 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
06-01-2018, 11:51 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Successful transactions with peter spaeth, don's cards, vwtdi, wolf441, 111gecko, Clydewally, Jim, SPMIDD, MattyC, jmb, botn, E107collector, begsu1013, and a few others. 
|
|
#2
06-02-2018, 12:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#3
06-03-2018, 02:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Last edited by bostonmarathonman; 06-03-2018 at 02:15 AM.
|
|
#4
06-03-2018, 06:59 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Here's some additional simple math that further says this system is B.S.
If average as defined by pwcc's own website is 50% of the population, shouldn't below average and above average each be 25% of the remaining population (basic normal population curve)? You can further breakdown either or both of those population areas into as many pieces as you want, ie. above average, exceptional, high end, etc. but they should sum to 25% each. PWCC has somehow found it possible and proper to invalidate the immutable tennents of math/statistics by having below average contain only 20% of the population and the entire area deemed higher than average comprise 30% of the population. Last edited by iwantitiwinit; 06-03-2018 at 07:13 AM.
|
|
#5
06-03-2018, 07:53 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
HE is for the technical grade. PQ is for the eye-appeal. The hobby needs this.
|
|
#6
06-03-2018, 08:25 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
As a consignor, I’m glad to see them do everything possible to maximize sales. As a buyer, I don’t care how they label anything (or how a grader grades anything).
|
|
#7
06-03-2018, 09:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I posted this in a thread when I first joined Net54 (and seen it discussed in other threads as well) but I'll say it again. It absolutely blows my mind that multi-million dollar companies make these assessments without any, or maybe a minimum of, 21st century technology. We all know even a 1 pt change in a TPGs grading of a card can have huge ramifications in that cards value. Just looking on eBay today, a 1987 Donruss Greg Maddux RC SGC 98 is about a $80 card - SGC 100 is a $600-800 card. And that's a modern rookie - we saw the same thing at HA with the PSA 8.5 and 9 Mantle 52 Topps cards. I know everyone who saw the 9 raves about the card and from the scans, I agree, but that's something like a $1.6 million change over 1/2 point grade. Not even getting into the discussion of TPG changing standards over time.
My background is in engineering and I've seen quality related equipment that can measure down to the 1/100 th of a mm. It's impossible to believe that there is not scanning software available that could grade a card electronically (corners, centering, etc). You could also have permanent storage of the scan for any future needs. Maybe things like focus, clarity would still be subjective but the technology is out there to make something this important and $ related as objective and scientific as possible. I may be misinformed about how cards are currently graded by the TPGs and I hope I am, but no matter how experienced or trained a grader may or may not be, grading solely by visual inspection should have been abandoned in the last century. Rant over...Carry on 
|
|
#8
06-03-2018, 09:34 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
As far as I can tell this is just a gimmick for PWCC to pimp PSA 3s and 4s and try to convince people they are worth more than they are worth. Good eye appeal in the real estate business usually means nice looking house but it’s located right behind the train tracks.
|
|
#9
06-03-2018, 09:38 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I definitely agree with their "point" and why they do this. But at the same time, leave some work and responsibility to the eye of the beholder.
|
|
#10
06-03-2018, 12:43 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#11
06-04-2018, 06:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Being a clemente collector- I just came across a new "premium quality" listing. A 1958 Topps Clemente SGC 7.5 - the card certainly is well centered with sharp corners - but is significantly out of focus- enough to bother my personal "eye appeal" test - thus the 7.5 from SGC and probably a lower grade from PSA ...
|
|
#12
06-02-2018, 05:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
This could be the top 5% of the 5% of the 15% of examples of the card within the same grade.
__________________
My new found obsession the t206! Last edited by KCRfan1; 06-02-2018 at 08:29 AM. Reason: Percentages. I am confused.
|
|
#13
06-02-2018, 05:53 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
This is such b.s., how can you know something is the top 20% or 15%, etc. of a certain population unless you have the entire population in front of you at one time to evaluate.
|
|
#14
06-02-2018, 09:37 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Four phrases I have coined that sum up today's hobby: No consequences. Stuff trumps all. The flip is the commoodity. Animal Farm grading.
|
|
#15
06-06-2018, 12:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pwcc
Quote:
|
 |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Pwcc Help | cardsnstuff | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 26 | 10-19-2017 08:15 PM |
| pwcc | Peter_Spaeth | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 280 | 02-17-2017 10:14 PM |
| Pwcc? | Manny Trillo | Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980) | 7 | 09-23-2016 07:14 AM |
| Really, PWCC? | Bliggity | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 38 | 09-06-2016 08:49 PM |
| Pwcc | ullmandds | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 67 | 04-12-2016 07:29 PM |
Hybrid Mode
