Which one is the PSA 3.5 and which is the 7?

mark evans · #1 10-20-2016, 07:55 AM

This again shows the inherent subjectivity in grading, not only among graders but by the same grader grading different cards. I'm still a supporter of TPG for many of the reasons discussed in a prior thread. But, what continues to baffle me, in light of this unavoidable 'flaw' in the system, is the wide disparity in values from one grade to the next, especially at the high end.

rainier2004 · #2 10-20-2016, 08:17 AM

Its all bullshit...

Leon · #3 10-20-2016, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark evans

This again shows the inherent subjectivity in grading, not only among graders but by the same grader grading different cards. I'm still a supporter of TPG for many of the reasons discussed in a prior thread. But, what continues to baffle me, in light of this unavoidable 'flaw' in the system, is the wide disparity in values from one grade to the next, especially at the high end.

The values given to the flips borders on irrational. Edited the rest to try to be nicer

.

glynparson · #4 10-20-2016, 09:25 AM

this proved nothing to me. all it showed was these two items had similar eye appeal on scans. In hand minor technical issues are easier to see and may explain things better. that said your card is very nice looking for a 3.5 (which doesn't mean its not accurate, again can't be sure from scans)

T206Collector · #5 10-20-2016, 10:03 AM

If there are no creases, then what is it that looks very clearly to be a wrinkle in the top of the 3.5?

Sean · #6 10-20-2016, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T206Collector

If there are no creases, then what is it that looks very clearly to be a wrinkle in the top of the 3.5?

+1 I thought that the wrinkle was clear.

Bpm0014 · #7 10-20-2016, 01:31 PM

Cards should either be graded :

"authentic"

"authentic-trimmed"

"authentic-altered"

"fake"

MattyC · #8 10-20-2016, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bpm0014

Cards should either be graded :

"authentic"

"authentic-trimmed"

"authentic-altered"

"fake"

+1

DeanH3 · #9 10-20-2016, 01:46 PM

To me all this reinforces the old adage of buy the card not the holder. The thousands that can be saved by purchasing the 3.5 vs the 7 in incredibe.

This also raises another thought I had. One's opinion is influenced by what side of the coin you're on. As a submitter, I'd be frustrated and upset at the 3.5 grade. As a buyer, I'd be delighted at the 3.5 grade. I can relate to both sentiments. I guess I'm guilty of wanting my cake and eating it too.

Edited to add. BEAUTIFUL card A.J. And I understand your bewilderment.

Sean1125 · #10 10-20-2016, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean

+1 I thought that the wrinkle was clear.

There is very obviously a surface problem on the 3.5. That's why it is a 3.5 and it isn't the staining. I still concur with you and my earlier post. Looks like a crease or wrinkle on the 3.5 and was simply missed by the OP.

ajjohnsonsoxfan · #11 10-20-2016, 01:37 PM

Hey Leon - I saw your original post before you edited and agree nor was I offended. Although, I happen to really enjoy the registry (I think it fosters a community of like minded collectors), I also try and buy the card not the holder even if that higher graded but "lessor" card would give me a bump on the list.

My post was to point out the arbitrary and inconsistent nature of grading in general especially with some issues like Cracker Jacks (and to have some fun at my expense). I think consistency is the most important aspect of the value proposition of a TPG as the collector relies on his/her experience and historical transactions of past grades to figure out value.

Sean and others thanks again for playing along. Impossible to be 100% accurate with less than stellar scans. There's no creases on the card though. The line you mention can't be seen by the naked eye and is only picked up by the scanner. It's a "snail trail" of missing color pigments on the paper similar to line across top red border between red background and white border. Anyway the reason given for the 3.5 by the grader was back staining. I obviously disagree with the grade and will march on and play the game in trying to right the wrong.

Sean1125 · #12 10-20-2016, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajjohnsonsoxfan

Hey Leon - I saw your original post before you edited and agree nor was I offended. Although, I happen to really enjoy the registry (I think it fosters a community of like minded collectors), I also try and buy the card not the holder even if that higher graded but "lessor" card would give me a bump on the list.

My post was to point out the arbitrary and inconsistent nature of grading in general especially with some issues like Cracker Jacks (and to have some fun at my expense). I think consistency is the most important aspect of the value proposition of a TPG as the collector relies on his/her experience and historical transactions of past grades to figure out value.

Sean and others thanks again for playing along. Impossible to be 100% accurate with less than stellar scans. There's no creases on the card though. The line you mention can't be seen by the naked eye and is only picked up by the scanner. It's a "snail trail" of missing color pigments on the paper similar to line across top red border between red background and white border. Anyway the reason given for the 3.5 by the grader was back staining. I obviously disagree with the grade and will march on and play the game in trying to right the wrong.

So you reviewed the card and for the review reason of rejection that put a sticky note on the back and said "staining"?