Overgraded cards

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris

I sure am growing tired of buying cards on Ebay that are not graded accurately. I would say 9 out of 10 ungraded items I buy are not graded accurately. I know it is far more times than I am unhappy with the grade of a slabbed card. Am I the only one this happens to or does anybody else have this problem?

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Some collectors still grade the old way...... and some grade the new (slabed card) way.

In my opinion, Grading has change alot over the last 20-25 years. "Oldschool" (pre slabed cards) grading was much less anal. The grading companies have raised the level. There are many sharp crease free cards out there in a PSA-5 slab. A card with slightly rounded corners and a couple ave crease used to be graded VG, now it easily could be slabed as PSA-1 or SGC-10 Poor. The difference between a PSA-6 and a PSA-10 in some (especially modern) sets is so slight you cant tell at arms length what the difference is. That sweet T214 Victory Wheat would have been VG+ or VG/EX 25 years ago, now its a PSA-2 "Good".


This card below is razor sharp and perfect front and back (scan doesnt do it justice). 25 years ago it was NRMT/MINT. Only flaw is very slightly off center R-L. No print flaws, creases, and corners are completely razor sharp.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Vargha

The PSA 5 you have is downgraded because of a surface crease and not because of centering. I like the "new" way of grading. It is more specific and holds people to account. Nonetheless, myopia seems to be running as strong as ever.

To answer the original question -- Yes, it is a common problem amongst sellers. That's why I try to bid/pay according to a good scan and a price based 1-2 grades below the esteemed opinion of the seller. As a seller, I provide good scans and very specific descriptions. If anything, I tend to err on the side of conservative grading. It's just not worth being borderline unethical . . . uhhhhhh, I mean using the old way of grading to squeeze a few extra $ out of unsuspecting buyers.

DavidVargha@hotmail.com

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I'm just glad I am not into high grade slabbed cards. I've submitted 1971 and 72 Topps that came straight from vendor boxes and a 1959 Indian card that came straight out of a pack without a blemish. Not one of these cards came back higher than an 92. I honestly couldn't tell you the difference between the 84s and the lone 92. I realize 71s are hard in top grade, but give me a break on white boarder cards. What is needed to get a grade in the high 90s? If cards straight from the pack or vending box don't cut it, then nothing it should. Or there is the conspiracy theory that says the grades are based on who submits the card.

I also defy anyone to honestly point out the difference between an 8, 9 and 10 without using microscopes, etc. Call me old fashioned, but in many ways, I prefer the old school style where you just used your eye. A wrinkle or print flaw that can only be seen under a loupe is not a problem. What's next, the use of electron microscopes to make sure that that all the ink is perfectly aligned or worse yet, the are no flaws in the atomic structure?

Jay

PS: They have a zillion grades for NM-Mint where the difference in cards is purely in the eye of the microscope holder, yet you get 5 grades for the lower end of the spectrum where there truly are a zillion different grades that is obvious to anyone without a microscope.

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

It is way more precise and way more in line with my understanding.

[Archive]

Posted By: DJ

In 2001, I had a 1991 Upper Deck Extended Edition case sitting in my garage and noticed that PSA10 Pedro Martinez rookies were bringing $200-300. I was like "Wow, for a $15 card, not bad!".

So I ripped open the case and removed the 60 Pedro Martinez cards and went through them basically with a fine comb spending roughly a minute on each card making sure there were no imperfections whatsoever.

Well I sent the five best to PSA and what came back were (1) PSA9, (3) PSA8 and (1) PSA7. Safe to say I was disappointed and unhappy at the fact that I was disappointed in the grade and lost money as the PSA8's sold for about $20 each.

DJ

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris

I agree with you Jay. As far as high grade stuff, to me there is not a big difference in what a card looks like. But much like you Jay, I don't buy much high grade stuff. To me EX is high grade. What bugs me is someone who says a card is EX and you get it and it has an obvious crease. Or how about the guy who says overall condition of the lot is EX with a few a "little" less. You get the cards and about 20% are actually in EX condition and one card has MAJOR papor loss. I guess this falls into the "little less" description. Funny thing is when I emailed the seller he tells me he was not trying to deceive anyone and I know he was. I should know by now that these types of descriptions most often are worded to "deceive". Sorry for griping guys. Just had to get it off of my chest as I just opened up three packages today and only one was actually graded fairly. One slightly over graded and the other one was just ridicules. OK, enough of my bitter tirade. I hope you all have a Merry Christmas! May Santa stuff lots of vintage baseball cards in your stocking!

[Archive]

Posted By: Mark

[Archive]

Posted By: t206King

sad isnt it. but ppl have there own type of grading. one person could say a card is NrMt, but another could say mint. i have noticed the lower grade cards, get grades that are just rediclous. cards graded 3's when it has a thick crease writing etc etc. thats why i prefer to buy ungraded cards at shows....

