I don’t really think PSA is so much a tougher grader as an inaccurate grader. I’d assume collectors will grow tired of ex-nm cards being returned as VG+ and will turn to more competent companies. If people continue to reward incompetence with more submissions… well they will never get better. The PSA insiders ( of course they play favorites) will continue to get plush grades while everyone else gets hammered. They have to be laughing
What has to change there then that hasn't historically yet - is collectors with large PC's already full of PSA being willing to jump ship. I know Mike M. won't, and I get it and why. But you are right, this will not change things. At what point do those invested in PSA no longer tolerate the inconsistency?
giving fair grade's would effect the value of there personal collections and there friends. pop counts can only keep getting higher so they have to manipulate the market.
I’m like you Mike. My entire collection is in PSA slabs so I’m not about to switch now BUT the fact that PSA knows that guys like you and me feel this way means they will not change the way they operate. The only way they change their practices is if they see a reduction of submissions. If you, me and others like us decide we’ve had enough, then and only then will they change. They got us and they know it. There’s a lot more guys like us who have spent a ton of money with them and because we want consistency in our slabs won’t ever change. Hence, we live with it.
I also only collect PSA slabs too, but the grade is irrelevant to me. I buy 9’s that look like 10’s, I buy 8’s that look like 9’s when it comes to modern cards. For vintage, I really buy the card and not the grade. I’ve seen PSA 3’s look better then 5’s. Now if you make a living buying raw, getting them graded and selling, then that’s another story. But most of us are collectors, so the grade is just a number as the card is what matters.
Not only that but I'm a huge set registry participant. They jacked up prices so high it makes it prohibitively expensive to get commons graded. But where are you going to go if you're a set registry participant. I used to talk to Joe Orlando all the time on email it was a better company when he ran it. Now they're just gouging people. And with their growth they probably hired a bunch of shity graders. I interviewed over there for 3 Days grading cards in Newport Beach in their dungeon it's a difficult job.
My observation of PSA is that when they started getting hammered with submissions they started hiring trainees to help out, so you may have a lot of inexperienced graders.
I'm told that PSA has so much higher value than SGC that you could sell everything, buy them back in SGC slabs, and still have money leftover to for a basement excavation.
I can completely understand wanting to have your collection consistent with one grading company. I suppose I didn't have a plan when I started collecting but I have been partial to SGC these days. 🐧🐧🐧
Grading is like the Wild West right now with all the new employees. Much of it depends on the day and the grader you get. Some nice cards, my favorites are the MacGregor cards. Sent you an email. I like the min-sized Oliva too.
Yes, PSA has been brutal on vintage. I recently cracked out three PSA 9 1972 Seaver's #445 for regrade. Thought one at least had a chance at a 10. One came back 7 and two 8's. Also cracked a nifty recent graded 8.5 SGC 1969 Nolan Ryan. Thought it had a chance at a PSA 8 or 9, came back a 5. Took 4 months to get back. I've got other recent vintage PSA crack outs I could tell you about but I just want to cry. Also three other vintage came back damaged. no kidding here. I'm going with all vintage to SGC. Not sure what's going on there at PSA but its bizarre.
Isn't this the scam/in a fun way...now a PSA 7 is another company's 10, making PSA even more exclusive, like the rich man's art-exhibit vs. the guy in the village with free beer and no admission.
As someone who has not sent cards in to get graded previously (though have bought several both PSA and SGC), this is very enlightening. I am gradually opening a '71 vending box from the Frisch vault and eventually planned to send a fair amount of these off for grading. I was already leaning SGC because of the look of the cards in holder, but seeing this is pushing me even further in that direction. Thanks for all your posts Mike, and I have especially loved listening your podcast since I found it about a year ago. I really loved the '48 vs. '49 Leaf talks as well as going through the current Bowman sets. You were a big inspiration for me to decide to do the '71 vending break over CZcams and hopefully do other show and tell things. Love vintage cards and collecting what I enjoy!!!
Idk, I think the grades for the most part seemed pretty fair. If you had found these cards in these grades at a show and had the chance to buy them I think you'd be happy to get them. I have noticed that the paper stock on 77 especially is like toilet paper. It is deceptively difficult to grade and keep nice. I have looked at several singles from 77 Topps sets I have had in hopes to grade them but decided not to each time because the card stock is just soft and damages so easily.
You are right Brian. After the video as I looked at the cards more, the grades were more fair than I originally thought. Some were better than the grade they assigned but it wasn't really that bad.
totally agree...we can really only see the centering when it comes to these reveal videos, and the centering alone was more than enough to knock the majority of these cards down to a 6 or 7, and then add in any other issues that exist, 5's and 6's seem quite fair...
A couple of clues prevent me from siding with your assessment that PSA grades too harshly. 1. You sent them multiple trimmed cards. 2. You assume a PSA 3 must have crease issues, which is incorrect. I assume you are sending in cards using the eyeball test without measuring the cards or reviewing PSA grade definitions. Many of the cards you showed had bad centering issues. Are you also looking at the registration, print quality, the gloss, off-whiteness, surface scratches? You didn't show the backs of the cards. What tools do you use to assess these things?
I wouldn't necessarily agree that PSA grading right now is tougher but they are without question way more inconsistent, and frankly they have been since the pandemic/ great reopening. That's why it's always frustrating when I see people who don't submit and grade cards make banal comments about collectors, flippers, dealers, whatever who have made these observations and share their experience. I just want more see more consistency in their grading standards from vintage to ultra modern. Enjoyed the video Mike. Despite some of the grades, the cards look very nice slabbed.
Why do people continue to send cards to grading companies and pay for THEIR OPINIONS......knowing that it's all SUBJECTIVE....and then BITCH AND MOAN at the grades they get!!!!
