Definitive proof PSA grading has changed?

[netmasters]

Jon English did what I am sure a lot of people have wanted to do but didn't want to take the financial hit. He submitted some cards from old slabs and got new grades. The results aren't all that shocking to people that have been paying attention.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAIZf42GkCo

[salsdali]

literally not ONE card got a better grade. PSA has jumped the shark

[Torro]

Could it be that the cards do get damage and decrease in eye appeal while sitting in PSA slab for a long time? Or the graders in the past have just been more generous, taking more in account the general eye appeal instead of strict grading guidelines? Has this changed just over the past year? I think there has been a lot of people complaining about it for years (or it’s been getting stricter every year since the 2018-19?

[Gary]

And yet the standards listed on PSA's site haven't changed.......... We all know Nat and PSA watch this board.........Im sure a PSA rep or Nat himself will fill us in.........NOT.Sooner or later PSA will have to face some legal action...they are basically a scam at this point.the ball is rolling down hill and just picking up speed at this point........

everyone has always known they grade the name on the card...with all the damage to cards,people outing the fact they cant grade the same card twice within 1 grade the mis labels,the trimmed cards with number grades,slabbing cards with "miscut" getting slabbed with the miscut label in the slab.and now the recent 75 rack pack at the national. the new video showing a guy just taking the slab apart with his fingernals and the slab not showing any signs of being opened.even the diehard PSA fan boys have stopped making excuses for them.

PSA is on a slippery slope right now......they either reel in the problems quickly or its just gong to get worse.they think their immune......they should go ask Beckett how fast things can change......

[bub838]

Devil's advocate: couldn't it just be argued grading was more lenient back in the day?

[f2tornado]

Originally Posted by bub838

Devil's advocate: couldn't it just be argued grading was more lenient back in the day?

No doubt in my mind, particularly on centering. I'd pay a premium for newer cert over an older one.

[junkwaxgems]

Originally Posted by bub838

Devil's advocate: couldn't it just be argued grading was more lenient back in the day?

What is "back in the day" to you?

I can confirm that the primary PSA submitting eras of my lifetime were not lenient by any means. Everything subbed during this time was 80s to 00s.

1998-2000 (this was via shop I worked at, 1000s of subs)

2010-11 (20-30 subs)

2014-2016 (40-50 subs)

2021-current is absolutely brutal when it comes to 80s to 00s cards. Unlike anything I saw during that time. Back then it was easy to find your flaw if it didn't gem. Back then we had the comfort of knowing that the graders had cut their grading teeth on and been familiarized with the cards of those eras which meant that they understood the nuances of different card stock, printing techs, etc. This is no longer the case.

[oddstuff]

At the minimum...cert #s starting with 0, 1, 2 and 3 with 8 digits (we now have certs starting with 1 but 9 digits) are "old"/back in the day where standards were much more lenient. There was some tightening up of standards starting with cert with "4"...and probably in the past 6 months they finally went with 45/55 centering minimum (before it was as generous as 40/60) for a mint 10. Some folks with the older cert #s will submit to reholder and get the newer "lighthouse" label without regrading the card...possibly to fool some prospective buyers. Not surprise at all the downgrades...curious why he cracked out the cards and regraded other than to prove a point (and lose a lot of value). The "standards" on the website has not really changed (until the recent update to the 45/55 minimum centering for a mint 10)...but they apparently didn't strictly adhere to their own standards back in the days so that people got higher grades....but they finally started to in the past year or two...to make a gem mint 10 a lot closer to what a gem mint 10 should be (maybe to get closer to a BGS 10).

[inaka]

Originally Posted by oddstuff

curious why he cracked out the cards and regraded other than to prove a point.

Yes, that was exactly the reason. He took one for the team to prove his point and have definitive proof of something many of us believed. He was 100% correct, and it was worth it to him to shed some light on this issue. He should be commended for taking the financial hit to demonstrate this.

[FT35]

I think another point would be—if a perfect vintage or modern card no longer gets a 10 (or even a 9 in many cases), what does?

The submitter. The 10’s seem to be reserved for mega submitters or insiders— the 4SC’s of the world and PSA employees’ personal collections or PSA promotional content. The rest of us get maybe 1 token good grade in a sub then the “ambiguous 6/7/8 range” for everything else.

If any of us were still on the fence, the 1975 Topps stunt at the National was the last piece we all needed to see the new PSA way. A complete and total insult to their customer base. How would that public grading segment have gone if those cards were put in 6 slabs—like ours are? Why hide reality and promote a system that literally shows the special treatment to insiders to the exact customer base who has been screwed over so often? The smug smiles throughout the whole skit…It was a gut-punch of corruption. Did they think we wouldn’t notice or throw flags on that play?

[fabiani12333]

According to GemRate, only 11.6% of cards graded by PSA last month were baseball cards -- only 5.5% of those cards were pre-1980s (0.6% overall).

On the other hand, TCG represented 60% of all cards PSA graded last month, which represented an increase of 75% year-over-year.

It's clear PSA doesn't really prioritize or care much about grading baseball cards right now -- especially vintage baseball cards.

[FT35]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

According to GemRate, only 11.6% of cards graded by PSA last month were baseball cards -- only 5.5% of those cards were pre-1980s (0.6% overall).

On the other hand, TCG represented 60% of all cards PSA graded last month, which represented an increase of 75% year-over-year.

It's clear PSA doesn't really prioritize or care much about grading baseball cards right now -- especially vintage baseball cards.

I’m sure they don’t care as much right now. But I’m not sure there’s a connection between not caring as much about vintage and a major change in how vintage cards (I’ll say 80’s and prior) are graded—going to a new system that yields 1-3 grades lower across the board compared to how they were graded just a couple of years ago. Unless you think the response to not caring is that they have decided to grade vintage baseball incorrectly? I don’t think that’s what you’re saying!

