[drcy]

My advice was just for a single new collector if he asked.

Just one thing that I would do hobby wide is to estimate is the margin of error just in assigning the grade, for example as exemplified as through all those resubmissions to get a different grade, and put that margin of error on the label. In science, identifying and expressing the margin of error is integral and essential when communicating results. If a label said "ExMt 6 with margin of error of 5%" that would change things quite a bit.

If with numbers people, this margin of error is well known and talked about, if indirectly. There are those who resubmit to get a different grade, people who say "Do you this could get a bump?" and people who say one card looks better than another though in the same number grade. All I'm saying this margin of error should be explicitly expressed on the product for everyone to see, and for this margin of error be expressed in all calculations and considerations.

Everything-- in science, life and grading-- has a margin of error. There is nothing wrong with that. The problem is when people, and a system, act as if there is no margin of error.

And would that margin of error have to be reflected in the registry numbers? Of course.

Would it change pricing on many cards and all that? Probably, but so be it. But much of the hobby is based on bad math and statistics.

Do I think this will happen? Of course not. The collectors would fight this more than the graders. PSA registry people would probably have a stroke.

Another practical and specific fix would be there should be formal grades for photographs. And I don't say that as some vague, generalized rule, but for specific reason.