Mind. Blown.

[rsdill2]

Just got this back from PSA today.

[111gecko]

WOW. Looks like there is a long crease on the back below the 177 that runs through ROOK then below STARS to the side..
A 1.5 though?...I'm in trouble with my cards then..
Rough grade, and the worst part is you probably had to wait 3 months.

[jchcollins]

Ouch. My condolences.

"Please Submit Again."

[quitcrab]

You want to sell it LMK. Thanks Scott

[rsdill2]

Originally Posted by 111gecko

WOW. Looks like there is a long crease on the back below the 177 that runs through ROOK then below STARS to the side..
A 1.5 though?...I'm in trouble with my cards then..
Rough grade, and the worst part is you probably had to wait 3 months.

I see what you're seeing in the scan. On close inspection in person, I don't see a crease. Don't see a crease anywhere. Only thing I see is the little spot on the 'A' on the front in ROOKIE STARS (it's not paper loss), the little mark on the back in the middle above 'w' in southpaw, and the weak lower left corner. I bought it raw thinking it was midgrade and I still think its midgrade. Real head scratcher here.

Originally Posted by quitcrab

You want to sell it LMK. Thanks Scott

Not actively trying to sell, but for the right price I would. Feel free to make an offer via PM

[JollyElm]

If it is not a blatant, egregious error/mislabeling on PSA's part, then there must be some creases or such present somewhere (at a minimum). Can you tilt it in the light from every angle and take pics to see if anything becomes apparent?? If there's nothing there, then YOWZA!!!

[ASF123]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

If it is not a blatant, egregious error/mislabeling on PSA's part

It has to be - I mean, Milton Bradley wasn't even born in 1968.

[rsdill2]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

If it is not a blatant, egregious error/mislabeling on PSA's part, then there must be some creases or such present somewhere (at a minimum). Can you tilt it in the light from every angle and take pics to see if anything becomes apparent?? If there's nothing there, then YOWZA!!!

Hard to tell because it's entombed. But maybe it has a wave in it. Which is very interesting because it definitely did not have a wave on it when I subbed it. See pics, maybe a bend in the middle and another one at the end. Very interesting. Definitely no creases or wrinkles that I can find.

[NiceDocter]

Maybe they considered it off center because of the white showing on the edge beside Koosman?? Although 2 of my 3 I pulled from packs back in 1968 have the same issue.... they are ungraded. Mine are not the Milton Bradley cards but the regular Topps issue.

[hcv123]

PSA giveth and PSA taketh away and many run like sheep (myself sadly included) to have them do it again because as incompetent and inconsistent as they are - they are a business reality!

I would agree for a card like that to get a 1.5 there would/should have to be a crease there - I would argue that even with a hard to see crease a 1.5 is harsh.

Do an interesting experiment - bust the card out - reinspect - take great pre resubmission scans and resubmit - then report back here. Be curious to see how different it comes back.

[jchcollins]

I'd totally pop that and send it to SGC. Even if it has a wrinkle you missed, that's one hell of a harsh grade. Looks like a 6 to me.

[Bigdaddy]

Very nice card, despite PSA's harsh judgement.

[ASF123]

Originally Posted by hcv123

PSA giveth and PSA taketh away and many run like sheep (myself sadly included) to have them do it again because as incompetent and inconsistent as they are - they are a business reality!

That's what baffles me as someone just coming back into the market. Why are people still playing along with PSA's game? It seems to be just a feedback loop where people go along with PSA because it's a business reality, and it's a business reality because people go along with PSA. How long can that be sustainable?

[jchcollins]

There will be people who disagree with this, but on big name / marquee cards, I think they deliberately sometimes give them ridiculous grades knowing that more likely than not, the card will get resubbed. This definitely happens with Mantle cards. Send it in, in that holder for a review - and I would not be surprised if it comes back like a 4.

[jayshum]

I'm not familiar with the Milton Bradley designation for 1968 Topps cards. Can someone explain what that is and how you can tell the difference from regular 1968 Topps cards?