Great minds think alike Mike. In the past few months, I’ve bought the same late ‘70’s “leaders” cards you showed & having seen your grades, I may hold off grading them now 😆
Hey Mike, the question is (and nobody talks about), how much involvement is the Genamint technology playing in to the grading process of vintage cards? Would love to see someone do a deeper dive in this. Just a theory, but I can’t help but wonder if this technology (that PSA acquired/owns) is spotting “too many” flaws on vintage. If a computer is scrutinizing and analyzing a vintage card, flaws can be found on many 9’s and 10’s - let’s face it, vintage cards aren’t made with the same degree of perfection that newer/modern cards are. This is also why I theorize that PSA has different grading service levels based on how old or new the cards are, as I suspect the technology cannot be used the same way for older vs newer cards. It’s all theories and such, but worth a consideration..
Nice cards! Just by the quick look you gave us, on quite a few, I think you got hosed 1 or 2 grades. They definitely are inconsistent with other vintage cards I’ve seen graded by PSA lately
Nice video and I agree the grading of vintage is harsh with PSA. My bigger complaint is I think they grade the "Super Stars" harder. Mantle, Jordan, Brady and players like that seem to get the tougher grades. I sometimes use SGC when I want to turn sales around quickly but I use PSA for my PC.
I’ve graded about 2,000 cards with PSA in the past 3 years. I’ve had to re-SUB some egregious ones, for example a perfect 2012 Prizm Tom Brady that was a 9 the first time, gem 10 after its 2nd trip to SoCal. Most modern/ultra modern is working pretty well at PSA, BUT…about 9-12 months ago I stopped sending vintage to PSA. I grade less vintage, many are sitting raw in boxes, some I send to SGC where I feel I get accurately graded cards 90% of the time. PSA cards I thought would get a 6, perhaps a 7 on a good day were coming back as 3’s. A 1968 Topps Standup Joe Namath I was sure would be a 7, and hoped even for an 8 came back as a 5. Just can’t send them these cards anymore.
Man, tough break Mike. I didn’t believe it at first but the more I see and experience myself these days, the more I’m a believer in PSA pop controlling cards. I look very closely at everything I submit but get back nothing but 9’s these days 🤷♂️
Yea that’s a bummer Mike, PSA has you by the baseballs! I’m lucky I started with sgc, I’m the same way, I want everything in the same slab. Thanks for the content!
Great points Mike, I have been sharing the same lately with PSA vintage. I have been buying more then ever before graded because 4 to 6 range look so damn good. Flip side is, I have cards that I am hesitant on sending in. My PC cards, I am in absolutely no rush. The ones I will sell I am just gonna do smaller orders for now. Maybe 10 to 15 per. I am interested in the Hank Aaron, feel free to reply if it's available. Thanks
Gr8 subs and reveal Mike..🤔 Always enjoy watching these..😍😲 I've always been a fan of the 77topps set also those league leaders cards.. Love the MacGregor vintage cards very cool..😉 Take care..👍💕🔥⚾👊
I've gotten some cards back from Psa that were total head scratchers. They will really low ball your cards. I only use Csg and Sgc for vintage. The cards are always within a point or half a point of what I'd expect expect. Not to mention the slabs are nicer and better looking.
Great cards Mike. As someone who is thankful to have the cards i think they look great and could care less about the grade and what it came back. Enjoyed and thanks for sharing.
The grades and inconsistency has to be so frustrating, but as a set builder and completionist by nature I understand you’ve come way too far to turn back now. The sticking by your team analogy about sums it up. Grades aside, those are a bunch of great additions to your 4 decades set. Would be interested to see an update video on your progress, especially since chasing cardboard started. Thanks for sharing Mike!
Mike, I can relate to your disappointing grades from PSA. I’ve taken a double hit from PSA with grading of Armour coins. First of all while the cost for grading of most cards went down in price, the cost for grading coins and pins has increased by 50%. It costs $75 to grade a 1 1/2 inch plastic coin. It’s hard to justify that cost on a coin worth $20. To make matters worse the coin grades coming back are also disappointing. This is making it impossible to upgrade my sets in the registry.
Thanks for sharing Mike - I am seeing the same results - INCONSISTENCY. Previously, I bought several raw vintage cards from Greg Morris cards and submitted to PSA. The grades came back very close to what Greg Morris listed in the auction. Most recently, cards listed as EX-EX/MT raw by Greg Morris were coming back as PSA 3’s and 4’s. Just want accurate and consistency. I am a PSA Registry collector as well. Those 78 Topps were brutal
Grading should not be subjective, we need a common guide to grading...we have to have it. I feel they grade vintage like the card is ultra modern. I would hope they have graders that grade older cards knowing how a card looks. This is why I don't like grading, it's based on a person's opinion and we know how that goes for everything else in life. 😉
Like you I'm too deeply invested in PSA to really change now, but my registry participation has been diminished quite a bit these last few years and I have become a more selective about what I will send in.
They were a little harsh but there is definitely thing’s wrong with the cards. I definitely saw some OC’s and a few soft corners. How much should they be marked down for that? Not too sure there. I just sent psa some vintage with good centering and sharp corners. Fingers crossed they aren’t too harsh.
PSA and SGC live in their own reality. My last order took six months with PSA. SGC slabs and labels suck, so would not care if if takes a year with PSA, I would never send to SGC. PSA lies. Their grading HAS changed. I resubmitted a 75 Brett that was broken out of a PSA 8 slab back in 2000 and resubmitted a couple years ago, it came back a 6. I will never accept Jim Kaat is in the HOF. HOF has basically become meaningless.
I feel ya Mike. Every order has a few head scratchers. The minsize is total BS, I send those back and always get it graded the second time. Frustrating I know
Beautiful Aaron and Mays MacGregor examples. I’m interested in one of the Aaron’s please. Sorry the other cards didn’t come back as well as hoped. I did enjoy the Rangers analogy. I just passed 350 with CSG and I can’t imagine switching. 3,600 is a whole other level.
those 1977 world series cards are really off-centered, so PSA 5's seem accurate to me..many of those cards are really off-centered, so when you add in any soft corners and edges, plus surface issues, it is no wonder most cards were 4's 5's and 6's...many of the cards present nicely, so not the end of the world, but it is very hard to get 9's on older cards even if you took them directly out of a pack today...
