Ty Cobb Card Market?

[botn]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Hi Greg,
Thanks for your comments and I don't want to get in the middle of an argument here, but my feeling is grading is subjective and that there really aren't that many objective standards in the grading process. That's why I hate the numeric grades cards receive because it's pretending that there really is an objective and precise standard. That's why the same card can be resubmitted several times and get a different grade each time.

I think eye appeal is very important and should be part of the grading process. If a card is ugly for the grade, good chance it's overgraded. If it's "the best 3 I've ever seen", maybe it is in fact better than a 3. I'm just not a big fan of third party grading in its current form, and think it could be done a whole lot better. Not saying I have the answer to how it should be done, I'm just not a fan.

Hi Barry,

I am not sure why the op decided to start an argument with me. I was not giving my opinion on whether the grading standards were right or wrong. Only trying to suggest that most times a card has a technical flaw that renders a grade much lower than the card would appear and upon examination in hand based on current grading standards, the grade would be justifiable.

Eye appeal should play apart in a grade but beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the grading process is supposed to be an objective process following certain guidelines but at the end of the day we have people making these calls. The market has always been sophisticated and compensates where the grading process has "failed". A nice 4 might sell for more than an average 6. I see it all the time and support that market as both a buyer and a seller.

Greg

[aaroncc]

Copied from PSA website.



The Importance of Eye Appeal and Subjectivity in Grading


Over the years, more and more collectors have come to understand the basic guidelines behind PSA grading. After grading for well over a decade, PSA grading standards have truly become the official standard for the most valuable cards in the hobby. That being said, there are a host of grading questions that arise and the one basic question that comes up the most has to do with eye appeal and centering.

While it's true that a large part of grading is objective (locating print defects, staining, surface wrinkles, measuring centering, etc.), the other component of grading is somewhat subjective. The best way to define the subjective element is to do so by posing a question: What will the market accept for this particular issue?

Again, the vast majority of grading is applied with a basic, objective standard but no one can ignore the small (yet sometimes significant) subjective element. This issue will usually arise when centering and/or eye appeal are in question. For example, while most cards fall clearly within the centering guidelines for a particular grade, some cards fall either just within or just outside the printed centering standards. The key point to remember is that the graders reserve the right, based on the strength or weakness of the eye appeal, to make a judgment call on the grade of a particular card.

What does this mean exactly?

Well, take this example. Let's say you have a 1955 Topps Sandy Koufax rookie card that is right on the edge of the acceptable guidelines for centering in a particular grade. The 1955 Koufax card has a yellow background that tends to blend with the border of the card. In other words, the contrast isn't great, so poor centering may not be much of an eyesore – the borders are not clearly defined. In this case, if the card exhibits extremely strong characteristics in other areas (color, corners, etc.), an exception may be made to allow an otherwise slightly off-center card to fall within an unqualified grade (no OC qualifier). This is a rare occurrence but it does happen.

On the other hand, there are cards that technically fall within the printed PSA Grading Standards that may be prevented from reaching a particular unqualified grade because the eye appeal becomes an issue. For example, a 1957 Topps Sandy Koufax card has great contrast between the white borders and the picture because the background is very dark. It is possible that a 1957 Topps Sandy Koufax, one that technically measures for a particular grade – let's say 70/30, may be prevented from reaching that unqualified grade because the market would view that card as off-center – based on eye appeal issues. Again, this is a rare occurrence but it does happen from time to time when a judgment call has to be made on a card that pushes the limits for centering.

In conclusion, the issues discussed do not apply to the vast majority of cards that filter through the PSA grading process each day but this is an issue that needed some clarification in the marketplace. The bottom line is that there are times when a PSA grader must make a call on a card that falls on the line between two grades and that final determination is made based on experience, eye appeal and market acceptability.