Quote:
Originally Posted by Shankweather
I collect Cubs RCs from all eras. I use the PSA population report to decide which grades to pursue. I try to get cards that grade higher than 80% of the total pop.
So for a 77 Andre Dawson that means a PSA 9. The total pop is 3,690, with 50 10s, 458 9s, 57 8.5s, and 1,529 8s. I assume my 9 is average for its grade, so that means there are (458/2)+50=279 cards graded higher than my card. Which means my card grades higher than 92% of the total pop of 3,690. The 8 would only grade higher than 64%, so 9 it is.
Obviously older cards will mean a lower grade. The same math for a 33 Goudey Gabby Hartnett gets you a PSA 6.
So you could use the same process, and adjust your target % to match your budget. 70%, 50%, whatever.
|
I didn't know there was going to be math...
For the cards the OP listed, Henderson is a different animal than the rest. Pre-Fleer/Donruss, usual 1970s Topps horrible QC. I have this one and I am happy with it:
Of course, part of my happiness with it is that I pulled it from a pack when I was 14 years old...
I would go after the Henderson in 8 or better, the rest I'd try for raw. Frankly, the minute differences between grades on these post-1980 issues is frustrating for me. I don't see it and I don't care to see it. An 8 often looks just as nice as a 10 and there are tons of beautiful raw cards out there. I have almost none of them except raw. I think the goal should be to get cards that look undergraded rather than labeled a 10.