Grading Question

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

I've read your post a few times trying to understand what you're saying, but I guess I'm missing it. Why are you comparing the Dmitri Young Seaver to the Seaver that is the topic of this thread? You say they have the same serial number, but the serial numbers are different. They're 2 different cards. I don't follow.

Seaver that is the topic of this thread...



Dimitri Young Seaver...

You are right...being dyslexic has it disadvantages and I transposed some of the the 9s, 7s and 4s in the serial number and reading the serial numbers side ways did not help the dyslexia.

Since the thread was about how this Seaver (ebay) card was graded a 10 with a diamond cut and less than perfect centering, I am still of the opinion from my original post in this thread, that due to both frosting on the case and the tilt cut that the card in this holder was not graded by PSA as 10(even though Dmirti's Seaver RC was graded a 10 with a slight tilt).

[vintagetoppsguy]

Oh, ok. I thought I was losing my mind

I disagree with you though on the eBay Seaver. I have seen many cases that were tampered with and the card was replaced and this is definitely not one of them. If so, it would have way more frosing - all around the edges. I think what you're seeing is just maybe where the slab didn't seal proplerly.

That said, I don't think either Seaver is worthy of a 10 with those diamond cuts. A card with a diamond cut should never, ever receive a 10. Best case, it should be a 9 MC. Why does PSA have a MC qualifier if they're not going to use it? And the MC qualifier isn't like the OC qualifier where you can just request "no qualifiers" - if it's MC, they're supposed to label it as such. Just another reason there are no PSA cards in my collection.

[bnorth]

I am with Larry(savedfrommyspokes) on this. If a PSA holder has any and I do mean any frosting stay far far away from it. I can crack them easily leaving very little to no frosting. It is very easy. The bottom left corner of the Seaver card slab is scary looking to me.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with the card, just saying it is crazy easy to crack a slab and leave way less frosting than it has.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I can crack them easily leaving very little to no frosting.

Of course you can. Cracking them is not the problem. It's putting them back together that's the problem. I guarantee you that you can't crack a PSA slab, put it back together (super glue or any other method you want to) and not leave frosting all the way around the edges. Try it on a cheap card. You'll see.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Of course you can. Cracking them is not the problem. It's putting them back together that's the problem. I guarantee you that you can't crack a PSA slab, put it back together (super glue or any other method you want to) and not leave frosting all the way around the edges. Try it on a cheap card. You'll see.

I have never tried to put one back together. Will have to buy a few cheap ones and try it.
Do you know why glueing it back together would made it frost?

Edit: The cards David pictured are not in the same holder. Same serial# but not the same holder.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Do you know why glueing it back together would made it frost?

If I understand the process correctly, it's not really the glueing back together that makes it frost. When PSA slabs a card, it is sonically sealed. They don’t use any adhesive or anything to join the two halves of the slab. Now, when you crack a slab in two, there are tiny amounts of plastic that transfer from each piece (half of the slab) to another. Even if you get a clean break and both pieces are intact, there is still some amount of transfer. When you go to reseal the case, we don’t have the same technology that PSA does to sonically re-seal the case. Even if we did, the plastic transfer is what causes the frosting and it would still show through anyway. Glue just makes it even worse.

Originally Posted by bnorth

Edit: The cards David pictured are not in the same holder. Same serial# but not the same holder.

What makes you say that?

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

If I understand the process correctly, it's not really the glueing back together that makes it frost. When PSA slabs a card, it is sonically sealed. They don’t use any adhesive or anything to join the two halves of the slab. Now, when you crack a slab in two, there are tiny amounts of plastic that transfer from each piece (half of the slab) to another. Even if you get a clean break and both pieces are intact, there is still some amount of transfer. When you go to reseal the case, we don’t have the same technology that PSA does to sonically re-seal the case. Even if we did, the plastic transfer is what causes the frosting and it would still show through anyway. Glue just makes it even worse.



What makes you say that?

Because the Gem MT 10 location on the slip.
The glueing make sense the way you explained it. Thanks

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Edit: The cards David pictured are not in the same holder. Same serial# but not the same holder.

You're right, the labels are different. It was probably re-slabbed. It's definitely the same card though. You can tell that from the back.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Oh, ok. I thought I was losing my mind

I disagree with you though on the eBay Seaver. I have seen many cases that were tampered with and the card was replaced and this is definitely not one of them. If so, it would have way more frosting - all around the edges. I think what you're seeing is just maybe where the slab didn't seal properly.

That said, I don't think either Seaver is worthy of a 10 with those diamond cuts. A card with a diamond cut should never, ever receive a 10. Best case, it should be a 9 MC. Why does PSA have a MC qualifier if they're not going to use it? And the MC qualifier isn't like the OC qualifier where you can just request "no qualifiers" - if it's MC, they're supposed to label it as such. Just another reason there are no PSA cards in my collection.

