1933 Uncle Jacks INSANE PSA Grade/Comparison (Video)

[Jws57]

Hey guys - just posted this. A PSA 1 vs my recent PSA 1. Outrageous.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/8D7BRDOd950

[ejharrington]

It's possible that there is some technical flaw with your card (slight paper loss on the back) that would justify the grade. Clearly, your card is better looking overall regardless of grade.

[Pat R]

What You're calling a major hole in the one on ebay looks like an ink spot to me.

[swarmee]

I know you're upset, but if the card has water damage that isn't automatically visible, it is still poor.

[Jws57]

Originally Posted by swarmee

I know you're upset, but if the card has water damage that isn't automatically visible, it is still poor.

It's clearly at the minimum 2-3 grades higher than that 1. It's not an automatic 1 if it's has slight water damage vs. being halfway mangled.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by Jws57

It's clearly at the minimum 2-3 grades higher than that 1. It's not an automatic 1 if it's has slight water damage vs. being halfway mangled.

Crack and resubmit!!

Or, time to take it to another grader.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Jws57

It's clearly at the minimum 2-3 grades higher than that 1. It's not an automatic 1 if it's has slight water damage vs. being halfway mangled.

No it isn't. It absolutely can, and looks to, have attributes of a 1. It doesn't matter for value...someone will buy that on aesthetics. It is a great looking coupon but I can see a 1 to 1.5, technically speaking. That's just me though...btw, we never saw the backs either. They can be the reason for low grades sometimes, as we all know.
.

[Jws57]

Originally Posted by Pat R

What You're calling a major hole in the one on ebay looks like an ink spot to me.

Good. Point is ?

[Pat R]

Originally Posted by Jws57

Good. Point is ?

Well I guess the point is there is a big difference between a major hole and a factory ink spot.

[Jws57]

Originally Posted by Pat R

Well I guess the point is there is a big difference between a major hole and a factory ink spot.

You can clearly see the notch at the top shares the same exact background as that of what I deem a hole. Doesn't matter going round and round on a forum - it's just blabber at this point. But I'm glad everyone is so happy to defend PSA. It's a joke. Have fun with em !

[Jws57]

Originally Posted by ejharrington

It's possible that there is some technical flaw with your card (slight paper loss on the back) that would justify the grade. Clearly, your card is better looking overall regardless of grade.

Mine has a bad back but a 1 is ridiculous. Give me a break.

[Lucas00]

I have a '66 Venezuelan that looks like an 8 or 9 on the front too. Guess what, it's a 1.
Back damage is a severe penalty for PSA. I don't agree with it, but it's how they grade.

[Jws57]

Originally Posted by Lucas00

I have a '66 Venezuelan that looks like an 8 or 9 on the front too. Guess what, it's a 1.
Back damage is a severe penalty for PSA. I don't agree with it, but it's how they grade.

Then I concede with that after 20yrs of grading with PSA / 35 years collecting bla bla - - I've seen countless weak backs get far less penalized. Oh well.
Though it goes with the latest PSA trend over the last 1-2 years in highly inconsistent (AND BAD) grading.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Jws57

Then I concede with that after 20yrs of grading with PSA / 35 years collecting bla bla - - I've seen countless weak backs get far less penalized. Oh well.
Though it goes with the latest PSA trend over the last 1-2 years in highly inconsistent (AND BAD) grading.

You are only giving half the information only showing the front. We all hate it, but the TPG's grade backs mostly the way they grade the fronts. A blank back paper loss is pretty much (half point?) the same as a front paper loss in grading'
.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The other card is irrelevant. Post the back of yours and people can then assess how undergraded it might be.

[Jws57]

Originally Posted by Leon

You are only giving half the information only showing the front. We all hate it, but the TPG's grade backs mostly the way they grade the fronts. A blank back paper loss is pretty much (half point?) the same as front paper loss to writing..

Even if it were an even 50/50 (or is it not?) between grading the front and back - this would not be a 1. How in the world is everyone so convinced this IS a 1 when compared to the ebay card!?? So crazy!! It's staring us right in the face with holes/marks/creases/staining and mine has back damage but a great front. You're saying that also would equate to a 1? So the front and back don't share in the grade? A Mint-front card with a bad back should be a 1? Ok. (I'm not saying my front is MINT - but just an example on this logic of why mine should be a 1..)

[Leon]

Originally Posted by Jws57

Even if it were an even 50/50 (or is it not?) between grading the front and back - this would not be a 1. How in the world is everyone so convinced this IS a 1 when compared to the ebay card!?? So crazy!! It's staring us right in the face with holes/marks/creases/staining and mine has back damage but a great front. You're saying that also would equate to a 1? So the front and back don't share in the grade? A Mint-front card with a bad back should be a 1? Ok. (I'm not saying my front is MINT - but just an example on this logic of why mine should be a 1..)

Yes, if the front is MINT and the back has medium to major paper loss, technically it would grade a 1 to a 1.5, in my experience. I am not a grading fanatic though so others will know more..
.

[Jws57]

I've already stated I have a bad back (card-wise haha) - though I still hold to this card being undergraded. Shred me all you want - but the front should make up SOME - not all - but for some of the back.
(Here are all the photos actually)
Sorry - can't seem to embed. If you want them - they're at the drive:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folde...ja?usp=sharing

[Jws57]

Well - that about does it then guys...from being fiercely defensive - to now realizing I guess it's a warranted grade....unfortunate as it may be.

Thanks for all the input!! Much love to my fellow collectors!

[Carter08]

I don’t know why but I hate paper loss on the back. Someone people rightfully could care less.

[NiceDocter]

Obviously there are major flaws in the other card..... your front is very clean which means collectors almost surely would value it more than the other one. I respectfully ask if it may be faded or washed out as it doesnt seem as "pink" as the other one? In any event it is a very nice example and the PSA grade would not hurt the value in my opinion as most collectors now look past the lower grade holders to see what the card actually looks like. Theres a bunch of crazy variations as to eye appeal of "1" graded cards. Very nice card in any event.... dont let PSA ruin your day!

[Jws57]

Originally Posted by NiceDocter

Obviously there are major flaws in the other card..... your front is very clean which means collectors almost surely would value it more than the other one. I respectfully ask if it may be faded or washed out as it doesnt seem as "pink" as the other one? In any event it is a very nice example and the PSA grade would not hurt the value in my opinion as most collectors now look past the lower grade holders to see what the card actually looks like. Theres a bunch of crazy variations as to eye appeal of "1" graded cards. Very nice card in any event.... dont let PSA ruin your day!

Thanks a lot! I really love the little piece - the era - and how rare it is. It doesn't appear to be faded to me as the text is strong and better in person. Not sure if the other has the contrast way up on the photo or what really is the case.

[glynparson]

Eye appeal and technical
Grade are not the same thing at all. A card can be technically a one based on one single attribute despite the rest of it looking like a ten. That’s just how it works. I get that’s tough for some to understand but that’s how it is.

[Orioles1954]

.