|
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Not necessarily assuming it's a clerical error -- just my best guess -- and offering my opinion that it's more common than some might think.
By clerical error, I mean something as simple as a keying error. It could also be that two of the same issue were being graded at the time and the cards or flips were inadvertently switched. I see cards in incorrect holders (wrong description) all the time. Regarding keying errors, I recently had two PSA 1s returned to me that clearly were not consistent with PSA 1 condition. In fact, they were closer (IMO) to PSA 10. Just for kicks, I cracked and resubmitted. One came back PSA 10 and the other PSA 7. In this case, my only logical conclusion was that the grades were simply mis-keyed. This has changed my thinking somewhat when I see a card that appears obviously misgraded. Last edited by scotgreb; 12-26-2013 at 02:21 PM. Reason: Edited to correct clerical errors :) |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Please post before and after scans of the PSA 1s (before) and PSA 7 / PSA 10 (after). As crazy and unbelievable as that sounds, I'm certain you took detailed scans. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Before and after scans . . . note that I upgraded my scanner in the meantime.
![]()
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Following is the link to the original discussion on the PSA message board
http://forums.collectors.com/message...yword1=psa%201 Edited to add that I'm not trying to make this a bash PSA thread -- PSA cards are the foundation of my collection ![]() I'm just pointing out a possible explanation of certain grading inconsistencies that some may not have considered. Last edited by scotgreb; 12-26-2013 at 09:27 PM. Reason: Edited to add comments re PSA |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wow that's crazy!
|
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
I checked out the back scans, and I think PSA meant to put those grades on them. I've been looking at a lot of T206 Cobbs in 1-3 grade lately, just doing research, and I've found that PSA *really* takes the backs into account, especially paper loss. I've found cards that appear 6+ on the front but paper loss on the back brought it to a 1. The 1 in question here does have bad staining on the back.
Please note, I'm not defending their grade, and actually believe the 2 and 1 should be flipped. Just offering one opinion that PSA gives a lot of weight to the back on T206's. Personally, I'd still rather have a nice front/bad back than anything with a corner chunk missing! |
![]() |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Please explain sgc grading | Merrillstoys | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 14 | 03-21-2010 04:29 PM |
| Can anyone explain or help me with this uncataloged Kahns card | JMANOS | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 07-25-2009 07:20 PM |
| When will Grading Card Co.'s Consider.. | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 09-10-2007 10:51 AM |
| Can anyone explain grading and paperloss? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 10 | 05-30-2007 09:15 AM |
| Card grading | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 11 | 08-21-2002 09:58 PM |