Buy the card, not the grade - stories

[jb67]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Or this? Wow...

I'm going with the PSA 5 all day. That PSA 6 comes in last of the 3 for me.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by jb67

I'm going with the PSA 5 all day. That PSA 6 comes in last of the 3 for me.

The 6 (the card, not PSA...) gets a bit of a pass because that's an old slab. But isn't part of the point of using a TPG consistency? That's proof that a 6 in 2005 is not a 6 in 2018...

[Econteachert205]

Here is what someone should do:

Create a new grading company that employs the following process:

1. Create an ultra detailed MRI type card grading machine that does the highest res. Scanning of all surface attributes.

2. Have scan fed into a computer program that matches it with condition similar exemplars to generate a number grade.

3. Have a human take a good look to verify.

The human should only verify that the process worked correctly (i.e. No obvious flaws or computer malfunctions). The human does not contribute to the actual grade itself. This would make getting a consistent grade from inception much more possible.

The only thing I am not sure of is whether the initial cost would be too great currently. If so it shouldn't be for much longer.

[Sportscards1086]

Originally Posted by Econteachert205

Here is what someone should do:

Create a new grading company that employs the following process:

1. Create an ultra detailed MRI type card grading machine that does the highest res. Scanning of all surface attributes.

2. Have scan fed into a computer program that matches it with condition similar exemplars to generate a number grade.

3. Have a human take a good look to verify.

The human should only verify that the process worked correctly (i.e. No obvious flaws or computer malfunctions). The human does not contribute to the actual grade itself. This would make getting a consistent grade from inception much more possible.

The only thing I am not sure of is whether the initial cost would be too great currently. If so it shouldn't be for much longer.

Agree to this COOL IDEA.

Human evaluation is so subjective and controversial.

[leaflover]

I have owned the Drysdale PD for 10 years and have not found the defect.
Hegan on the other hand has no PD or OF qualifier. If I had opened Leaf
packs in 1948 half of them would have gone in the trash.

[Peter_Spaeth]

.Maybe it's the print specks, but in hand they are barely visible.

[jb67]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

.Maybe it's the print specks, but in hand they are barely visible.

Wow!! Best looking 7 I have seen.

[MikeGarcia]

About the Drysdale , in my eyes , if the ''snow'' is obvious immediately upon first glance , then at the "8" level it gets a PD . It is visible in your scan , but maybe not so bad in hand ?

..

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by leaflover

I have owned the Drysdale PD for 10 years and have not found the defect.

The Drysdale looks like it has some light print snow to the left...but that could just be the scan. More proof of PSA's inconsistency Yawn...

[MarcosCards]

Wow, this is an excellent thread. Although enlightening, it is also a frustrating and discouraging commentary on the current state of third party grading.

I still consider myself a newbie on this forum. After posting photos of my childhood card collection (1960s Topps) last year, some of you Net54baseball veterans strongly suggested that I submit my star cards to PSA for grading. I was going to - but life got busy - and so I put it off. Maybe it was for the best. I think I can enjoy my cards just fine without them being encased in hard plastic.
Marcos