I collect sports cards! I also sell sports cards, and I have been doing both for quite a while! I love sharing my passion with other collectors and hope to share the knowledge I've gained over the years. From tracking down collections to buy, to sorting, to reselling, to shipping and collecting tools - I'll try to cover all of it.
With submitting several cards a second time and getting different grades, how can we be confident in any of their grading system? How many 9s do we have that should have been a 10? Don't know if I want to waste my money on PSA. Thanks for the video.
Kind of makes me wish for AI grading to take human element out of it. Also, pretty sure they consider pop count for those McGwire cards. They don't want too many 10's.
Definitely a believer that they control the pop on certain cards - I remember watching a video a while back on a guy that analyzed the 93 SP Jeter count. I've got mixed feelings on AI, but am definitely a believer in some sort of technology aided grading.
PSA needs to be very specific as to why the grade was given . For example off center,coloring, and explain we’re it is located . Your paying them for a service and they SHOULD explain the flaws in the cards! SMH
PSA is controlling the market for sure.... Big cards getting lower grades with reason.... you'll never see Jordan, Henderson, Mantle's ever getting 10s again...Beckett's having 4 grading results is more honest.
The problem with graders is that you have a new generation grading them! They see these refractors and the new generation cards that come off the press immaculate! The 80's generation that graded these put that into play! Majority of them have retired!
FYI - Rocky Bleier was a 4x Super Bowl Champ, Hall of Famer + Vietnam War vet & Purple Heart recipient, among other accolades. Hope your buddy gives you crap on that one. 🤣
LOL - consider me more educated now. I knew the name, didn't know all that, though! I think he got that specific card as a gift when he was younger (sentimental value), and on the fly I wasn't sure if that was Rocky's RC or not. Thanks for watching!
they sure screwed u on those mcgwires im sorry but thats just the reality of it. there is no way that first card was a 7 .. that was literally perfectly centered all the way around. surface looked super clean. corners front and back were perfect. no chipping. that was 1 of the best mcgwires ive seen. that centering was incredible. sadly they want to control the population is why they wont give it a 10. now if you were probstein and sent that in it would have gotten a 10. they pick and choose who they give the 10's to. I dont know why they couldn't at least give you a 9 on that. but a 7? sorry but that is NOT a 7 in no way shape or form! not even an 8. compare yours to 10's yours looks better than some of the 10's ive even seen.
I just reviewed this video as a refresher to myself to ensure accuracy. One new thing that I noticed is that you will need to add a 'RelationshipDetails' column. Very easy to do. Everything else working as it should!
All good, brother! I've got some footage I'm slowly working on for a couple more vids. I've just been super busy with my 9-5 and kids' sports teams, lol. Hopefully soon!
I love the old BVG labels - I can't recall when they eliminated subs off the vintage stuff. While Beckett might not grade as harsh on the vintage, I honestly think that they might be the most accurate. A 5 should be a 5, not a 4. I don't hesitate to grab BVG labels for my PC. For that matter, I also like the original GAI stuff too...
@@jbscardshow Late 2005 they quit using sub grades. I have a 71 Pete Maravich card graded by BGS in 2000 which was two years before BVG. A Staubach rookie in a BGS 8 recently sold for just 1200 bucks. What a steal that was. Before BVG Beckett was notoriously tough on cards.
I have a microscope with a 7” display screen and a large area to to work in. It’s amazing how a card can look pristine to the naked eye and kind of ratty under the microscope. Most corners have some amount of the surface material missing. I did not get it for looking at cards but it does “slow your roll” and keeps you from getting ahead of your skis. So when it looks good under magnification it is good. I honestly do not get it when older cards look so good and get a 3? Is there something the camera and the person isn’t picking up?
Thanks for watching! Really appreciate the feedback and opinions as well. I definitely am guilty of rushing sometimes (though I don't hesitate to admit it!). I've found that most of the time I'm off with my grade it's a straight up miss or a subjectivity issue (ie: "I saw that corner, I just thought it made it a 7, not a 5" lol). If I were to be more serious, I'd definitely look at getting a setup like yours. At this point I've just got one of those magnifying glasses with an LED light on it. And that only gets used some of the time...
@@jbscardshow they actually are going to now... only on the upper tiers. Regular bulk and on specials,,, NO But they will be giving grader notes for the premium tiers.
Quote…if cards don’t come back the same grades…there’s a problem……the truth is if you yourself graded100 cards….then I took the grades away and made you regrade a month later….of course they wouldn’t all be the same…it’s human nature …….
This is it. How they get away with not doing this makes me question why people pay them for their "opinion". The problem is that it is an opinion and there is no way for PSA to know if the slab was cracked and resent for regrading. It's all too subjective for me.
@@spmacdonald precisely why I don't and wouldn't ever collected graded cards. the same cards graded a 10 that sell for hundreds or thousands of dollars you can find the same looking card for 5 or 10 bucks lol.well some maybe 20 or 30 bucks depending on which card. now I will say you may have to spend some serious time going through tons of listings inspecting everything but perfectly centered raws are out there for cheap with perfect sharp corners. and from an eye appeal looking at the card standpoint there is NO difference from the 5 dollar raw on ebay to the 900 dollar "PSA 10" ... this is the reality. I have bought plenty of perfectly centered with sharp corner raws on ebay for dirt cheap where the "PSA 10" sells for 100x more.
One final bit of constructive criticism - this is the first of your videos that I have watched. You need to be better organized and not jump all over the place. The fumbling around because of your disorganization takes up a lot of time on your video. Time that is precious for everyone. Additionally I wanted to see the 4 McCovey's revealed consecutively.
Thanks for sticking it out! This was an earlier video of mine - still figuring things out on it. Hopefully I've gotten better already (check out some of my more recent reveals!) but I know I'll always have room to improve. While I try to make things flow a little better, one thing I'll always probably end up doing is talking about the cards, though - that's just me. Oh also - all my reveals are blind so sometimes the order of them is just what it is.
I have the number five ranked 1980 Topps hockey set on the PSA set registry. I must have opened at least 6 wax boxes and three vending boxes of this year trying to complete it. 1980 T Ray bourque is consistently off center either top to bottom or left to right. Yours is way off center T to B. And even worse the back is miscut. Additionally I see touches of wear on all four corners. In the old days that would probably come back as a 8 (oc) or 8 (mc). PSA has cut back on the qualifiers in the past few years so that's probably why you got a 6. Your 74 Pete Rose should have definitely got the MC qualifier because of the cut on the back. You got a deal on that.
Thanks for watching and really appreciate the insight on the Bourque! It is not a card I am terribly familiar with (now if you'd like to discuss the 1982 Donruss Cal Ripken Jr - that's a different story, lol). Where on a sheet was Ray at? Typically, cards that have centering issues were near corners (1979 Ozzie Smith for example). We are in agreement on the Pete!
@@jbscardshow well I finally broke down sent in two submissions at 14.99. to think I used to get bulk rates at 7.99. between the two submissions it's 158 cards total virtually all vintage hockey and most of them commons. I'm talking 62 through 79. Mostly 69 through 74. I shudder to think what I might get under this new regime however historically I have had good luck picking cards out to be graded.
@@garygor1960 Best of luck!!!! Man, I remember those good old days. When I started subbing, Beckett came to my LCS and it was $7/sub given to them right there.
@@jbscardshow I was just looking through my old submission history I had one submission of 350 cards and many over 200 cards. Some awesome stuff. All vintage.
Thanks for posting. You have a nice array of cards there. Good selection. My question for you is how are you looking at your cards. Are you eyeballing them? Are you using a 10 times magnifier? Do you have an LED light on your Magnifier? do you have a centering tool. All these things help to make a better judgment on the grade of your cards.PSA does not give grades that aren’t deserved. I’ve sent them many cards in my lifetime and scrutinized them carefully. If you get an eight you’ve missed at least two things on the card. Hey, it’s your money.
On this one I actually did look at a lot of them under magnification, though I generally just eyeball them. I've been subbing for 13 years, and typically do ok IF I take my time. I obviously miss some things like we all do, but most of my misses fall into a subjectivity argument. That being said my real loose rule of thumb is that I break even on value if the card gets the lowest grade I think possible. On this sub for example, 8s might just cover grading, 9s I was in the black and 10s solid wins. Additionally, I think I've only spent more than $20/card on a sub once or twice - I sub cheap. I am not sweating needing a 10 on a $100 sub to make value. Thanks for watching!
I couldn't believe when they stopped taking submissions - million+ card backlogs. I've been subbing for 13 years and couldn't wrap my head around the volume, and like you said - what folks were sending in. I've picked up collections that have cards that were actually sent back to customers because of the price increases - and seriously tons of stuff not worth grading.
My biggest criticism ... And FYI I think that the root of the problem is the baked in subjectivity of grading scales. Solution would be clearly defined and objective grading aspects along with technology aided grading (I'm not sold on complete AI or computer grading) Thanks for watching!
Your Jordan is a 7 mainly bc of the back top edge, but also the back bottom right corner white & top right front corner. IMHO, I actually think a 7 is justified on that one :(
Good eyes! You are 100% correct. Right after filming I was taking a closer look and definitely saw the back side, lower right corner wear. Even without anything else that might be there that corner is it. Admittedly that back is often was I breeze through and overlook sometimes. Additionally, when I rush my subs, I sometimes forget if I've fully looked over a card or if it still needs a good review. Looking at some others I found back corner touches on at least one of the Posey Chromes and a surface indentation on the back of the Sabathia RC as well. Might be an idea for additional content - "What I missed". Thanks for watching!
There is no way that Griffey is a 5 solely due to centering. I also see some whitening on the back edges, the back right corner has a touch of white, but the main issue I see are the white surface dots on his left elbow (which aren't supposed to be there). If that is on the case itself, then there must be a surface indent which is harder to see. Even if all that is the case, a 5 still seems a rough grade. Just MHO.
I am a little hesitant to hand the reins over to computers yet. I do believe, though, that humans aided by technology can offer a much more consistent product. Might have to do a deep dive on my opinion someday.... thanks for wathching!
@@jbscardshow As much as im not ready for AI, it would help on grading probably there's so much money in cards now even the grading companies are crooked.
Thanks for watching! I'm leaning towards an SGC sub, thinking that this card might hit a .5 grade one way or the other. Will do my best to get it out there!
I’ve always been fascinated with this set and I’ve often wondered what a factory sealed set would yield condition wise. You answered my questions and I am now a subscriber - thank you sir. I guess we could say great minds think alike lol
Thanks for watching and subscribing! It was a hard first for me - I'm the type of guy that just let's Schrodinger's cat stay in the box. Definitely had fun, and even just got the rest of the set break up on eBay. Keeping my new set sealed, though!
Thanks for watching! I think I'm right exactly where you are on it. Thinking it might go to SGC for hope of some half-point love. Will try to get the update out ASAP.
Thanks for watching and sharing the same opinion as many of us in the hobby! Biggest issue with grading is consistency and adherence to stated standards.
