Posted By:
JoannI don't think Jim was saying that X% of SETS were 8+. I think he is saying that X% of cards in any given set are 8+. So it would be X% of all T206's, but not X% of all T206 sets.
And I think what is interesting is the difference in high grade cards from set to set, not so much the difference in number of high grade PSA versus high grade SGC.
WRT the difference in high grade between sets, I would love to hear more speculation. The cards that were obtained by mail-in would logically be higher grade, and therefore have more 8+ cards. One down. Maybe the later cards (starting with the PB's as shown in Jim's numbers) exist in higher grades because improvements in mass communication made following the games, teams and players easier so fewer cards were dismissively tossed aside? Or cards in general, after 30+ years, were more on people's mental radar as collectibles?
I don't know - I'm just spraying buckshot around hoping I knock something out of the trees.
In a generic sense, it will be harder to find higher grade thinner paper cards than thicker cardboard stock, and caramel cards compared to tobacco. Alos, sets that are condition sensitive for very specific reasons, like the T205 gold border chipping, will also be on the low end.
But some of the numbers posted are less obvious as to reason, and I can't think of why they are so different. Why would AG's be twice as high as OJ's?
Thanks for posting the numbers Jim. I'll be following the responses to see what the various theories are.
Joann
Oh, and on a related topic: Doesn't it seem like HOFer's would definitely have more high grade cards than commons? Because they were the stars, the famous players, so I would think they were saved more carefully and preserved better than others. It seems like their average grade would be significantly (in the statistical sense) than commons. Unfortunately, pop reports would not be helpful here, since the tendency to want to grade HOFer's more than commons would create a bias.