Either there has been an unpublished, fundamental change in how they are graded—OR most cards are actually damaged (1-3 grade damage) while in their possession and graded correctly. This is all while 4SC continues to list hundreds of newly-graded PSA 10 vintage cards with near consecutive serial numbers every day. They certainly care about that account! Ha

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by FT35

I’m sure they don’t care as much right now. But I’m not sure there’s a connection between not caring as much about vintage and a major change in how vintage cards (I’ll say 80’s and prior) are graded—going to a new system that yields 1-3 grades lower across the board compared to how they were graded just a couple of years ago. Unless you think the response to not caring is that they have decided to grade vintage baseball incorrectly? I don’t think that’s what you’re saying!

Either there has been an unpublished, fundamental change in how they are graded—OR most cards are actually damaged (1-3 grade damage) while in their possession and graded correctly. This is all while 4SC continues to list hundreds of newly-graded PSA 10 vintage cards with near consecutive serial numbers every day. They certainly care about that account! Ha

I think, like the video strongly implied, PSA is automating aspects of the grading process to streamline it and compensate for the lack of qualified or competent sports card graders. They're doing this in part because their primary focus is currently on TCG, which is clearly a growth area and moneymaker for them.

[FT35]

Originally Posted by fabiani12333

I think, like the video strongly implied, PSA is automating aspects of the grading process to streamline it and compensate for the lack of qualified or competent sports card graders. They're doing this in part because their primary focus is currently on TCG, which is clearly a growth area and moneymaker for them.

Makes sense.

[88horsepower]

Something I did find interesting was that the person in the video commented about how some cards have damage now in the upper right corner. This validates a suspicion I have also had about this, having several cards come back to me with similar damage that was absolutely not present when I sent the cards in. In fact, some of the cards are so badly dinged that there is ZERO chance I would have sent them in to begin with, considering how bad the dings are. Again, same corner the person in the video complained about.



I can promise you, I would NEVER send a card that had this damage. No chance. I look every inch of a card over and spend a lot of time on edges and corners. This is without question the same kind of issue the guy in the video is referring to and it was caused by PSA.

[goodole13]

Yesterday, one of my PSA subs popped. It was a 5 card submission.

One of the cards I submitted was a former BGS 9. I cracked it and submitted to PSA. It came back a PSA 10.
Of the 5 cards in the submission, I expected 3 to Gem.
That BGS 9 I cracked was not one of the cards I expected to get a PSA 10.

I ended up getting four 9s and one 10.

I don't know if PSA has strengthened their standards, but what I do know is, and it's no surprise, PSA is very inconsistent.

I will probably stop submitting to PSA from here on out. I will more than likely go with BGS.

[The_Reverend]

Originally Posted by f2tornado

No doubt in my mind, particularly on centering. I'd pay a premium for newer cert over an older one.

Indeed. I have seen some PSA 10’s that are not close to being worthy of a 10. Centering should never be 60-40 for a 10 and it was.

[88horsepower]

Originally Posted by The_Reverend

Indeed. I have seen some PSA 10’s that are not close to being worthy of a 10. Centering should never be 60-40 for a 10 and it was.

These are downright embarrassing looking for PSA 10s. The centering on these are so off, I would never in my wildest dreams ever bother sending these to PSA with centering that off the mark.

[FT35]

Originally Posted by 88horsepower

These are downright embarrassing looking for PSA 10s. The centering on these are so off, I would never in my wildest dreams ever bother sending these to PSA with centering that off the mark.

Seen anything like this 98/2 top/bottom centering in this recently-graded Makarov GEM from 4 Sharp Corners?? Why this doesn’t make more people mad when we look at our 9% gem rates—I’ll never understand!

This is the correct centering for the card:

[88horsepower]

Originally Posted by FT35

Seen anything like this 98/2 top/bottom centering in this recently-graded Makarov GEM from 4 Sharp Corners?? Why this doesn’t make more people mad when we look at our 9% gem rates—I’ll never understand!

Oh, believe me, it infuriates me. It's one of the reasons I haven't bought a card off of 4SC website in months. The only times I buy anything from them anymore is when it's something so niche I have no choice but to buy it, assuming the card doesn't look like it's been over-graded. I've passed on several cards I really wanted, but because they were from 4SC and looked awful in the slabs, I passed on them.

This is a card I really wanted for my set and there is ZERO chance I would buy this from 4SC. Just look at the blown-up photo of the upper left corner. That's not a 10. Even the centering is off.





That fuzzy atrocity would have garnered me an 8 or 9, at best, if I sent that in.

[imbluestreak23]

Add them to the overgraded thread! Make this a thing!

[FT35]

It’s the special treatment that gets me. I used to get great grades from PSA. They were appropriately graded according to their posted grading criteria. Those days are long gone for me, but not for mega submitters. That double standard is what gets to me. 4SC cards get a quick glance and rubber stamp 10 treatment. It’s almost like the grading part isn’t even a part of their process—it’s just a GEM MINT 10 slabbing service! (At a discounted dealer rate of course).

Same graders look at my cards and must think—wow—that’s the best gem we have seen going into one of our PSA 6 slabs!

[88horsepower]

Originally Posted by imbluestreak23

Add them to the overgraded thread! Make this a thing!

Do we have a thread for that? If not, I'd be more than happy to start that and add to it daily.

[88horsepower]

I might have to make this my new avatar.


PSA - THE INDUSTRY LEADER IN GRADING

[Rpal1977]

Originally Posted by 88horsepower

Do we have a thread for that? If not, I'd be more than happy to start that and add to it daily.

https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1481835