Vintage and PSA's grading consistency over time
 

PSA started their business in 1998. So, we're coming up on two full decades that they have been grading baseball cards. My question is this: over time, how consistent has PSA remained when grading vintage cards? I ask because it seems that recently graded vintage cards are showing far lower grades than I would expect. Am I just missing things, or have they perhaps become more critical in their evaluations?

Here's a hypothetical. Say we were to take three different 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle baseball cards, and all have been graded a "7" by PSA.

The first was graded shortly after the company began, so in 1998 or 1999.
The second was graded in 2007, or 2008.
The third was recently graded, in 2016.

If I were to compare these cards side by side, how much disparity would I see between the conditional quality of these examples?

There will always be some variation, because it is human beings that do the grading. But, have their written standards changed over time? I wasn't collecting when they started business. In fact, I've only been "back" for the past five years, or so. But it sure seems that vintage cards freshly graded by PSA are seeing tougher grades than before.

What's the likelihood that we'll see PSA (or more accurately, PSA's graders) relax those standards somewhat in the future? And will cards getting 6s and 7s now get cracked in order to get 7s and 8s in a few years? One would think that the key to PSA's reputation would be consistency over time. A PSA 7 in 1998 should be the same as a PSA 7 in 2016. If all PSA 7s are not created the same, what's the use in having a company grade cards at all?

Actually it was 1991 or 2. Over time, the perception has been that there have been stricter periods and looser periods, with now being very strict. But somehow, even with some inconsistency, they manage to creep along -- and completely dominate the industry.

PSA was grading cards in 1991.

This has always been my sentiment. However, as Peter points out, "But somehow, even with some inconsistency, they manage to creep along."

Yes, the current thought is that PSA is strict currently, especially much harder on short (MINSIZREQ) cards that used to get number grades. In fact, there are collectors of the 1975 Minis that only buy newer graded cards because they know many of the old ones wouldn't measure up to the correct size in PSA's old holders.

Some people cracking out 6s and 7s trying to get bumps or crossovers and getting hosed on MINSIZREQ or ALTERED Trimmed. I sent in 100 EX or better cards of the T51 series and was thrilled to get two 8s, 10 7s, 10 6.5's, 17 6's, etc. But these were collected over the years by someone with a great eye. Some of them were Mint, but I never expected to get such high scores.

The one thing that has been true from the start is PSA giveth, PSA taketh.

From the research/looking trying to educate myself, I have seen, undeniably, there is a difference between older graded cards VS newer ones.

Imo, all one has to do is check out E-Bay and you will see for yourself older slabbed cards are graded much higher than newer slabbed graded cards.

Seen many 4's-5's that, imo, if graded today would receive 2-3's at best.

I am not a big purchaser by any stretch, but the cards I lean towards are the ones with the Hologram, as, from what I understand, are the newest graded cards?

I have also seen, even on here, but that is based on scans/pics, some cards that are graded way too low imo.

Like what has been mentioned, the human element comes into play so there will never be 100% consistency on any given day.

1975 Minis were terribly miscut from the factory. You can open packs with cards that psa says are trimmed. The same with 1955 Bowmans.

Early "Merkle Era" SGC
 

are every bit as inconsistent if not more so than early PSA, compared to current standards, in my honest opinion. There is just a much smaller number of those graded.

Buy the card not the holder
 

I have been collecting since well before PSA and during PSA's early days. Inconsistency is the norm, not the exception. As has been stated numerous times in numerous threads - buy the card, NOT the holder.

I can confirm this as I was told by someone at SGC that if the flip doesn't have the SGC grade and the 1-10 equivalent their guarantee does not apply. If such a card is sent in for a reholder the grade can be reviewed and lowered.

Centering was almost irrelevant in those days. Not sure they did the best job identifying alterations either.

I used to think PSA was all about the corners, now they seem to be all about the centering. Of course a card still has to have nice corners, too. This in turn has driven the market to care much more about centering than they used to.

I would like to see a TPG create a set of guidelines, and stick to them. Centering is a purely visual aesthetic. That is a big time factor in what a card sells for. Shouldn't color and focus also be just as important? A card can be centered perfectly, but if the color is faded, and the image not focused, who cares about the centering?

Bill, imo, you stated the key phrase, " stick to them ", regarding grading guidelines. Each one of us has seen enough graded cards that not all 5's are equal. PSA has really tightened up the grading. I have some 5's now would have passed for 7's previously. I have also seen cards graded a 6 that were rubbish, and may pull a 4 now.