Grading Has Clouded Our Minds...

[JollyElm]

Curious.
With other things being pretty much equal, the 'problem' area is the right border, but the PSA 9 OC has a bit more room there than the straight 8 does...



...and I won't even mention how significantly wider the left side white area is on the 8.

From PSA:
MINT 9
Centering must be approximately 60/40 to 65/35 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the reverse.

NM-MT 8
Centering must be approximately 65/35 to 70/30 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the reverse.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Curious.
With other things being pretty much equal, the 'problem' area is the right border, but the PSA 9 OC has a bit more room there than the straight 8 does...



...and I won't even mention how significantly wider the left side white area is on the 8.

From PSA:
MINT 9
Centering must be approximately 60/40 to 65/35 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the reverse.

NM-MT 8
Centering must be approximately 65/35 to 70/30 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the reverse.

This to me is the "expertise" of professional grading which occasionally smacks of fraud. There is materially no difference in those cards, and had they been graded side by side, I bet would have received the same grade.

[JollyElm]

In keeping with the season, today's episode is called Eight graders a-gradin'...

(These cards were randomly placed in two rows, so there is no underlying rhyme or reason to the layout. As always...no cheating!!)

Here's an octet of 1972 #255 Julius Ervings (random screenshots of his 'Rookie Light' card) that all have at least one side pretty close to a border. All are graded either PSA 8 or PSA 9...but only one of them has an OC qualifier, just one. Which of these 8 relatively similar cards is NOT what the Doctor J ordered? Which one has an OC designation cursing it??
(The top row contains cards #1, 2, 3, 4 and the bottom row has cards #5, 6, 7, 8.)

[cardsagain74]

I've never understood their need for the "OC' qualifier anyway. It's interesting to have beckett break down the four main qualities of a card together, but I don't know why PSA only points out typical poor centering out of those four basics. Why that, but not a nicely centered 3 being "5 RC" instead (for rounded corners) too?

Just doesn't seem to be needed, especially since it's fairly obvious why a card with all other aspects like an 8 (except for some 85/15 centering) is being graded a 6