[jchcollins]

The Milton Bradley cards were parallels of certain 1st and 2nd Series '68 Topps cards that were be made to be included with this game. Depending on what you read, some sources say they were actually manufactured in 1969, not '68. The main differences are the backs are yellow instead of darker / more orange like regular '68 cards. And because of the printing layout - usually on the short side of the card - sometimes there is a solid white streak / line on the end of the border - as can be seen in the OP's scan on the card that received the unfair grade.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

The Milton Bradley cards were parallels of certain 1st and 2nd Series '68 Topps cards that were be made to be included with this game. Depending on what you read, some sources say they were actually manufactured in 1969, not '68. The main differences are the backs are yellow instead of darker / more orange like regular '68 cards. And because of the printing layout - usually on the short side of the card - sometimes there is a solid white streak / line on the end of the border - as can be seen in the OP's scan on the card that received the unfair grade.

John - thanks for posting the info about the 1968 Milton Bradley cards. I'm guessing they are much rarer so probably unlikely I have any in my 1968 Topps set, but maybe I'll take a look through it just in case.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by jayshum

John - thanks for posting the info about the 1968 Milton Bradley cards. I'm guessing they are much rarer so probably unlikely I have any in my 1968 Topps set, but maybe I'll take a look through it just in case.

I'm not sure if they are rarer, but price wise I think they are more or less the same as the regular Topps cards. Here is a pic of the back differences; don't know why but this is not to scale (the cards are the same size). The MB version is on the right.

[ALR-bishop]

Unfortunately the yellow backs in the regular 68 set differ some by series and some later series have back similar to the MB cards and are often mistakenly offered for sale as MB cards, including the Mantle. When searching for them have the official CL handy . See the article referenced in the first post in this old thread

https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrE...7Q3CL5KFxgf6M-

[hockeyhockey]

ouch. almost as if the grader had a personal vendetta against you. agree with whoever said pop it and submit to SGC.

[jchcollins]

Mine. Bought raw and sent in right about a year ago. Creases / wrinkles would change the equation, but I dare say yours has better corners.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JollyElm]

Your back picture does show a wavy black line instead of a straight one. That very well could be the essence of the grade being lowered, but down to a 1.5?? Mystifying. And the card wasn't rippled when you submitted it? Damn.

[STM56]

That’s concerning to me because I have the same card out to PSA for grading right now. I’m an amateur but the only thing I see is the white line down the left edge. I wouldn’t think that would count off that much though. Examples of 1.5’s on Vintage Card Prices are much worse looking cards.

[rsdill2]

Originally Posted by STM56

That’s concerning to me because I have the same card out to PSA for grading right now. I’m an amateur but the only thing I see is the white line down the left edge. I wouldn’t think that would count off that much though. Examples of 1.5’s on Vintage Card Prices are much worse looking cards.

95% of all MB #177's have the white line. And truthfully, the white line in my card is much thinner and less obtrusive than most. It should have zero impact on the grade.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by rsdill2

Just got this back from PSA today.

Gorgeous Ryan rookie! You should be very happy to own this one. This is just another example of why I am increasingly indifferent at best in allowing any TPGer to define my collection with their opinions.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by rsdill2

Hard to tell because it's entombed. But maybe it has a wave in it. Which is very interesting because it definitely did not have a wave on it when I subbed it. See pics, maybe a bend in the middle and another one at the end. Very interesting. Definitely no creases or wrinkles that I can find.

Yes, by looking at the back I can see what may be a wave across the middle of the card.

Maybe it got damp in transit?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[ALBB]

Like that 70s song..." didn't I blown your mind this time"....

dont recall who sang that one ??

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by ALBB

Like that 70s song..." didn't I blown your mind this time"....

dont recall who sang that one ??

Delfonics 1970:

Note: This Soul Train appearance was a few years after the song was released:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYNjpZ3NAGE

Rich

[ALBB]

far out Rich !

[Rich Klein]

Originally Posted by ALBB

far out Rich !

Even more far out, and I heard this while listening to a 1989 Countdown tonight on Sirius/XM there was the very faithful remake. If you like boy bands, you'll love this version. (In reality, they were fairly decent when they did remakes)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUv4BFpLU_4

Regards
Rich