OH Mike this wrong video for me to watch today. I just mailed off 57 pre 1970 vintage cards to PSA. Sorry they were so harsh on your grades. I hope that grader doesn't get mine. On a bright note, as always I enjoy your videos and continue to love vintage more and more. No matter what PSA says. Hehe.
I'm speculating they're using magnification equipment that reveal flaws unseen by the naked eye. That may be why you thought they looked like they should grade higher. Having said that, there is no doubt an element of judgement involved so based on the time of day, experience level of grader, you will inevitably see inconsistencies. I know they use templates for measuring centering which again is hard to compare to surface appeal or how centering registers at a glance. Corners are another area where it's impossible to detect minor flaws without the assistance of devices. I've researched grading methodologies and it appears to be part art and part science. Nice cards though no matter what the grades came back as.
@@BaseballCollector I'm not really familiar with Genamint. Is that measuring? What concerns me is how PSA unilaterally decides what condition is. You remember before PSA...if a card looked mint to the naked eye it was mint to collectors. Maybe NM to some. The cards you showed on the video would compare very favorably to cards PSA used to grade as 8's or higher just a few years ago. This feels like they are redefining the definition of conditions again.
I just submitted some late 90s cards. Many came back 8s, some 9s, and few 10s. YES! I went through them fairly well, but didn't have my 40x loupe yet only about 15x. Centering, edges, corners. If you have ANY noticeable edge or corner wear, you're gonna be lucky to get an 8. Then, centering and surface could easily knock you down. Unless it's better than 55/45 centering or just for your PC. I wouldn't bother sending them in. You're already at a disadvantage and for sure not going to get a 10. Especially if there's nicer cards they can compare too.
I have a couple of graded PSA unopened returns . That I received January 2020 and a Beckett unopened retI got in December 2019.I have plans to do a couple of videos for each returns. Plus I'm a grader for SGC and I have graded nearly 16,000 cards already
Great video. I’ve done several subs with PSA and find their grading to be very, very inconsistent. Pulling a 7 feels like 9 /10 in the vintage, pre 1970 era.
70s are tough, like the (black) 71s. The color prints right to the edge and so its too easy to nick those edges, thus hurting the grade. You can even nick an edge in placing the raw card in a penny saver holder. If anyone can manage to get a PSA 8 or better, that's an incredible task. Also, I noticed that many of the cards are not centered, albeit with sharp edges. I bet many of the cards graded 4 or 5 are ones with damaged edges with regards to the color being nicked off. Also NOTE. Regarding bending, and your comment at the 15:00 minute mark, about, "I don't think I sent a bent card," I want to do an experiment the next time I send in cards to PSA. Suggest you do this too. Say, for instance you send in 20 cards, I would get out a notebook and make notes for the condition of each card in detail regarding ANY BENDS, FOLDS, or NICKS regarding the edges. Draw a generic version of the card, front and back, and (as one would send in a diamond to have it's FLAWS, IMPERFECTIONS, BLEMISHES, and INCLUSIONS noted in a "Diamond Grading Chart," [See online for a photo] do the same with that card). One card per page in the notebook, with the sketch on top and the notes below. Why?? Because I also suspect that something was done on their end after sending in cards that did not have bends and nicks in them originally. So, to have the original card condition photographed and documented in your notebook, would be THE evidence you need to confirm that damage was done on the PSA end (or the card is as it is). And yes, take some quality, close up photos of the card, front and back, before you send it in. Spend some real time documenting the card. As an experiment that would go far into putting any doubt that you may have about damage. You're spending hundreds of dollars anyway, and a ton of time, so why not do a bit more on your end --- as a quality control?! Good luck.
PSA's inconsistency with grading is become more apparent. I to have a decent collection of PSA holders, however, SGC is starting to become my go to. I sent them several cards that I thought were under graded and they fully agreed. I love the accurate and honest grading SGC provides and the turnaround.
I get it, believe me, a majority of my PC is PSA. BUT, starting an SGC PC is just that easy, send in a few enjoy them and keep them separate from the PSA cards. Use a different room if you have to! 😂😂 No need to stop using PSA, use them both. Fun cards, definitely tough grades….
I completely agree with you Mike on wanting to keep your collection consistent by using PSA. Great analogy with the Rangers. I think it’s fair to criticize PSA about the length of time it still takes and most importantly the grades. Like you said, grading is subjective!!! Until someone comes up with a “flawless” machine that can grade cards consistently we are at the mercy of the “grader”. I love the MacGregor cards of Aaron and Mays!!! If you have a Rose MacGregor for sale, I would be interested in purchasing one. Also, any other interesting Pete Rose items. Didn’t want to use the word “odd ball” because Mr. Mangini would get on me for using that word. Lol Thanks for showing the cards AND for voicing your opinion about PSA. It’s appreciated.
And this is exactly what PSA is banking on - collectors keep coming back regardless of satisfaction but just wanting uniformity of a holder look in their collection.
I am not much of a slabber... but the ones I have are all PSA and probably wouldn't buy another...and that is just because those are the first I bought... love seeing all of those 70's cards...
Mike I get it and you have the right just like anyone else but PSA has screwed up with labeling and other things…so I switched to another company because I can and have been so much happier
Vintage is getting hit hard by Genamint technology detecting tiny one-sided wrinkles and surface imperfections. Stuff we can’t always see with our loupes and magnifying lamps.
There is another option besides starting over vs continuing to drink the PSA kool-aid, and that is having a collection that has both PSA and SGC slabs. My complete 1948 Bowman set is all SGC slabs, so I can understand the need to keep things "uniform", but my player runs have mixed slabs and I don't feel the need to make them all the same slab. In fact, my near complete Spahn run has PSA, SGC, CSG, and even one BVG slab. I guess its a matter of taste, but I prefer to collect the best version of each card I can find regardless of slab. And when I sub vintage, its only with SGC because they are the best grading company for vintage, and I refuse to pay any more money to be abused by PSA. But we're all different and our PC's are all different, and that's ok.