Dyslexia aside, two other things about the label are concerning....while the bar code is legit, on no other PSA Seaver RCs (that I viewed on ebay, etc) graded post 1/2 grade does the barcode and serial number nearly touch the bottom red edge of the label. Some labels have at least a slight amount amount of white between the barcode and serial number(like the D Young Seaver RC), while others have more. Compared to the others I viewed, the bar code and serial number on the ebay PSA 10 Seaver are sitting on the bottom red line.

Also, the "PSA" on the top red border is partially obscured by the top edge of the case. While I have some PSA cards in my collection that the word "PSA" is right at the edge of the top frame, I found none where the top edge of PSA is partially obscured(I randomly flipped through a few hundred of the 6000 I have graded) by the top edge of the case.

I still can not get over why someone selling a $25-40K card would do so with a glaring crack in the holder. Why would this card not be reholdered? It would be like a car dealership selling a new car with a glaring crack in the windshield.

Finally, here is a link to an article concerning some high dollar fake PSA cards, and while some of the fakes have more frosting than the Seaver card, some in the article have no frosting. A PSA 10 Seaver RC is a more valuable card than some of the cards mentioned in the article

http://bbcemporium.com/california-craigs-list-psa-scam/

[vintagetoppsguy]

No disrespect to anybody, but some of you need to educate yourselves on this matter. The card has not been tampered with. It's the same card that sold in Memory Lane 4/4/09 and the same card that sold in MileHigh 2/14/08. Here are the scans...

Memory Lane 4/4/2009...


Mile High 2/14/2008...


Same card today as it was pictured nearly six years ago. Nothing's changed. Again, no disrespect to anyone, but to infer that a Top Rated seller with over 2400 feedback (all 100% positive) is selling tampered/replaced cards is very negligent IMO.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

No disrespect to anybody, but some of you need to educate yourselves on this matter. The card has not been tampered with. It's the same card that sold in Memory Lane 4/4/09 and the same card that sold in MileHigh 2/14/08. Here are the scans...

Memory Lane 4/4/2009...


Mile High 2/14/2008...


Same card today as it was pictured nearly six years ago. Nothing's changed. Again, no disrespect to anyone, but to infer that a Top Rated seller with over 2400 feedback (all 100% positive) is selling tampered/replaced cards is very negligent IMO.

You are right David, the cards look identical in the scans....and except for the frosting along the right edge of the 09 auction card and the ebay card being slightly different appearing in the scans, the holders look identical.

This may just be a coincidence, but also sold in the same April 09 auction was a Fisk RC that this same seller is now offering for sale also. The image from the 09 auction may have been photo shopped as several print defects on the front of the Fisk RC offered on ebay do not appear on the 09 image. On the ebay card, when the image is enlarged on ebay, there is a light scratch(could be on the case, but to appears to be on the card) to the left of Cooper's head and a small print defect on the "R" in First Base" under Cooper's image. Again, this could be coincidence and caused by the editing of the image at the auction house and/or these defects may not be evident in the 09 image because of image quality.



For me, it is still hard to believe that either the Seaver with it's cut or the Fisk with the scratches and print defects were graded as 10s. If I were ever in the market for either of these cards in that high of a grade, these two 10's would not be my choice.

I am certainly not accusing the seller of anything.....he may have received these cards as is and is acting on good faith in selling these. He may be selling these cards for a consignor for all we know.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by savedfrommyspokes

For me, it is still hard to believe that either the Seaver with it's cut or the Fisk with the scratches and print defects were graded as 10s. If I were ever in the market for either of these cards in that high of a grade, these two 10's would not be my choice.

Exactly. No way is that card (or Dimitri's) worthy of a 10. IMO, the best either should have received is 9 MC (and that would be stretching it). That's why I stay away from PSA cards. I know some people like them, it's just a personal choice for me. If I'm looking to buy a graded card, I feel like I can get an SGC card that is a much nicer card and usually for a lot less than it's PSA counterpart.

[glynparson]

card cut square but picture is on an angle it is for cards so off center they are usually 95-5 or worse on front and 100-0 or worse on back. They generally do not slab cards that are the other type of miscut where they have abnormal shapes, they occasionally make exceptions to this rule and they would have to explain the whens and whys of that. I do not think the card deserves a 10 but to say it deserves an mc qualifier is not correct either.

[savedfrommyspokes]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Exactly. No way is that card (or Dimitri's) worthy of a 10. IMO, the best either should have received is 9 MC (and that would be stretching it). That's why I stay away from PSA cards. I know some people like them, it's just a personal choice for me. If I'm looking to buy a graded card, I feel like I can get an SGC card that is a much nicer card and usually for a lot less than it's PSA counterpart.

When building my sets, I bought 8's for both of these cards, and IMO both show nicer than these two cards in question, at least in my eyes. While I collect both raw and graded cards, like many I prefer raw. As others have said in this thread, when buying a graded card buy the card, not the grade. With my sharp looking 8's, I literally spent pennies on the dollar(as compared to these two sloppy looking 10s) to have two great looking cards