1986 Fleer Jordan PSA 10?!?!?!

[MJGOAT23]

1986 Fleer 57 Michael Jordan PSA 10 Gem Mint | eBay

Really? I mean, nice corners and edges but this has to be the poorest centered PSA 10 I've ever seen. Not to mention a glaring fisheye print mark on the back.

Memory Lane...

[tristan20]

PSA is so inconsistent.

But people don't care, they buy the label and that's all that matters lol

[MJGOAT23]

Originally Posted by tristan20

PSA is so god damn inconsistent.

But people don't care, they buy the label and that's all that matters lol

Not that i submit much to them, but i'v never received a PSA 10. it feels impossible, then i see this. what a joke.

[exoticprince]

Now that's a joke. Would grade a bgs 9 maybe

[Nyfancam01]

BGS 9 or possibly even 8.5

psa is a joke

[aggie4ever]

The centering looks fine to me. The right edge is partially under the bumper, which makes it look off-center left-right, but looking at it closer, it looks like the centering is well within their guidelines.

[6celtics33]

Originally Posted by aggie4ever

The centering looks fine to me. The right edge is partially under the bumper, which makes it look off-center left-right, but looking at it closer, it looks like the centering is well within their guidelines.

Dude come on! And the fish eye front and center white on red on the back. How is that for their term eye appeal? It's gross.

[GC1980]

And this is why we have eyeballs. There are some questionable BGS cards out there too. It's not a problem specific to any one grader. If the card doesn't meet your standards for a 10 as a collector/consumer then it's not a 10 no matter what the label says. This is what makes he really deserving, top flight 10s go for big money.

We all have eyes. We just need to use them and judge each card own its own merit. Not all cards in the same holder are created equally.

[tke1600]

It looks like its a glare on the right side and the card is up against the brackets on the side, which is covering up what we can see. Don't think it is that off centered at all.

I would guess that the fish eye on the back may be the only flaw on the whole card. They don't have exact guidelines like BGS but probably had the same idea where everything on the card was Gem but the surface was only mint, so overall they gave it a Gem.

[6celtics33]

Originally Posted by GC1980

And this is why we have eyeballs. There are some questionable BGS cards out there too. It's not a problem specific to any one grader. If the card doesn't meet your standards for a 10 as a collector/consumer then it's not a 10 no matter what the label says. This is what makes he really deserving, top flight 10s go for big money.

We all have eyes. We just need to use them and judge each card own its own merit. Not all cards in the same holder are created equally.

Yes exactly!

Also, the card is off bad left to right no matter how much that rattling holder hides part of it.

[tke1600]

Originally Posted by 6celtics33

Yes exactly!

Also, the card is off bad left to right no matter how much that rattling holder hides part of it.

This card is a good example of why people shouldn't pay 3X BGS prices for this card as a gem mint. PSA 10 does not equal Pristine. Many PSA 10's look almost perfect in the scan, but probably have similar flaws that would make them BGS 9.5's almost every time.

It may be assumed that PSA holds this card up to a higher standard but the card above is well within their guidelines for a PSA 10, except for the fish eye on the back. Again, my guess is that there are no other flaws on they card so the bumped it.

[6celtics33]

I agree and that comes down to technical grade vs eye appeal. I'd rather have 3 print spots that are hidden on the card and don't stick out vs having that 1 white one right there front and center on the red.

[6celtics33]

I had a 9.5x3 with 10 centering and it had red bleed on the back into the white at the top and I hated it. It also had some white nicks along the right edge. I traded it straight up to a 9.5x3 with 10 edges which seems stupid but the 9.5 centering I have now is borderline 10, edges are perfect, and surface flaws aren't visible unless you go looking for them with a light. It's a card that is affected by many things. The one thing they get right usually is 9.5 corners don't have issues. The best 10 pristine would be 10 9.5 10 10 in my opinion. Doubt that exists.

