Grading discussion- Revolutionizing :) the hobby...

[barrysloate]

And let me say I also agree with Jimmy that I think the "grading" companies should only authenticate cards and nothing more. To me the numerical grades are virtually worthless. Detecting subtle alterations is a huge asset for the hobby; assigning a numerical grade is nothing more than an opinion, and every advanced collector could render the same, or virtually same opinion that a grader could. All it takes is a little experience handling cards. But since those numbers will never disappear, then the next best solution is to get them right.

[oldjudge]

Barry--We both know that doing away with grades will never happen. Without registry sets PSA could close up shop.

[barrysloate]

Jay- you touched on a very good point. Is the set registry out there to help collectors, or to keep the grading services in business?

[Leon]

BTW, the point of my topic was not to propose a new grading company, but to help make the top 3 current one(s) better. I personally don't think we need another grading company but that too could be a debate for some.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I disagree to an extent with Barry. If we could view and handle cards before we bought them, and examine them with a loupe, then yes numerical grades would be irrelevant, we could grade our own. But buying online, there are many things one cannot see in a scan that a grade clues us in to.

[thekingofclout]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I disagree to an extent with Barry. If we could view and handle cards before we bought them, and examine them with a loupe, then yes numerical grades would be irrelevant, we could grade our own. But buying online, there are many things one cannot see in a scan that a grade clues us in to.

And vice versa...

[barrysloate]

Fine. Then here are some suggestions to improve what we already have:

1) Make absolutely certain that altered cards do not find their way into holders. I can't even count the number of high grade cards I've handled that were graded by one of the big three that were short. Nearly all those short cards are trimmed. Identify them the first time around and keep them out of holders.

2) Grade cards as absolutely carefully and accurately as possible. Sometimes I wonder if some percentage of cards are deliberately undergraded in the hopes of getting resubmissions. Grading can never be done perfectly but it can be a lot better than it is now. Everyone in the hobby has heard horror stories about grading: one of my favorite is a major ebay dealer told me he resubmitted a 7 because he felt it was undergraded. It came back a 6. He submitted it again and this time it came back a 5. If the same card can be a 5 or 6 or 7 on different submissions then there is a problem with the system.

3) Get a better understanding of photographic cards, especially Old Judges. Like it or not, they are different than other baseball cards. A very light card can never be a 7 no matter how sharp the corners are. Likewise, a card with a gem quality photo should never be a 1 even if an expletive is written on the back. These cards demand a little different approach and the first company that recognizes this will be ahead of the curve.

[barrysloate]

Peter- could you buy a card online if it had an adjectival grade, such as Very Good or Excellent? I'll agree that scans are not always clear enough. I just think that numbers denote a level of accuracy that does not really exist.

[Anthony S.]

Leon,

If the system ain't broke, don't fix it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

I can't even count the number of high grade cards I've handled that were graded by one of the big three that were short. Nearly all those short cards are trimmed.

At the risk of incurring the wrath of the trade association, I could not agree more.