Posted By:
Al Crisafulli"You still get a good idea of the condition rarity cards from the population reports."
I agree with this, but only with cards in the pre-Topps era. I just think there are way too many ungraded cards out there, say, post-1953, to get a true picture of condition rarity from pop reports.
My personal opinion is that SGC is a far better grading company that any of the others, for about a million reasons. However, I do use PSA for two sets - 1938 Goudey and 1953 Topps. No point in getting into my reasons, as they're not relevant to this thread. But I can tell you that with the cards I collect, I've cracked plenty of cards out of PSA holders and had them come back with lower SGC grades. I have NEVER cracked an SGC holder and had it come back with a lower PSA grade. Not once. Obviously, I can't speak for anyone else - that's just my personal experience.
However, to respond to Jim's last post, I definitely think that resubs are an issue. I buy the card. But if I'm getting the card slabbed, I want it in a holder that I can agree with. So I'll resubmit it until it gets as close as I think it can get. And the set that I collect more vigorously than any other - 1938 Goudey - I am responsible for probably 7% of the cards they've graded. For the most part, I completed the set with raw cards and had them graded myself. Since then, I've bought many graded examples, sold some, kept some, and built a set that I'm reasonably happy with.
All that said, I've been trying to understand how the pop reports relate to true condition rarity. Having bought so many raw examples of that set, I think I'm in a pretty unique position of being able to compare my own experiences with condition rarity with what the pop reports reflect, and I can say that with very few exceptions, the PSA pop reports for 1938 Goudey are a good reflection of condition rarity.
-Al