Does PSA Actually Look at Cards Before They're Slabbed?
 

https://i.ibb.co/39QrmHzZ/8638766.jpg
https://i.ibb.co/YFV2SLgF/Ruth-edited.jpg

According to PSA's website:

Wow.

The opinion sellers have historically been so good at what they do that it's hard to believe they would have missed something so obvious.

Unfortunately, they also play games with their "Grade Guarantee."

I didn't want anyone else to get fooled by "buying the grade" instead of the card, so I reached out to PSA's Customer Relations Center (CRC) for regrading. Sure enough, PSA realized they overgraded it, deactivated the old certification, and said they'd reslab it as "Authentic."

Per PSA's "Grade Guarantee" terms and conditions, they will:

PSA's unofficial value estimate right now for a PSA 2 is $14,093.

https://i.ibb.co/yBWS1Yxy/IMG-0167.png

I valued the card at $8,636 (my actual cost) on the CRC submission form.

PSA values a PSA 2 at $8,500, but they won't disclose how they got to that number. According to the PSA Customer Relations Specialist:

No. That would be an unnecessary bother. The fee must be paid anyway if the submitter wants his card returned.

:(

Here is the original listing:

https://goldin.co/item/1921-exhibits...-psa-gd-26jq76

Graded GD 2 by PSA (86528730). Hall of Famer. A stunning, postcard-sized collectible, capturing the great Ruth in only his second season as a Yankee. This popular and rare arcade card shows Ruth in a seldom-seen fielding pose; the name used as a caption (Geo. H. "Babe" Ruth) offers another intriguing element with respect to an important card from what was arguably Ruth's finest season as a major leaguer. Upon close examination, vestiges of defacements that appear to be faded, handwritten notations can be observed on the card’s surfaces; routine general wear affects the periphery.

Why did you bid on the card then ?? :confused::confused:

For a second or so, maybe. Why bother to pay attention or be competent, people keep throwing money at them and their slabs no matter how obviously incompetent and/or corrupt they are. If your customers refuse to expect or reward competency or honesty, why bother? PSA has it made.

I haven’t submitted in a while but if memory serves you can opt out of the qualifiers and accept a lower grade when you submit.

Unfortunately, I used the Goldin app to bid on my watched lots in that auction. When you click on the thumbnail to place a bid on a card in an active auction, it looks like the attached images. I didn't scroll down to the description, which appears at the bottom in smaller print, below the Current Bid, End Time, Quick Bid Button, Manual Bid Entry Box, Place Bid Button, Sales History, and Shipping & Handling. I generally don't bother with the description unless it's an ungraded item or it's marked "Altered" and I want to see if they disclose what the alteration is.

When I bid on a PSA card, I know that their policy is to not issue a numeric grade to altered cards. I also know that submitters can't opt out of a Marked or Miscut designation. If the grader detects those, it goes on the label. PSA has a notice explaining this during the online submission process. A card with evidence of handwriting (other than an autograph) should never receive a numeric grade without a qualifier.

I got complacent because I trusted the slab and placed a bid quickly. That's on me. I'm still concerned that PSA charges $599 per card to inspect these cards (with occasional upcharges) and they somehow didn't notice the handwriting when it was in-hand. Maybe this was part of a bulk submission with a preferred customer and just got waved through.

Interesting, because I see PSA 1s with writing all the time. If that's their policy, they never follow it.

This is their written qualifier policy:

grading
 

LOL, too time consuming !

I'm assuming there was an attempt to remove the writing which would result in "Authentic" Writing itself has never precluded a number grade in my memory.

This one got a straight five

Paper Loss on a 3?
 

Here is another. Picked this up from a board guy but didn't look close and thought the paper loss on lower right was a base. Don't know how this got graded

Nice looking card, Eric

Thanks but it’s not mine - it was almost mine - I seen it on eBay a couple months ago was gonna pursue it but if you look at the #59 on reverse there’s a “G D” Or something wrote in pencil

They apparently move the goalposts whenever they feel like it, especially for big money cards and/or submitters.

Seeing as long as they have them in their possession, in addition to the fact that they are scanning images now I would hope they're looking at them.

No one has said anything yet, but surely I'm not the only one who can't specifically tell where the writing (or writing impressions) are on the image of the Ruth card that started this thread, no??
There's a lot going on, but not sure what I'm supposed to be zeroing in on.

Anyone want to give a heads up?

Diagonally, all over the top right/center of the card. That looks like actual ink to me, which may have faded over time, but the attempt to remove it appears to be evidenced by scrub marks/resulting staining. Actually, the writing extends all the way down to his shin.

Bingo!

And why should they not? After all, the vast majority of slab buyers now think PSA's opinion is sacrosanct. Slabs are therefore treated as a fungible commodity with an 8 being an 8 being an 8. (Yes, yes, I know, I'm tilting at windmills.)

:(

With the right illumination/scanning/photogrammetry tools, I'd bet that you could decipher the writing. Would be interesting to read what it says.

Thank you!

I thought the same thing when I first looked at the posted picture. When I enlarged it, I was able to see where it looked like the writing had been. While it may be more evident in person, the fact that it is hard to see could help explain how it was missed during grading. You would hope that more time was being spent on grading cards like this, but maybe not that much more.