![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I was talking to a vintage baseball card collector over the weekend. He has submitted cards to PSA to grade since the late 1990s. From that time up until 2018 or so, he was able to guess the grade of his submitted card to 1 grade above/below and was normally right on the number. All of his submitted cards were vintage, maybe half prewar and half postwar.
However, since 2019, more often his guesses were incorrect by 1 or more grades. Cards that used to be 7s are now 6s or 5s… or ever worse. In the group he submitted a few months ago, 60 percent came back at least 1 grade lower than anticipated. For those that submit to PSA, are you seeing the same thing? Have you lowered grading expectations in the last few years? Please no discussion of utilizing other grading companies, this is strictly a PSA submission expectation post. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Well I will let you know my experience in a few months when I get a couple of larger submissions back. That being said, I did have a small submission come back with lower than expected grades on a couple and very few on target but none better. Hope I get pleasantly surprised in a month or two.
Bob |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I posted a similar message on a thread last year about PSA and these were my thoughts at the time... and I still feel the same way now.
"...it looks like they're pretty accurate on the modern 'shiny' stuff and I believe they get the Poor to Good (1-2 range) stuff graded correctly, but the 4-8 range stuff is really off. I have an order of 1950's to 70's mid to higher grade cards on their way back to me right now from PSA and every single card is at least 1 grade lower (a couple are 2+ grades lower) than I've been accustomed to over the past 22 years. It seems to me that they take an even harsher grading approach to a card that is even slightly off-center. These new graders are so used to seeing perfectly centered new cards, that 40/60 off center vintage cards are getting hammered.....and it seems that they don't realize vintage cards were manufactured with rougher non-perfect cuts, as compared to modern. It would be great to see different graders for only modern OR only vintage." Last edited by Kzoo; 04-12-2023 at 12:47 PM. Reason: typo |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Some opportunistic collectors are targeting recently graded cards as an opportunity to pick them up for cheap since they are undergraded.
__________________
Trying to wrap up my master mays set, with just a few left: 1968 American Oil left side 1971 Bazooka numbered complete panel |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
LoL
__________________
Bought from: orioles93, JK, Chstrite, lug-nut, Bartholomew_Bump_Bailey, IgnatiusJReilly, jb67, dbfirstman, DeanH3, wrm, Beck6 Sold to: Sean1125, sayitaintso, IgnatiusJReilly, hockeyhockey, mocean, wondo, Casey2296, Belfast1933, Yoda, Peter_Spaeth, hxcmilkshake, kaddyshack, OhioCardCollector, Gorditadogg, Jay Wolt, ClementeFanOh, JollyElm, EddieZ, 4reals, uyu906 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't know why you guys do this to yourselves....
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Guess I am just a poor guesstimator at grades. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I would still like to know how PSA arrived at the following grade on this trimmed card.
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I think it’s more frustrating now than it’s been in some time. While I think we can all agree that “BVG-esque” grading that is too easy / reminiscent of raw grading in the early 1990’s or even 80’s is no longer the standard - there is no reason for PSA today to be grading cards with decent centering, clean surfaces and just minor touches of corner wear 3’s and 4’s when as recently as earlier in the Lighthouse holder generation - the same cards were grading at least 2 points higher on average.
I don’t submit myself, but as an example - I bought a ‘63 Clemente in a PSA 4 fairly recently on eBay. The card is not perfectly centered, but I would imagine meets the criteria for at least a 6. The surface is clean, the color is bright, and the card has three NM corners and one that I would call probably EX at worst with a light ding. I wouldn’t expect it to be a 6.5 or anything, but….a 4? Really? I have scrutinized it up and down and I really see nothing that should prevent the card from having gotten at least a 5. In the early days of PSA (1990’s - maybe 2005) I could have seen it pulling a 6. I get that the goalposts will always move in an industry where they will not change their written standards, but the “allowable” shift in reality based on subjectivity lets them get away with it. This has been PSA’s MO ever since they started. But at what point do you actually change the written rules when things seem to be missing so badly? I know, don’t answer that - they won’t. To me this just means I’ll go back to looking for nice cards first and foremost over a number on a slab. I’m glad to have my 6-ish looking ‘63 Clemente that I got at a 4 price…the lesson once again for me is just to think that a lot of credence given to PSA is silly and pointless when the standard clearly fluctuates so significantly over time. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
__________________
Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Cubs of all eras. Currently working on 1956, '63 and '72 Topps complete sets. Last edited by jchcollins; 04-13-2023 at 11:07 AM. |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
The worst part though is the arrogance they carry themselves with in regard to this topic. Nat Turner just laughs it off in every interview as if it's just sour grapes or ignorant noobie submitters. Then whoever is interviewing him just lets him off the hook because they don't want to be confrontational. Someone needs to sit his ass down with some scans of these cards and force him to accept that this is in fact going on and that it's a massive problem. The problem is far-reaching as well. It's not just that we get hurt as submitters today, but it also divides eras of slabs into buyable and must-be-avoided holders for collectors. I never end up buying any low-numbered certs because of it. It's frustrating because I'd like to buy certain cards within a certain condition range, but pretty much all the early certs are way over-graded. I buy the cards, not the grade, and it takes so many cards off the table now because of how far they've moved the goalposts since then. I've seen countless VGEX cards that I'd love to buy, but I can't because they're sitting in PSA 6 holders and the sellers understandably are married to what's on that label. It also makes trading much more difficult, because the guy holding that PSA 8 with the 04xx cert with corners that would get a 5 at most today still thinks they're holding pure gold, and if they wait long enough for the right sucker to come around, they might still be able to cash in. It just messes with the entire ecosystem.
__________________
If it's not perfectly centered, I probably don't want it. Last edited by Snowman; 04-13-2023 at 09:27 PM. |
![]() |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Submitting cards for graded review at PSA | Snowman | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 7 | 10-27-2021 09:19 PM |
Are my expectations too high? Creased vintage cards | wdwfan | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 46 | 06-27-2020 02:05 PM |
submitting 50s cards | Mike in Vt | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 2 | 09-16-2012 08:36 PM |
Submitting cards to SGC from Canada | jb217676 | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 01-24-2012 01:28 AM |
Ebay Lowering Listing Fees | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 1 | 01-26-2008 03:00 PM |