since the card looks pretty flawless.

I always think these kinds of threads are a little insane, no offense. There's only so much a 2D scan can show! Either of these card could have indentations we can't see.

It looks awfully short and likely trimmed to my eyes too. But I am not seeing what got it 2, there must be a wrinkle or crease I can’t see.

PSA 2 with heart of a 5
 

Some of these comments are a perfect example of what has gone wrong with
grading (in my opinion, anyway). If people "can't see" flaw "x", how in the
*@$#* is it a devastating flaw in the first place? If the grader has to look
THAT hard, how does the barely detectable flaw cripple the grade? Reminds
me of Seinfeld episodes in which Jerry had to hunt for the most absurd reason
to fault a new love interest. In our cases, we are now going out of our way to
find "flaws" we can't see, then questioning why the card hasn't been roto
rooted by some dude with an xray machine and an electron microscope!
Some of us are asking the wrong questions.

Trent King

Psa 2
 

That Conroy is a great card, and you got a good deal on it. I like the centering and the corners.

Regarding the Thebo, I've noticed that PSA will downgrade a T206 to a PSA 2 if there is any evidence of glue residue from scrapbook removal. You can feel the residue with your fingers but often can't see it in a scan. I've seen a few where I was able to soak off the residue and send it back in for a higher grade. If you can't see any wrinkles and can't feel any residue or indentations after you crack it out of the case, then submit it again to PSA for better results. I had one PSA 2 that turned into a PSA 6.

Psa 2
 

That Conroy is a great card, and you got a good deal on it. I like the centering and the corners.

Regarding the Thebo, I've noticed that PSA will downgrade a T206 to a PSA 2 if there is any evidence of glue residue from scrapbook removal. You can feel the residue with your fingers but often can't see it in a scan. I've seen a few where I was able to soak off the residue and send it back in for a higher grade. If you can't see any wrinkles and can't feel any residue or indentations after you crack it out of the case, then submit it again to PSA for better results. I had one PSA 2 that turned into a PSA 6.

Thanks! Appreciate the input. That’s great advice regarding the glue. I have another McIntyre that looks flawless but got a 1.5 because of major glue on the back. Been trying to get up the courage to crack and soak it (I’ve never done it before), but hopeful it’ll get me a way better grade.

Couldn’t agree more, and I think you articulated the entire point of my post better than me. The fact that I was scrolling through the endless rough looking raw cards on eBay and immediately stopped and thought “wow that one looks way better than everything else”, should be an indicator that a 2 is a tough grade to the naked eye. Seems that sometimes we’re so focused on the minutia that the grading scale can miss the mark in the common sense department. Just glad im not the only one with that sentiment!

I've gotten grades as high as 6 with subtle surface wrinkles and 3's and 4's with light creases used to be fairly common

I can’t disagree more technical grade and eye appeal should be two different things and have little effect on each other. The difference should be in price not grade. A two that looks like an 8 should sell at a premium but technical grade shouldn’t be improved. They aren’t the same thing.

These get bought up very fast great thread

Here’s one of mine. Only issue I see is the small staining at the top. I have a lot of these type cards in my collection. Usually at somewhat of a discount because of the grade (some one else’s opinion), I would pick these type of cards up all day long.

Danny

I've submitted a lot of Polar Bears, and unless there's something else, that would very likely come back with a 3/3.5. I can pick out some very minor chipping (I think) and of course registry misalignment, but those are allowed, especially when the everything else is strong.

Crease and paper loss on back cause the grade. Looks like a nice card for the $$ though.

++1