[MJGOAT23]

Originally Posted by 6celtics33

I had a 9.5x3 with 10 centering and it had red bleed on the back into the white at the top and I hated it. It also had some white nicks along the right edge. I traded it straight up to a 9.5x3 with 10 edges which seems stupid but the 9.5 centering I have now is borderline 10, edges are perfect, and surface flaws aren't visible unless you go looking for them with a light. It's a card that is affected by many things. The one thing they get right usually is 9.5 corners don't have issues. The best 10 pristine would be 10 9.5 10 10 in my opinion. Doubt that exists.

i had this one that didn't cross to PSA 10. 9.5 x 3 with 9 surface. can you see the surface dots??? they are super tiny white ones near the word "Bulls" in the blue area. PSA basically said that the surface kept the crossover from happening. go figure! I swear they just read the label.

[MJGOAT23]

And one might ask why i wanted it to be a PSA 10...easy...so I could sell it and buy 2 or 3 more BGS 9.5's that are equally as nice.

[sjim8660]

I am a huge PSA supporter but that centering is off. If the rest of the card is absolutely perfect but the centering is off that much, make the card a 9 Mint. One thing to keep in mind, it could be a fake. Check this out....
1952 Mickey Mantle Reprint Card in A PSA 2 Holder | eBay

If the seller didn't actually say it was a reprint, how many people would of known? All this guy had to do was buy a 8.5 or 9 MJ and swap it out with a 10. Put the 10 label with the 9 card and boom. You made your self what $10K? Hobby has become very sketchy. I am not saying its the seller could be a consignment.

[k13]

Originally Posted by 6celtics33

Yes exactly!

Also, the card is off bad left to right no matter how much that rattling holder hides part of it.

"The image must be centered on the card within a tolerance not to exceed approximately 55/45 to 60/40 percent on the front"

They never said a 10 is supposed to be close to 50/50...

But yeah..every time I look at "10" cards...they are full of flaws in person...

[tke1600]

Originally Posted by sjim8660

I am a huge PSA supporter but that centering is off. If the rest of the card is absolutely perfect but the centering is off that much, make the card a 9 Mint. One thing to keep in mind, it could be a fake. Check this out....
1952 Mickey Mantle Reprint Card in A PSA 2 Holder | eBay

If the seller didn't actually say it was a reprint, how many people would of known? All this guy had to do was buy a 8.5 or 9 MJ and swap it out with a 10. Put the 10 label with the 9 card and boom. You made your self what $10K? Hobby has become very sketchy. I am not saying its the seller could be a consignment.

This MJ is in the new holder with the hologram. Are they able to swap lesser cards into these new holders already?

[burke23]

IF PSA is more lenient anywhere it is on the reverse (not defending that). I don't see the issue with centering given their guidelines.

If you are complaining about centering, complain about any bgs 9.5 with 9 centering being 'Gem Mint' then.

[pingbling23]

Stuff like this is why Bgs>psa

[King44]

Centering is nowhere near a 10...and the mark above the G in Chicago should get a knock on surface.

[MJGOAT23]

Originally Posted by tke1600

This MJ is in the new holder with the hologram. Are they able to swap lesser cards into these new holders already?

I think its a real MJ in a real PSA 10 holder, but the centering and fisheye should have made it a 9, not a 10.

[jj2]

Originally Posted by k13

"The image must be centered on the card within a tolerance not to exceed approximately 55/45 to 60/40 percent on the front"

They never said a 10 is supposed to be close to 50/50...

But yeah..every time I look at "10" cards...they are full of flaws in person...

This. The card edge is being obscured by the holder's bumper which you can clearly see at the top and bottom where the bumper stops. I would assume it's within the specified tolerances if you measure it.

[MJGOAT23]

Originally Posted by jj2

This. The card edge is being obscured by the holder's bumper which you can clearly see at the top and bottom where the bumper stops. I would assume it's within the specified tolerances if you measure it.

regardless of the millimeter obscured by the holder, take a good look at any 86 fleer with good centering. the red margin is never that thick on either side. (or top/bottom) That left red border is way too fat.

[jj2]

Originally Posted by MJGOAT23

regardless of the millimeter obscured by the holder, take a good look at any 86 fleer with good centering. the red margin is never that thick on either side. (or top/bottom) That left red border is way too fat.

I just measured (as best I could) the left to right centering and it comes out to ~55/45, which, as per k13's quote, is within the tolerance for centering.

If you want to dispute this then fine, but at least measure the centering for yourself. None of us have to guess if it's within the stated guidelines. We all have rulers and calculators.