Can someone explain the grading on this card?

[ullmandds]

PSA is infallible...if they say its a 2...it's a 2.

[pawpawdiv9]

Could been submitted at the same time, PSA put them in the wrong holders

[bnorth]

Ok I will be the jerk. The PSA1 was submitted by a normal submitter and the PSA2 was submitted by 4 Sharp Corners. Just kidding we all know PSA does not give top submitters better grades.

[D. Bergin]

Well, there's a picture right there. Anybody who bids on just the number deserves what they get IMO.

[glynparson]

The 2 is over graded.

[scotgreb]

In my opinion, clerical errors account for most of the obvious PSA mis-grades -- as opposed to inconsistencies in an otherwise subjective grading process.

[ullmandds]

how can you "assume" these are clerical errors...

[lug-nut]

"Levi just paid a little more for THAT one, that's all!"

I hate to say it but he gets a lot of love from PSA, I bought a PSA 3 Napoleon T207 about 6 months ago that was unsealed at the top, I cracked it open and sent it to SGC. They promptly told me it was trimmed...which is was. I'll never do business again with him.

Sorry if this breaks the rules but I hate dishonest people.

[glynparson]

No way, I have actually submitted thousands of cards through Levi when I worked for him. I did not receive any better grading than when I submitted on my own. Levi may be able to get a review quicker and possibly free, especially if he gets a grader of death inovice, but I am sick of people on this board making baseless claims. Also one card is hardly a scientific study. If you are insinuating Levi sold you a card in an obvious cracked out holder again I'll have to say I do not believe you. Levi and I may have had a falling out but I NEVER saw anything close to that level of fraud in working for him for several years. I have had cards not cross from EVERY major grading service due to a trim job being missed. This does not mean Levi got a break nor does it mean PSA was fraudulent. As long as we have humans envolved in the process at any level their will be errors we are not perfect creatures.

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

Well, there's a picture right there. Anybody who bids on just the number deserves what they get IMO.

+1

It always baffles me...how a subjectively generated sticker has the magical ability to make some grown men blind.

[Brian Van Horn]

My guess is the grader had a little too much eggnog, saw two of the card and graded it based on the number of images he saw.

[doug.goodman]

He should get Dmitri Young to resubmit it if he wants a "10".

[auggiedoggy]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

PSA is infallible...if they say its a 2...it's a 2.

[2dueces]

Should have graded a PSA 3. 3 out of 4 corners are present.

[WhenItWasAHobby]

What I find most telling about those scans is that neither card has sold in the past 5 years and will likely be many more years to come.

[Fred]

What? Nobody's heard of the saying that "a pictures worth a thousand words". Perhaps it crossed over from GAI (originally a 4 and knocked down to a PSA2).

[Leon]

Originally Posted by WhenItWasAHobby

What I find most telling about those scans is that neither card has sold in the past 5 years and will likely be many more years to come.

I might have to rib Levi about this next time I see him. He's always a good sport about stuff. He's got stamina in displaying his cards, that's for sure. Reminds me of when I bring part of my collection to the National and put astronomical prices on them.....they aren't for sale and that is the best way to get people to quit asking how much for that doggy in the window .

To answer the first question. That 2 is not a 2.