![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I bought this in a 2 holder
![]() Cracked out and resubmitted it.
__________________
Read my blog; it will make all your dreams come true. https://adamstevenwarshaw.substack.com/ Or not... |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Wow Adam, that's crazy. It jumped from a 2 to a 7? That's ridiculous.
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I remember that jump in grades, I just couldn't remember who posted it a couple years ago.
That one was an eye opener for me!
__________________
52 Topps cards. https://www.flickr.com/photos/144160280@N05/ http://www.net54baseball.com/album.php?albumid=922 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Here's one I believe. Nicer looking than most 3's and many 4's, no back damage either.
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
I've posted this one a bunch too. Way undergraded, imo, but it worked out good for me as I got it at 3 prices. ![]() I've always said/believe SGC grades harsher than PSA. My Crandall card being one them that only graded out a 5.
__________________
52 Topps cards. https://www.flickr.com/photos/144160280@N05/ http://www.net54baseball.com/album.php?albumid=922 |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Interesting responses, thanks again all.
I'm becoming increasingly skeptical of PSA's grading consistency especially with mid-grade vintage. I looked at several recent examples of my '53 Topps Satchel Paige in the PSA Auction Prices Realized site last night. I know that grading when it comes down to technical brass tacks is more than just eye appeal alone, but still: My card is a PSA 5; I saw many 6's that didn't look as good, and many 5's that looked way worse. If you take into consideration the age of the slab / flip as well - then it gets even worse. I saw some older 5's that I doubt would be 4's today with the corners they had. Oy...
__________________
Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Currently working on 1956, '63 and '72 Topps complete sets. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
And when we begin to look at cards graded in past years, or decades, things really go haywire. I focus primarily on Mantle, and I see PSA 8s and PSA 9s of his basic issue cards in old grades/slabs that would be lucky to merit 7s today. Just browse some of the "high grade" Registry sets or VCP, and what becomes clear as day is that some cards awarded a PSA 9 many years ago are simply total head scratchers. And as humans often do, PSA seems to have made the mistake of overcorrecting; now you can submit a lights-out 8 that blows away every 9 viewable on VCP past sales, and they will give you a sticky note pointing to some minor flaw as cause for the card not even getting a half point bump. So what we have in the market are some of today's cards in lower grade, destroying higher grade cards from yesteryear on both the eye appeal and even technical grade fronts. The upshot is it gets even more important to shop with our eyes and in effect police the flips. Last edited by MattyC; 12-14-2018 at 10:22 AM. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
__________________
Postwar stars & HOF'ers. Currently working on 1956, '63 and '72 Topps complete sets. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
First card in a set - any childhood stories? | Bestdj777 | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 29 | 05-23-2017 08:03 PM |