Grading needs to graduate to the point where there is repeatability, transparency and the subjectiveness is eliminated. The only way we get there is electronic grading (like TAG) and I hope we get there sooner than later. We have to take the human out of the loop.
Nov 9th 32 card vintage order still waiting. They are so slow on vintage. They may have sent your cards to a home grader and they damaged them. PSA doesn’t really like to talk about their home graders for obvious reasons
I am slabnostic - have 8 BVG, 1 KSA, 2 CSG, 280 PSA and 111 SGC. When I find a card that I like and am looking for in any of the companies, I will buy them. Not on the registry because I have never completed anything without having cards from multiple grading companies. While being on the registry would be cool, I would rather buy cards than pay to cross. I would be fairly high on some of my HOF sets if I collected all in one slab. However, I appreciate you liking consistency. That is what is best for you and your right choice. I totally agree that a fan of everything cares and that is why they vent - we all wish we could influence decisions for anything we are fans of.
Grading seems completely subjective. All graders should include a checklist of how they determined the grade for each and every card. They need to come out of the shadows.
Love your selections for your submission. I'm a big fan of miultiplayer cards. Why collect one HOFer on a card when you can get multiple players on it. Plus the players that are not in The Hall were great in their own right as well. I've only graded with SGC and I don't see me switching up anytime soon. Maybe a lesser grading company for my childhood rookies from the late 80s early 90s that were stars but not HOFers. The cards look great but I understand your frustrations. The MacGregors look amazing!
Sorry Mike, looks like someone didn't have enough coffee that day. I haven't been buying graded for that long so I've decide that I'm going psa or sgc whichever I can find the best deal on, which works for me. I get why you want to have all psa, if I had a third of what you do I would also. I bought a 80 Henderson psa and went down that rabbit hole for the hof 80 set. Still lack 3 to finish. But I've decided I'm going to do the registry on my own with both companies. Recently had a pickup, 1926 w512 tris speaker labeled 1910 w-unc tris speaker, so yeah they need to do better.
I also have Killebrew card of him hitting one out of the park three pictures in sequence 1962 ,A 1961 world series card great shape but not centered makes it only dallor amount
Cool 77 and 79 cards. PSA and SGC are both pretty strict on grading now. I guess it is more about how the card looks than the actual grade. If you’re never going to sell as a collector the grade shouldn’t matter that much.
@@claudelehman7165, I agree. Why get the cards graded. Mike, is hooked on the card registry at PSA. I typically only grade cards that I will potentially sell. Much easier to sell graded cards.
13:14 They look good from the front but you're not showing the backs. Also you can't see if it has creases, marks. Can't see corners close enough or surface but the front doesn't look a 5, but you're not showing the surface, if you tilt it in light you should be able to see something.
I'm building 54 Bowman and 60 Topps sets, and I can depend on a PSA 6 being a nice card, and prices, especially on on the 60's, confirm it. A couple comments on your cards. You say you'd rather have an 8 OC than a 6. As nice as vintage 6's are, I'll take the 6. Your cards are consistently OC. Remember - backs count - that RBI back is bad. A year ago most of your cards would be qualified OC. I bought two complete 81 Topps traded sets many years ago (most poorly centered, BTW) that were in binder pages. They looked beautiful - color, gloss, white borders... Every one has a dinged corner, however slight. Pages are a corner destroyer.
I don’t really think PSA is so much a tougher grader as an inaccurate grader. I’d assume collectors will grow tired of ex-nm cards being returned as VG+ and will turn to more competent companies.
If people continue to reward incompetence with more submissions… well they will never get better. The PSA insiders ( of course they play favorites) will continue to get plush grades while everyone else gets hammered. They have to be laughing
What has to change there then that hasn't historically yet - is collectors with large PC's already full of PSA being willing to jump ship. I know Mike M. won't, and I get it and why. But you are right, this will not change things. At what point do those invested in PSA no longer tolerate the inconsistency?
giving fair grade's would effect the value of there personal collections and there friends. pop counts can only keep getting higher so they have to manipulate the market.
Amen. 😎
Centering, centering, centering.
I’m like you Mike. My entire collection is in PSA slabs so I’m not about to switch now BUT the fact that PSA knows that guys like you and me feel this way means they will not change the way they operate. The only way they change their practices is if they see a reduction of submissions. If you, me and others like us decide we’ve had enough, then and only then will they change. They got us and they know it. There’s a lot more guys like us who have spent a ton of money with them and because we want consistency in our slabs won’t ever change. Hence, we live with it.
I also only collect PSA slabs too, but the grade is irrelevant to me. I buy 9’s that look like 10’s, I buy 8’s that look like 9’s when it comes to modern cards. For vintage, I really buy the card and not the grade. I’ve seen PSA 3’s look better then 5’s.
Now if you make a living buying raw, getting them graded and selling, then that’s another story. But most of us are collectors, so the grade is just a number as the card is what matters.
@@chrisolivo6591 I am exactly like you. I have lots of PSA 5’s and 6’s that look amazing slabbed. Look at the money we save!
Although they sell for slightly less in vintage, I prefer SGC for accuracy, turnaround time and the way the black makes the cards pop.
czcams.com/video/ITVtA5Rwzqc/video.html
Not only that but I'm a huge set registry participant. They jacked up prices so high it makes it prohibitively expensive to get commons graded. But where are you going to go if you're a set registry participant. I used to talk to Joe Orlando all the time on email it was a better company when he ran it. Now they're just gouging people. And with their growth they probably hired a bunch of shity graders. I interviewed over there for 3 Days grading cards in Newport Beach in their dungeon it's a difficult job.
My observation of PSA is that when they started getting hammered with submissions they started hiring trainees to help out, so you may have a lot of inexperienced graders.
No doubt that is true.
I'm told that PSA has so much higher value than SGC that you could sell everything, buy them back in SGC slabs, and still have money leftover to for a basement excavation.
