Best looking PSA 1 card ever? Show 'em!

[tschock]

Figured I'd start a thread lamenting PSA's grading practices, as this seemed like a novel idea. But hopefully with a twist.

Just got back a batch of cards from PSA, and while most were better than expected, of course there would be a few head scratchers. This graded a 1, even though one in worse overall condition (with similar border chipping) got a 2, and one got a 5 MC with obvious chipping since it totally broke the black outline in a few places.

Larger images available as:
https://imageshack.com/a/img921/3681/69JjBw.jpg
https://imageshack.com/a/img922/4531/PcPfK3.jpg

In any case, for bragging rights alone, show us you most head scratching PSA 1s (or SGC 10s).

[swarmee]

Still a pretty valuable card with eye appeal. Yeah, there is a lot of chipping or paper loss on the right side of that card. Maybe a pinhole (almost closed up) at the top center? That would easily explain the 1, however there are now some instances of pinholes getting 2s, including one I just got back.

[commishbob]

I'm probably out in left field on this given how few graded cards pass through my hands but these two happen to be right next to me at the moment. In the scan and in person the Mantle presents better that the Pierce. The crease does Mickey in.

img002.jpg

[brob28]

Not a PSA 1, but close enough, card has a slight crease, you can see it as a vertical white line in Mick's cap over his left eye.

[MattyC]

[robsbessette]

Tape residue along the top. Doesn't bother me one bit. Popped it from the case and it looks amazing in my binder.

[ronniehatesjazz]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Whoever graded that card should be barred from the industry!!!!

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by MattyC

That is insane! What, is the back peeled off or something? a 1?

I just had grades pop today - mostly very disappointed and shocked. I will post scans when I receive.
At best I think PSA is more inconsistent than ever!!

[MattyC]

Yep, back has lots of gunk on it. Still, all I ever look at on my cards is the fronts. For the corners on such an old card to be that well preserved is really cool.

[CW]

It's tough to follow up Matt's sweet Jackson, and this next card maybe isn't the best 1 ever, but it's a good one. This one has a few small spots of paper loss on the reverse.

[sthoemke]

Originally Posted by tschock

Figured I'd start a thread lamenting PSA's grading practices, as this seemed like a novel idea. But hopefully with a twist.

Just got back a batch of cards from PSA, and while most were better than expected, of course there would be a few head scratchers. This graded a 1, even though one in worse overall condition (with similar border chipping) got a 2, and one got a 5 MC with obvious chipping since it totally broke the black outline in a few places.

Larger images available as:
https://imageshack.com/a/img921/3681/69JjBw.jpg
https://imageshack.com/a/img922/4531/PcPfK3.jpg

In any case, for bragging rights alone, show us you most head scratching PSA 1s (or SGC 10s).

That is a super nice card.

Unless there is a pinhole or some kind of surface anomaly, I would guess that the PSA Inputter pressed "1" instead of "4" on the computer's keypad and the error wasn't caight.

I would send back to PSA for reevaluation.

[GasHouseGang]

Originally Posted by sthoemke

That is a super nice card.

Unless there is a pinhole or some kind of surface anomaly, I would guess that the PSA Inputter pressed "1" instead of "4" on the computer's keypad and the error wasn't caight.

I would send back to PSA for reevaluation.

It appears from the scan that there's paper loss all the way down the front right hand side of the card. If that's true then the grade is accurate.

[tschock]

Originally Posted by GasHouseGang

It appears from the scan that there's paper loss all the way down the front right hand side of the card. If that's true then the grade is accurate.

You are correct, David. However I have a similar one graded as a 2 with the same paper loss down the left side. And then this one for comparison:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/142980282359

All 3 are from the same submission batch. The inconsistency for me is the head scratcher.

All in all, I still think it's great looking "Poor" card.

[MattyC]

Good Lord that Evers and Ruth are stunners.

[Leon]

Always thought this was a great looking 1.5. So much so I have owned it 2x.