[Archive]

Posted By: Shannon

Theres always gone to be people who grade there own cards higher than most everyone else. When I sell raw cards I try to describe them the best I can. Noting how the corners look, centering and wrinkles that cannot be picked up by a scan.

[Archive]

Posted By: Joann

...a pileup at the bottom.

I buy lower graded cards. When higher grades are used to distinguish small subtleties, there is not much room in the lower grades to distinguish among genuine differences.

There is huge variation, obviously, in what ends up as a 1 because it is the bottom number. At the top end are the cards that are a 1 for substantial creases, some paper loss even on the back, etc. but present reasonably. Also in 1 holders are the cards that look like they've literally been used in the bike spokes. Very often I'll look at a card that's a 1 and think that the only reason it's a 1 is because there is no lower grade to give. Anyone for starting to include negative numbers? hee. Goes directly to what you read here all the time - buy the card not the holder.

Well that's the view from the bottom, anyway.

J

[Archive]

Posted By: tbob

Mark- Wow, thanks for posting that scan of the Gibson. Talk about overgraded, I have several SGC 10s in my collection and many SGC 20s which are worlds better than that card. Makes you wonder sometimes...
tbob

[Archive]

Posted By: FYS

Marcus0202

They are not always accurate, just the most accurate. Send in the card, you will get paid the money for the overgrade i.e. difference in price between a 1 and a 2 or a 1.5 and a 2. Nobody else backs up their product to extent of SGC.

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

For what its worth there is no creases, no wear, no print marks, no corner wear whatsoever. Nothing wrong with the PSA 5 Bell except maybe 45/55 centering. I have looked the card over many times in the last 3 years. I have used it many times in the past to point out undergrading, as it is the worst example I have seen. I used to own a sharp Tango Eggs Jennings card that was slightly off center 60/40 that received a PSA-4....... it used to be the worst I saw, until this Bell came along.

[Archive]

Posted By: Alan Zimmerman

am i the only one that thinks that the card Marcus posted is accurately graded? sure, i cant SEE the card, and i am basing my opinion solely on the scan, but I think the card is fairly accurate. i don't think it falls into poor-fair quality. just my opinion.

-alan

[Archive]

Posted By: David Vargha

fkw -- I guarantee that a wrinkle will show under black light on that card. Is that fair? It doesn't matter. That's what the grading companies have set up as their criteria.

Alan -- I think major paper loss, writing and vertical and horizontal creases that go through the picture don't qualify as "Good" in most people's books. Certainly not mine.

DavidVargha@hotmail.com

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

Ha ha

I do have 20/20 vision. Youd have to see it in person. I have spent quite a few minutes looking the card over along with my brother, my girlfriends, and a few others. No crease wrinkles, bumps, print spots or lines, paper flaws, dings, surface wear, dogfood stains , etc. nothing...... it is NRMT/MINT and problem free. Its not the only Red Heart card I have like that, I have another submited at same time that got a PSA-6 in the same exact shape.

[Archive]

Posted By: Alan Zimmerman

i was KIDDING. lol. u all need to have your sarcasm detectors tuned in time for the new year.

this is a psa 1: (and yes, it is my auction. so i do apologize for the self-promotion, but i was just using it as an illustration)

EDITED: on second thought, this isnt a place to self-promote, so if anyone wants to see the scan of what psa is giving a 1 to nowadays, just ask me and i will email it to you.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

Here's a card I just got back from SGC as an 86. The glare and shadows you seen in the scan are from the plastic page it was in when I scanned it. I've looked this card over again and all I can find are two minute spots of stray black ink. This is a card I pulled straight from a pack about 10 years ago and didn't leave that page until I submitted it for grading. The rest of the set looks exactly the same, but there is no way you can tell me these cards are an 86 when they come straight from the pack and look absolutely flawless to the naked eye and show no noticibles flaws under a loupe.

Personally, I think the whole 8-9-10 thing is a complete scam to part the wealthy from their money.



Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

Here are four cards - PSA 8 through 5. I think these are good representative corners for these grades. The differences between one grade and another is minute, but as you slowly go up (or down) the grading curve, it becomes fairly transparent why one is graded higher or lower than another. Of course, they aren't as consistent as they should be or I would hope they'd be (speaking of PSA), that's why cards get re-submitted. After a year or so handling tons of these Goudeys in holders and ungraded, I am finally getting to understand the differences. Now if I can only figure out the trimming issues!



Jay, after downloading the image of your card, and looking at blown up images of the corners, it does look like SGC 86 is the right grade. Better than the average PSA 7, but not quite PSA 8. But that's from a scan only, in person it could be better/worse. By the way, how do you post an image with such high clarity? I can only post images of less than 100KB.