I can completely understand wanting to have your collection consistent with one grading company. I suppose I didn't have a plan when I started collecting but I have been partial to SGC these days. 🐧🐧🐧
He should have sent them elsewhere like Beckett or something if he wanted higher gradings.
Grading is like the Wild West right now with all the new employees. Much of it depends on the day and the grader you get. Some nice cards, my favorites are the MacGregor cards. Sent you an email. I like the min-sized Oliva too.
Yes, PSA has been brutal on vintage. I recently cracked out three PSA 9 1972 Seaver's #445 for regrade. Thought one at least had a chance at a 10. One came back 7 and two 8's. Also cracked a nifty recent graded 8.5 SGC 1969 Nolan Ryan. Thought it had a chance at a PSA 8 or 9, came back a 5. Took 4 months to get back. I've got other recent vintage PSA crack outs I could tell you about but I just want to cry. Also three other vintage came back damaged. no kidding here.
I'm going with all vintage to SGC. Not sure what's going on there at PSA but its bizarre.
Isn't this the scam/in a fun way...now a PSA 7 is another company's 10, making PSA even more exclusive, like the rich man's art-exhibit vs. the guy in the village with free beer and no admission.
So you got f3cked by your own greed. /golf clap for you, stucky.
Sad when someone can’t leave an ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP. (PSA) 😔😣😖😫😭
Centering issues seem low grade
As someone who has not sent cards in to get graded previously (though have bought several both PSA and SGC), this is very enlightening. I am gradually opening a '71 vending box from the Frisch vault and eventually planned to send a fair amount of these off for grading. I was already leaning SGC because of the look of the cards in holder, but seeing this is pushing me even further in that direction. Thanks for all your posts Mike, and I have especially loved listening your podcast since I found it about a year ago. I really loved the '48 vs. '49 Leaf talks as well as going through the current Bowman sets. You were a big inspiration for me to decide to do the '71 vending break over CZcams and hopefully do other show and tell things. Love vintage cards and collecting what I enjoy!!!
Idk, I think the grades for the most part seemed pretty fair. If you had found these cards in these grades at a show and had the chance to buy them I think you'd be happy to get them.
I have noticed that the paper stock on 77 especially is like toilet paper. It is deceptively difficult to grade and keep nice. I have looked at several singles from 77 Topps sets I have had in hopes to grade them but decided not to each time because the card stock is just soft and damages so easily.
You are right Brian. After the video as I looked at the cards more, the grades were more fair than I originally thought. Some were better than the grade they assigned but it wasn't really that bad.
totally agree...we can really only see the centering when it comes to these reveal videos, and the centering alone was more than enough to knock the majority of these cards down to a 6 or 7, and then add in any other issues that exist, 5's and 6's seem quite fair...
The high to low centering is not as displeasing to the eye, but it's a deal breaker...
A couple of clues prevent me from siding with your assessment that PSA grades too harshly. 1. You sent them multiple trimmed cards. 2. You assume a PSA 3 must have crease issues, which is incorrect. I assume you are sending in cards using the eyeball test without measuring the cards or reviewing PSA grade definitions. Many of the cards you showed had bad centering issues. Are you also looking at the registration, print quality, the gloss, off-whiteness, surface scratches? You didn't show the backs of the cards. What tools do you use to assess these things?
I wouldn't necessarily agree that PSA grading right now is tougher but they are without question way more inconsistent, and frankly they have been since the pandemic/ great reopening. That's why it's always frustrating when I see people who don't submit and grade cards make banal comments about collectors, flippers, dealers, whatever who have made these observations and share their experience. I just want more see more consistency in their grading standards from vintage to ultra modern. Enjoyed the video Mike. Despite some of the grades, the cards look very nice slabbed.
Why do people continue to send cards to grading companies and pay for THEIR OPINIONS......knowing that it's all SUBJECTIVE....and then BITCH AND MOAN at the grades they get!!!!
Great minds think alike Mike. In the past few months, I’ve bought the same late ‘70’s “leaders” cards you showed & having seen your grades, I may hold off grading them now 😆
Hey Mike, the question is (and nobody talks about), how much involvement is the Genamint technology playing in to the grading process of vintage cards? Would love to see someone do a deeper dive in this. Just a theory, but I can’t help but wonder if this technology (that PSA acquired/owns) is spotting “too many” flaws on vintage. If a computer is scrutinizing and analyzing a vintage card, flaws can be found on many 9’s and 10’s - let’s face it, vintage cards aren’t made with the same degree of perfection that newer/modern cards are. This is also why I theorize that PSA has different grading service levels based on how old or new the cards are, as I suspect the technology cannot be used the same way for older vs newer cards. It’s all theories and such, but worth a consideration..
I agree with this. These old paper cards have surface wrinkles that we just can’t see like they do.
Looks like centering was the big grade killed for most of the cards.
I agree.
Nice cards! Just by the quick look you gave us, on quite a few, I think you got hosed 1 or 2 grades. They definitely are inconsistent with other vintage cards I’ve seen graded by PSA lately
Nice video and I agree the grading of vintage is harsh with PSA. My bigger complaint is I think they grade the "Super Stars" harder. Mantle, Jordan, Brady and players like that seem to get the tougher grades. I sometimes use SGC when I want to turn sales around quickly but I use PSA for my PC.
Love hearing your thoughts on these types of topics Mike, thanks for the insight. Great cards!
I’ve graded about 2,000 cards with PSA in the past 3 years. I’ve had to re-SUB some egregious ones, for example a perfect 2012 Prizm Tom Brady that was a 9 the first time, gem 10 after its 2nd trip to SoCal. Most modern/ultra modern is working pretty well at PSA, BUT…about 9-12 months ago I stopped sending vintage to PSA. I grade less vintage, many are sitting raw in boxes, some I send to SGC where I feel I get accurately graded cards 90% of the time. PSA cards I thought would get a 6, perhaps a 7 on a good day were coming back as 3’s. A 1968 Topps Standup Joe Namath I was sure would be a 7, and hoped even for an 8 came back as a 5. Just can’t send them these cards anymore.
