Psa no longer putting qualifiers on labels

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by Bigdaddy

Putting sub-grades on the flip and listing specific qualifiers both slow down the process and also provide additional insight by PSA as to how they came up with the numerical grade. Neither of which are in PSAs vested interest at this time.

Giving a single numerical grade with no other information is the fastest and least accountable way to get a card in and push it out in a plastic tomb.

I completely understand. As I wrote, "PSA will likely never do this."

[JollyElm]

Here's another pair of virtually identical cards. There's a helluva lot of extra room on top of the card on the left versus the card on the right, but it received a straight grade. Is that PSA 7 a 'natural' 7, or is it a PSA 9OC that was numerically demoted by a check of the 'no qualifiers' box?? There's no way to know.

(I would absolutely prefer the card on the right, because they are basically carbon copies of each other, so the 9 tells me it's perfect in every way, save for centering. The PSA 7 begs the question above to be asked.)

1969clemente50c.jpg

If you're viewing them on-line, there's no way to really tell unless there's big-time magnification available to study the corners, focus and such. Of course, if you're buying cards in person you can judge all of these factors for yourself, but the vast majority of purchases are done over the web, so (let the PSA jokes and insults fly) you have to have some faith in the actuality of the grade on the label.

[JollyElm]

Anyone have a crop? This dead horse still needs a few whacks...

1973rosecomp.jpg

[mq711]

I don’t know why the TPGs don’t put the centering % on the flip and grade the card on other factors. This could be done with AI and would separate one TPG from the others.

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Here's another pair of virtually identical cards. There's a helluva lot of extra room on top of the card on the left versus the card on the right, but it received a straight grade. Is that PSA 7 a 'natural' 7, or is it a PSA 9OC that was numerically demoted by a check of the 'no qualifiers' box?? There's no way to know.

(I would absolutely prefer the card on the right, because they are basically carbon copies of each other, so the 9 tells me it's perfect in every way, save for centering. The PSA 7 begs the question above to be asked.)

Attachment 461149

If you're viewing them on-line, there's no way to really tell unless there's big-time magnification available to study the corners, focus and such. Of course, if you're buying cards in person you can judge all of these factors for yourself, but the vast majority of purchases are done over the web, so (let the PSA jokes and insults fly) you have to have some faith in the actuality of the grade on the label.

That Clemente 9 (OC) looks trimmed. Look closely- I wouldn't trust it.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by perezfan

That Clemente 9 (OC) looks trimmed. Look closely- I wouldn't trust it.

I shared your same concerns before I bought the card, Mark, because it's a hair short, but I went right down the line looking at every one of the past sales on the PSA site, and found a pretty decent percentage of them were a bit short top-to-bottom in varying degrees. Not crazy or anything, but not quite hitting both bumpers either. (Of course, virtually every single card sold by the card doctors at PWCC was short. It was a given. SMH.) In the end, I believe the glass to be half full and maybe it was just how they were printed, since one of the positions his card occupied was on the bottom row?

1969-topps-uncut-sheet-aaron-clemente.jpg