[Archive]

Posted By: jay behrens

I host my own pictures. Depending on what I what I need the scan for, I scan a card from 100dpi to 600dpi, depending on how much detail I need. It hink this one was done at 150dpi.

This card was my last attempt at submitting a modern card for a high grade. I won't be bothering with it anymore. There just isn't any point to it when I can't seen any flaws in the card. I will hang on to it though and the next time I'm at a show where SGC is set up at, I will show them the card and ask them to explain why the card got the grade it did. I've seen cards from this set graded 96 on eBay and I can't imagine those cards look any better than this one.

Jay

I've just reached Upper Lower Class. I am now officially a babe magnet for poor chicks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Josh K.

David - can you explain how you can guarantee that there is a wrinkle in that card? are you making an educated guess based on the grade or did you once own the card?

[Archive]

Posted By: David Vargha

Educated guess. 20/20 vision isn't the key. In fact some of the toughest surface wrinkles to spot won't even be found under magnification in regular light. The UV (black) light makes it stand out instantly. IMO, some of these surface wrinkles that are so minute and so difficult to even see in white light aren't worthy of dropping a card instantly from "Mint" to "Excellent", but that's the standard established by th grading companies (like it or not). That's why the adage of "buy the card and not the holder" is so true; especially in cases such as this.

DavidVargha@hotmail.com

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Jay, I feel your pain. Next time you should have your cards submitted by a major dealer, pay him a fee, and watch your grades go up. As for the differences between a PSA 10, 9, 8, etc., I can tell you that I have many mid 50s Topps cards that are 9s and 8s and 7s. There is honestly a difference between each grade. 7s are clearly flawed, 8s look nearly perfect and 9s ARE perfect (on average). Is the difference between an 8 and 9 worth it for aesthetic reasons? No. For value reasons? Possibly yes.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

SGC80:



SGC60:


SGC50:


Also have a '34 Goudey Dean, SGC 60, that doesn't look any better than the 1911 Zeenut Weaver--no scan. Oh, there're undergrades, too. Also, a whole bunch that are right on the money.

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

What's wrong with the SGC 80 card? Are the corners supposed to be rounded? (it looks like that's the way it comes). BTW, what's the card for ignorant people like me?

On the CJ - is it the staining that makes you think it doesn't deserve a SGC 60 grade? If so, I thought that natural product staining (from candy, cracker jacks, etc) didn't really detract from the technical grade, although it does detract from eye appeal. What are the specs for PSA/SGC on product staining issues?

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

The E.R. Williams (1888?89?) game card is supposed to be snowy-white, and snowy-white ones are suppoased to get 80s. The shape is fine; it's just dingey.

The Cracker Jack is NOT stained with Cracker Jack product, but with ink--and I guess i scanned it to minimize the stain.

[Archive]

Posted By: WP

Where is there ink on the Cicotte?

[Archive]

Posted By: WP

The black on the top of the card appears to be typical "foxing" seen often on cards from that time period.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

[Archive]

Posted By: WP

Back Damge?

[Archive]

Posted By: Hal Lewis

Yes, I think ALL of the E107's in Sotheby's had some paper loss damage on back...

but I still believe that back damage should only count "half" as much as front damage.

Apparently the grading companies don't.

[Archive]

Posted By: WP

I think that when there is a large area affected with paper loss on the reverse, the card should get severely penalized.

[Archive]

Posted By: Julie Vognar

in the Cicotte card; there is some product stain on tbis cap.

[Archive]

Posted By: warshawlaw

Jay: the card is noticeably o/c L/R and T/B. That alone takes it from "mint" to something lesser. Sorry, but to get the big 9-10, the card has to be darn near perfectly centered. Regardless of what the services say about tolerances, the reality is that they only issue the big ones for perfect centering when it comes to mere mortals like us.

[Archive]

Posted By: identify7

Warshawlaw: regarding mortals: I remember when I first started viewing my (leftover from childhood) 50s Topps regarding centering. As was dictated by Becketts. It took a while, but eventually I noted the difference.

To this day, I do not agree with their (ie. the grading company's) emphasis on this manufacturing characteristic. That is, I agree with Lew Lipsett: If it is as manufactured, it is mint.

Edited to add: I did not contact Lew to request that he restate this philosophy, again.

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob S

Hi Chris,

Get yourself a lighted 8+ loop, and a nice UV lamp, and you will, with effort, become a top flight grader.

Interestingly, I got my best buys off the eBay platform, by buying "UNDERGRADED" cards, (meaning non-slabbed, but undergraded by the seller)

Best regards.

Bob S