I agree SGC is the best overall grading company!!
I agree.
Man, tough break Mike. I didn’t believe it at first but the more I see and experience myself these days, the more I’m a believer in PSA pop controlling cards. I look very closely at everything I submit but get back nothing but 9’s these days 🤷♂️
they don't want to effect the value of there own personal collections and there friends.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Mike. Most of my major cards are PSA and on the registry. SGC grading is more consistent and accurate than PSA.
Yea that’s a bummer Mike, PSA has you by the baseballs! I’m lucky I started with sgc, I’m the same way, I want everything in the same slab. Thanks for the content!
That’s why I stay raw my brother I can avoid all the undue stress! Thanks for sharing
I feel your pain, my last submission went about the same, but I agree with what you said about PSA, I’ve already send in 2 more orders.
Great points Mike, I have been sharing the same lately with PSA vintage. I have been buying more then ever before graded because 4 to 6 range look so damn good. Flip side is, I have cards that I am hesitant on sending in. My PC cards, I am in absolutely no rush. The ones I will sell I am just gonna do smaller orders for now. Maybe 10 to 15 per.
I am interested in the Hank Aaron, feel free to reply if it's available. Thanks
I just buy graded vintage only. There’s too many fakes, cut and creased cards that you can’t see online.
….and another reason why grading is dumb. You liked the cards and now you can’t look at them the same way.
Gr8 subs and reveal Mike..🤔 Always enjoy watching these..😍😲 I've always been a fan of the 77topps set also those league leaders cards.. Love the MacGregor vintage cards very cool..😉 Take care..👍💕🔥⚾👊
I've gotten some cards back from Psa that were total head scratchers. They will really low ball your cards. I only use Csg and Sgc for vintage. The cards are always within a point or half a point of what I'd expect expect. Not to mention the slabs are nicer and better looking.
Nice group of cards, thanks for sharing.
Thanks Chuck
Great cards Mike. As someone who is thankful to have the cards i think they look great and could care less about the grade and what it came back. Enjoyed and thanks for sharing.
The grades and inconsistency has to be so frustrating, but as a set builder and completionist by nature I understand you’ve come way too far to turn back now. The sticking by your team analogy about sums it up. Grades aside, those are a bunch of great additions to your 4 decades set. Would be interested to see an update video on your progress, especially since chasing cardboard started. Thanks for sharing Mike!
Centering on most of those 5’s and 6’s were pretty bad.
Mike, I can relate to your disappointing grades from PSA. I’ve taken a double hit from PSA with grading of Armour coins. First of all while the cost for grading of most cards went down in price, the cost for grading coins and pins has increased by 50%. It costs $75 to grade a 1 1/2 inch plastic coin. It’s hard to justify that cost on a coin worth $20. To make matters worse the coin grades coming back are also disappointing. This is making it impossible to upgrade my sets in the registry.
I would say sgc is tougher on vintage.
Thanks for sharing Mike - I am seeing the same results - INCONSISTENCY. Previously, I bought several raw vintage cards from Greg Morris cards and submitted to PSA. The grades came back very close to what Greg Morris listed in the auction. Most recently, cards listed as EX-EX/MT raw by Greg Morris were coming back as PSA 3’s and 4’s. Just want accurate and consistency. I am a PSA Registry collector as well. Those 78 Topps were brutal
Grading should not be subjective, we need a common guide to grading...we have to have it. I feel they grade vintage like the card is ultra modern. I would hope they have graders that grade older cards knowing how a card looks. This is why I don't like grading, it's based on a person's opinion and we know how that goes for everything else in life. 😉
I always marked my cards secretly. Knowing that they are mine. I will check my
That's going to ruin their value.
Like you I'm too deeply invested in PSA to really change now, but my registry participation has been diminished quite a bit these last few years and I have become a more selective about what I will send in.
They were a little harsh but there is definitely thing’s wrong with the cards. I definitely saw some OC’s and a few soft corners. How much should they be marked down for that? Not too sure there. I just sent psa some vintage with good centering and sharp corners. Fingers crossed they aren’t too harsh.
Centering and surface is key. Anyone can look at corners and edges and easily say Ok that looks minty. But centering and surface is a lot trickier.
PSA and SGC live in their own reality. My last order took six months with PSA. SGC slabs and labels suck, so would not care if if takes a year with PSA, I would never send to SGC. PSA lies. Their grading HAS changed. I resubmitted a 75 Brett that was broken out of a PSA 8 slab back in 2000 and resubmitted a couple years ago, it came back a 6. I will never accept Jim Kaat is in the HOF. HOF has basically become meaningless.
As a royals fan I was really able to understand your analogy of why you stick with PSA. Nice Greinke to by the way!
Thanks. It makes sense to me.
If SGC offered to crossover your entire collection into SGC slabs for free, would you do it?
Interesting question. I do not know. I would definitely think about it.
That'd be a no brainer for me. Better run company with employees in a far better state. SGC all the way.
it seems like they got harder on vintage than before? To keep pops down and key cards worth more?
I feel ya Mike. Every order has a few head scratchers. The minsize is total BS, I send those back and always get it graded the second time. Frustrating I know
Beautiful Aaron and Mays MacGregor examples. I’m interested in one of the Aaron’s please. Sorry the other cards didn’t come back as well as hoped. I did enjoy the Rangers analogy. I just passed 350 with CSG and I can’t imagine switching. 3,600 is a whole other level.
Shoot me an email at gonzaleznut@hotmail.com and we can talk about the Aaron.
@@BaseballCollector sent you an email. Thanks.
HTF is that Nolan Ryan/Tom Seaver card a PSA 5?? that card looks like its at least a 7.5. PSA is so inconsistent unlike SGC.
those 1977 world series cards are really off-centered, so PSA 5's seem accurate to me..many of those cards are really off-centered, so when you add in any soft corners and edges, plus surface issues, it is no wonder most cards were 4's 5's and 6's...many of the cards present nicely, so not the end of the world, but it is very hard to get 9's on older cards even if you took them directly out of a pack today...
