Vintage Grading - "Excellent"
 

Wanted to pose some thoughts / questions around that most interesting of middle card grades - "Excellent." AKA, "EX", "5", etc. etc.

EX seems to be that catch-all middle grade between cards that still looks pretty nice, and those that are starting to become distinctly worn. It's more difficult these days, what with professional grading and all the "tweener" grades. When I was a kid in the 1980's, the grades I was familiar with were NM, EX, VG, G, and F/P. At some point EX-MT and VG-EX got squeezed in there as acceptable grades. So for an Excellent card, that normally to me meant a card that still looked pretty sharp (centering was not much of a consideration) but where the corners were maybe not nice enough to be an NM card. To be clear when looking for vintage, "Excellent" condition was also an excellent find - as that meant a card without creases.

Is the definition the same today? What are your thoughts? Here is the PSA definition of "Excellent":

"On PSA EX-5 cards, very minor rounding of the corners is becoming evident. Surface wear or printing defects are more visible. There may be minor chipping on edges. Loss of original gloss will be more apparent. Focus of picture may be slightly out-of-register. Several light scratches may be visible upon close inspection, but do not detract from the appeal of the card. Card may show some off-whiteness of borders. Centering must be 85/15 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the back."

"Very minor rounding of the corners" to me is still a subjective thing. At what point (assuming the card has no other issues, corners are normally the main criteria for "EX") do the corners get bad enough to go from EX to VG-EX? For example I have this '58 Clemente which was sold as (and I would agree based on my standards) "EX" which shows that minor rounding of the corners, and a few other things, but still no "major" (wrinkles or creases) flaws. Is this an EX card? I think so, but also can compare it to a '58 Aaron that I have at home which looks very similar, but is in a PSA 4 VG-EX case.

Last anomaly I will mention for EX cards - you sometimes see otherwise NM cards (sharper corners) in PSA 5 slabs due to other, hidden imperfections. I once had a '55 Kaline that looked NM+, but had only the very slightest start of a surface wrinkle across the face of the card - which you could not see without twisting it around in bright light. It was graded PSA 5.

Curious as to your thoughts on this particular, maybe the middle of the middle - grades.

Thanks. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...a7efc8aff5.jpg



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If I were to submit that card to PSA I would expect a 4.

I would argue that this particular card has a little bit more than "very minor corner rounding". Nice card, and lots of people would probably grade it as EX, but I believe PSA would grade it a 4....maybe a 4.5.

Thanks for the opinion. I think it could go either way, because I've seen 5's all over the map before - but I don't disagree. I did not pay a PSA 5 price for it...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Cards like this are why I argue it could go either way. The corners are not markedly better than on my Clemente, and the centering is way worse. Who knows...

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...b7d958cae5.jpg


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Don't forget your, Berra is an older graded card. The newer graded cards use a hologram and the grading standard is much tougher.
I'd say that Berra and your Clemente would be a 3-4 at best,,,,,,, but funnier things happen from time to time. :confused:

This Kuzava only graded a 3. The front is ex/mt imo, but the back does have some slight spider lines to the right.

PSA certainly has gotten tougher recently. IMHO, unreasonably so for vintage cards. SGC is the fairer, more reasonable of the two.

Regards, Larryh

I agree, PSA has gotten tougher in the past few years. I am building a 52 set at an overall PSA 5 level....the more recently graded cards do appear to be more stringently graded than cards graded 5 or even 10+ years ago. Some of my older graded 5s have light creases and more corner wear than some of the newer graded, crease free 4s that I have for the set. I even have a 5 (an older graded one) that has surface wear on the front???

Like John mentioned, my peeve is when I receive an EX card and there is any type of creasing. I have seen some 5s with faint wrinkles on the back, but IMO, those should be 4.5s, not 5s.

The subjectivity in regards to corner wear does vary greatly from one person to the next. For me, on any card, corner wear is more of a peeve than centering or even (light) creasing. Some people's EX corner wear is my VG corner wear, while other's EX corner wear is my EX-MT. Unfortunately for me, there are far fewer encounters with the latter and more than I would like with the former. However, the majority of card people I deal with, their corner wear is generally consistent with mine....VERY MINOR rounding on the corners is consistent with an EX card.

Thanks all for the replies. I posted this scan in a PSA group for opinions, and of course it got crucified. Many thought it was only a 3, even with no creasing. I didn't realize that PSA had gotten noticeably tougher on vintage recently, but that does seem to be the consensus. That's one of the things I can't stand about professional grading. If the standards change and are not consistent over time, then what is the point?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I understand what you are saying, and I have also struggled with this as well, but I believe, because so many cards are now coming to the forefront, (for auction/sale) the quality of these cards are in much better condition than some originally thought possible?

Take some cards, like the PSA 10 Gretzky RC for example. That card was originally graded a 10 because it was likely the best one around at the time. As time went on, more came to the market that were in better condition so the TPA's had no choice but to be more diligent/strict with their grading.

Again, that smacks of changing the rules halfway through the game. It should be of no consequence whatsoever if a particular issue has one graded PSA 10, or a thousand examples. Condition is what it is.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

From a book published in 1987. "Mint until you examine it closely" I would think is a bit of a stretch for EX today, but this was from a time before EX-MT. Anywho...interesting:

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...3d84c261a2.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Candidly, it is all BS; totally subjective. This card has a tiny wrinkle near the top:

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...%20PSA%206.jpg

This card has the same wrinkle and got a 5:

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...pps%20Otto.jpg

These are clean:

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...1%20Csonka.jpg
http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...20PSA%205.jpeg

Nice card either way. That's what I hate about grading though. I think PSA is more of a popularity contest anymore and vehicle for certain high-end cards to sell for even more money. SGC seems better geared to the true collector.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk