1933 Uncle Jacks INSANE PSA Grade/Comparison (Video)

[steve B]

This is one of the big failings with numerical grading as it's done. For the upper grades, there's some degree of consistency. While there's differences between one card and another, most 8s will look similar. If they're different it's along the lines of "that's nicely centered, too bad about that one corner" Or "nice corners, too bad it's not centered all that well"

But at lower grades, there's lots more room for differences.



On Quillen I was expecting better than a 3, but missed an erasure on the back. (Like never saw it in over 30 years missed it)
Young was a pleasant surprise, I was expecting a 1, maybe a 2 because of the crease.

even lower grade cards can be much farther apart.

[luciobar1980]

As other people have alluded to, there's the technical grade and then the eye appeal of a card. The TPGs grade on a technical scale, obviously.

That's why it's annoying when people on Youtube compare 2 cards and are like "how is this card the same grade as this carrrrddd@*LH@JHKL!*E^Y(@*."

Now, does that mean the TPGs are always accurate and fair in grading technical defects? Nope!

You know what could be a good idea, or maybe terrible? What if a grading company offered a Technical Grade and Eye Appeal grade? Would probably muddy the waters.

[raulus]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

You know what could be a good idea, or maybe terrible? What if a grading company offered a Technical Grade and Eye Appeal grade? Would probably muddy the waters.

Seems like we need more stickers for eye appeal...

[perezfan]

This is one reason I personally choose not to grade my cards. PSA obviously got this one right, according to their published standards. But their grading scale is ridiculously skewed to identify preposterously minute (often microsocpic) differences in cards graded 7 - 10, while the variance in cards graded 1 - 4 is enormous, and all over the board.

If they evened out the standards between each numerical grade, I'd be more open to the whole concept. I've also seen little-to-no accounting for focus and registration, with many 8s having less eye-appeal than 4s and 5s. This is a huge factor to me when evaluating a card, and PSA won't acknowledge it.

I guess the bottom line is that I would rather be the evaluator of my cards than an inconsistent and often wrong third party. I realize that sellers, flippers and PSA apologists have a whole different mentality, and that's fine.

[Pat R]

If you think you got cheated by PSA on your coupon how would you feel if you were the person that sent this one in for grading.

06.jpg

06b.jpg