OH Mike this wrong video for me to watch today. I just mailed off 57 pre 1970 vintage cards to PSA. Sorry they were so harsh on your grades. I hope that grader doesn't get mine. On a bright note, as always I enjoy your videos and continue to love vintage more and more. No matter what PSA says. Hehe.
I'm speculating they're using magnification equipment that reveal flaws unseen by the naked eye. That may be why you thought they looked like they should grade higher. Having said that, there is no doubt an element of judgement involved so based on the time of day, experience level of grader, you will inevitably see inconsistencies. I know they use templates for measuring centering which again is hard to compare to surface appeal or how centering registers at a glance. Corners are another area where it's impossible to detect minor flaws without the assistance of devices. I've researched grading methodologies and it appears to be part art and part science. Nice cards though no matter what the grades came back as.
PSA seems to be redefining what NM, EX and VG stand for.
No doubt Keith. I am curious if you think they are incorporating Genamint more into their grading process and finding more flaws than before???
@@BaseballCollector I'm not really familiar with Genamint. Is that measuring?
What concerns me is how PSA unilaterally decides what condition is. You remember before PSA...if a card looked mint to the naked eye it was mint to collectors. Maybe NM to some. The cards you showed on the video would compare very favorably to cards PSA used to grade as 8's or higher just a few years ago. This feels like they are redefining the definition of conditions again.
Tough grades but fun video to watch. Thanks for sharing!
Thanks Jeff
I just submitted some late 90s cards. Many came back 8s, some 9s, and few 10s. YES! I went through them fairly well, but didn't have my 40x loupe yet only about 15x. Centering, edges, corners. If you have ANY noticeable edge or corner wear, you're gonna be lucky to get an 8. Then, centering and surface could easily knock you down. Unless it's better than 55/45 centering or just for your PC. I wouldn't bother sending them in. You're already at a disadvantage and for sure not going to get a 10. Especially if there's nicer cards they can compare too.
I have a couple of graded PSA unopened returns . That I received January 2020 and a Beckett unopened retI got in December 2019.I have plans to do a couple of videos for each returns. Plus I'm a grader for SGC and I have graded nearly 16,000 cards already
Great video. I’ve done several subs with PSA and find their grading to be very, very inconsistent. Pulling a 7 feels like 9 /10 in the vintage, pre 1970 era.
What about starting an SGC portion of your collection?
Grades look accurate, why would you pay $20 a card to grade when the card isn’t worth $5? Makes no sense.
There are vintage cards out there in early PSA 7 holders that would probably grade a 4 today.
70s are tough, like the (black) 71s. The color prints right to the edge and so its too easy to nick those edges, thus hurting the grade. You can even nick an edge in placing the raw card in a penny saver holder. If anyone can manage to get a PSA 8 or better, that's an incredible task. Also, I noticed that many of the cards are not centered, albeit with sharp edges. I bet many of the cards graded 4 or 5 are ones with damaged edges with regards to the color being nicked off. Also NOTE. Regarding bending, and your comment at the 15:00 minute mark, about, "I don't think I sent a bent card," I want to do an experiment the next time I send in cards to PSA. Suggest you do this too. Say, for instance you send in 20 cards, I would get out a notebook and make notes for the condition of each card in detail regarding ANY BENDS, FOLDS, or NICKS regarding the edges. Draw a generic version of the card, front and back, and (as one would send in a diamond to have it's FLAWS, IMPERFECTIONS, BLEMISHES, and INCLUSIONS noted in a "Diamond Grading Chart," [See online for a photo] do the same with that card). One card per page in the notebook, with the sketch on top and the notes below. Why?? Because I also suspect that something was done on their end after sending in cards that did not have bends and nicks in them originally. So, to have the original card condition photographed and documented in your notebook, would be THE evidence you need to confirm that damage was done on the PSA end (or the card is as it is). And yes, take some quality, close up photos of the card, front and back, before you send it in. Spend some real time documenting the card. As an experiment that would go far into putting any doubt that you may have about damage. You're spending hundreds of dollars anyway, and a ton of time, so why not do a bit more on your end --- as a quality control?! Good luck.
PSA's inconsistency with grading is become more apparent. I to have a decent collection of PSA holders, however, SGC is starting to become my go to. I sent them several cards that I thought were under graded and they fully agreed. I love the accurate and honest grading SGC provides and the turnaround.
I get it, believe me, a majority of my PC is PSA. BUT, starting an SGC PC is just that easy, send in a few enjoy them and keep them separate from the PSA cards. Use a different room if you have to! 😂😂 No need to stop using PSA, use them both. Fun cards, definitely tough grades….
Your channel is such a breath of fresh air, bro, and I always learn something from you! 👏🔥😎
Happy to hear that!
I completely agree with you Mike on wanting to keep your collection consistent by using PSA. Great analogy with the Rangers. I think it’s fair to criticize PSA about the length of time it still takes and most importantly the grades. Like you said, grading is subjective!!! Until someone comes up with a “flawless” machine that can grade cards consistently we are at the mercy of the “grader”. I love the MacGregor cards of Aaron and Mays!!! If you have a Rose MacGregor for sale, I would be interested in purchasing one. Also, any other interesting Pete Rose items. Didn’t want to use the word “odd ball” because Mr. Mangini would get on me for using that word. Lol
Thanks for showing the cards AND for voicing your opinion about PSA. It’s appreciated.
And this is exactly what PSA is banking on - collectors keep coming back regardless of satisfaction but just wanting uniformity of a holder look in their collection.
Great video content
You’re in an abusive relationship and refuse to leave. F loyalty. At some point the blame falls on the abused for not walking out the door.
I use PSA 1980 and above and SGC anything earlier than 1980.
Nice slabs. New sub here from Adam's shoutout. Nice video
I just saw a guy who did a PSA reveal. He resubmitted a 6 & 7 and got back a 8 & 9. Thats insane.
I stopped using PSA and have never been happier. What a ripoff operation they are... "The Emperor's Clothes" persists to this day.
