![]() |
PSA 7 Ruth Rookie in HA
1 Attachment(s)
This card sold last night. Does the centering on the front meet PSA's standard for a 7 (approximately 70/30 or better)?
|
Visually, if you double the right border and add a little bit, it looks like it's about equal to the left, but someone technically inclined should be able to check.
|
Old serial number and would probably grade a PSA 5 today. Still a nice card though!!
https://dyn1.heritagestatic.com/lf?s...oduct.chain%5D |
They have not changed their standards on centering but are obviously stricter on overall grading. I think the centering meets the 70/30 standard they have always used for centering criteria but agree it would likely not make a grade of 7 today. Maybe a 5 or more likely a 6 IMO.
|
Well, we know who *didn't* buy this card.
|
Still a beautiful card and went for a lot less then an another 7 that sold about 2 years ago.
That one went for 2.4 million but the centering on that one was a lot nicer as well as the overall eye appeal. Whoever won this card should be happy with the price but not the consignor |
Hate the centering. Just not an attractive card. You know what I would look at every time I look at the card? Yes, the centering. And it would never stop annoying me.
Like a beautiful woman with a bad mole on her face. |
A RUTH ROOKIE and people are bitching about the centering? Come on.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Ruth
Yes, the centering does meet the standard according to this image. I wish
TPGs (and more collectors!!) would adhere to these standards themselves. There's a difference between being particular about centering, and believing that anything that isn't dead centered is somehow inferior. Someone above mentioned the card in question being a 5 or 6 today- that's the problem. It's today's standards that are off, not older standards. Great card! Trent King |
Old serial numbers are a joke! Look at this PSA 9 Gretzky rookie that also sold last night and you'll see surface damage (where it says OILERS.) Somebody paid 140K USD for this !! OMG !!!
https://dyn1.heritagestatic.com/lf?s...oduct.chain%5D |
Larger scan:
https://dyn1.heritagestatic.com/lf?set=path[3/1/7/1/8/31718873]&call=url[file:product.chain] Unbelievable |
Values of Ruth rookies are down too. So while it’s not a great 7, prices have come down from the last comp. I’d still trade my entire collection for it!
|
Quote:
|
By my measurement, there are 30 pixels on the right side (center) and 85 pixels on the left side (center). That would equate to 74/26 centering, nearly 3 times heavier on the left than right. That is worse than the current limit of 70/30, but before last month PSA 7 did allow graders to allow for up to 75/25 for this grade, I believe.
I believe it would get a PSA 6 today, as it's off-centered in both directions. And that's usually what they grade cards that are noticeably off in both directions. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
So if one sees a really lousy Monet or Picasso, you can’t comment on it?
|
Quote:
|
2 Attachment(s)
Quote:
|
Quote:
I think they are comparing the centering as it effected the price especially when you comparing it to the other 7 that sold a bit over a year ago and it went for $1 million dollars more. Regardless it is a great looking Ruth and someone is a proud owner of it. |
Quote:
That's bitching about the centering, nothing at all to do with the grade or price. Steve is entitled to his opinion, but let's not sugar coat it. |
I’m guessing it met an x-acto knife or two along the way.
|
Quote:
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...6bd562ade9.jpg |
Wow that's astonishing. Not the easiest card to find.
|
John--Thanks for answering the question. If your measurements are correct the card does not meet the STATED PSA centering requirements for a 7. That was all I was asking.
|
The Ruth would likely grade "5" if submitted today (by a common collector).
It might squeeze out a "6" if submitted by a well-known auction house or a close ally of PSA. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:08 AM. |