BGS, Mike!!
I am not much of a slabber... but the ones I have are all PSA and probably wouldn't buy another...and that is just because those are the first I bought... love seeing all of those 70's cards...
Mike I get it and you have the right just like anyone else but PSA has screwed up with labeling and other things…so I switched to another company because I can and have been so much happier
Vintage is getting hit hard by Genamint technology detecting tiny one-sided wrinkles and surface imperfections. Stuff we can’t always see with our loupes and magnifying lamps.
That's a great point about Genamint.
Love your show
There is another option besides starting over vs continuing to drink the PSA kool-aid, and that is having a collection that has both PSA and SGC slabs. My complete 1948 Bowman set is all SGC slabs, so I can understand the need to keep things "uniform", but my player runs have mixed slabs and I don't feel the need to make them all the same slab. In fact, my near complete Spahn run has PSA, SGC, CSG, and even one BVG slab. I guess its a matter of taste, but I prefer to collect the best version of each card I can find regardless of slab. And when I sub vintage, its only with SGC because they are the best grading company for vintage, and I refuse to pay any more money to be abused by PSA. But we're all different and our PC's are all different, and that's ok.
On the vintage it’s the centering. Some of those cards had problems.
They did for sure
That’s why i believe that the future of grading will be computer AI, my 2 cents
Grading needs to graduate to the point where there is repeatability, transparency and the subjectiveness is eliminated. The only way we get there is electronic grading (like TAG) and I hope we get there sooner than later. We have to take the human out of the loop.
PSA is the benchmark grading company- meaning you don’t want to do worse but you want to try to do better
Nov 9th 32 card vintage order still waiting. They are so slow on vintage. They may have sent your cards to a home grader and they damaged them. PSA doesn’t really like to talk about their home graders for obvious reasons
Bummer on the tough reveal. As a Jets fan (and more of a bandwagon Knicks fan), I get your Texas Rangers analogy completely.
I am slabnostic - have 8 BVG, 1 KSA, 2 CSG, 280 PSA and 111 SGC. When I find a card that I like and am looking for in any of the companies, I will buy them. Not on the registry because I have never completed anything without having cards from multiple grading companies. While being on the registry would be cool, I would rather buy cards than pay to cross. I would be fairly high on some of my HOF sets if I collected all in one slab. However, I appreciate you liking consistency. That is what is best for you and your right choice. I totally agree that a fan of everything cares and that is why they vent - we all wish we could influence decisions for anything we are fans of.
Thanks. I get why people are slabnostic too.
Psa is harsher on edges and corners and SGC is more on centering with vintage cards.
Unsure where to ask this question, seems there are many experts on this thread.. Are opee chee cards from the 70s as valuable as Topps
They still look pretty in slabs...but man, I've got a lot worse looking slabbed 4s and 5s. Weird.
Despite the grades Mike, they are still great looking cards!! Dave
No doubt Dave. I am happy to own them.
Grading seems completely subjective. All graders should include a checklist of how they determined the grade for each and every card. They need to come out of the shadows.
Love your selections for your submission. I'm a big fan of miultiplayer cards. Why collect one HOFer on a card when you can get multiple players on it. Plus the players that are not in The Hall were great in their own right as well. I've only graded with SGC and I don't see me switching up anytime soon. Maybe a lesser grading company for my childhood rookies from the late 80s early 90s that were stars but not HOFers. The cards look great but I understand your frustrations. The MacGregors look amazing!
I have a question? I have some baseball cards that I bought from thrift store. Should I sell it raw or graded? Im zero knowledge on baseball
No idea. Depends on what you have?
@@BaseballCollector its a binder of cards, it say in card 1991 40 years of baseball topps
@@six7onevlog85 I hate to tell you but not really worth anything. $10 maybe. Definitely not worth grading. Sorry.
@@BaseballCollector thanks for the info, I paid $15 bucks for it. Not even 1 player will get my money back lol...
It might be interested in some of those blank backs
Sorry but they have all sold already.
@@BaseballCollector okay well thank you anyway thanks for answering
Sorry Mike, looks like someone didn't have enough coffee that day. I haven't been buying graded for that long so I've decide that I'm going psa or sgc whichever I can find the best deal on, which works for me. I get why you want to have all psa, if I had a third of what you do I would also. I bought a 80 Henderson psa and went down that rabbit hole for the hof 80 set. Still lack 3 to finish. But I've decided I'm going to do the registry on my own with both companies. Recently had a pickup, 1926 w512 tris speaker labeled 1910 w-unc tris speaker, so yeah they need to do better.
I’m interested in the mcgregors
I also have Killebrew card of him hitting one out of the park three pictures in sequence 1962 ,A 1961 world series card great shape but not centered makes it only dallor amount
Cool 77 and 79 cards. PSA and SGC are both pretty strict on grading now. I guess it is more about how the card looks than the actual grade. If you’re never going to sell as a collector the grade shouldn’t matter that much.
If it's about how the card looks rather than the grade, then why get the card graded?
@@claudelehman7165, I agree. Why get the cards graded. Mike, is hooked on the card registry at PSA. I typically only grade cards that I will potentially sell. Much easier to sell graded cards.
13:14 They look good from the front but you're not showing the backs. Also you can't see if it has creases, marks. Can't see corners close enough or surface but the front doesn't look a 5, but you're not showing the surface, if you tilt it in light you should be able to see something.
I'm building 54 Bowman and 60 Topps sets, and I can depend on a PSA 6 being a nice card, and prices, especially on on the 60's, confirm it. A couple comments on your cards. You say you'd rather have an 8 OC than a 6. As nice as vintage 6's are, I'll take the 6. Your cards are consistently OC. Remember - backs count - that RBI back is bad. A year ago most of your cards would be qualified OC. I bought two complete 81 Topps traded sets many years ago (most poorly centered, BTW) that were in binder pages. They looked beautiful - color, gloss, white borders... Every one has a dinged corner, however slight. Pages are a corner destroyer.