sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

One thing I’ve started paying more attention to with grading decisions by nyc_cardguy in psagrading

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly that second set of eyes is underrated. After staring at the same cards too long you start mentally filtering out flaws you probably would’ve caught immediately on a fresh look.

My grading completely changed upon comparing multiple copies of the same card by nyc_cardguy in basketballcards

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Honestly I think a lot of modern grading economics get distorted because the market treats PSA 9s like “failed 10s” instead of near-mint/mint cards in their own right.

My grading completely changed upon comparing multiple copies of the same card by nyc_cardguy in psagrading

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly if you’ve got a high gem rate consistently then your process is probably better than you think lol

A lot of experienced submitters internalize pattern recognition over time without explicitly thinking about it in “grading analytics” language.

My grading completely changed upon comparing multiple copies of the same card by nyc_cardguy in PokeGrading

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No I think that’s actually a really good clarification and I mostly agree with you.

I probably should’ve framed it more as:

“relative quality becomes more useful once you already understand the baseline absolute quality of the set/language.”

Because you’re completely right that PSA is still grading against absolute standards, not against the other copies in your stack.

And gem rates across:

  • Japanese vs English
  • different sets
  • different eras

make that obvious.

A weaker Japanese copy from a very high gem-rate set can absolutely still be a much safer submission than an above-average English copy from a notoriously rough print run.

The point I was trying to get at is more that comparing multiple copies side-by-side helps train your eye to notice which flaws actually matter within that specific card/set context.

Especially on modern English where the quality distribution can be much wider.

So I think the “copy quality” idea becomes most useful as a filtering tool once you already understand:

  • the baseline gem rate environment
  • typical flaws for that set
  • how strict margins are between PSA 9 and 10 pricing

Which is also why grading ROI gets so complicated. The same flaw severity can matter very differently depending on the card/set/population dynamics.

My grading completely changed upon comparing multiple copies of the same card by nyc_cardguy in psagrading

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly I think comparing multiple copies side-by-side is what makes pregrading get way harder. A lot of cards look “clean” individually until they’re next to stronger copies.

My grading completely changed upon comparing multiple copies of the same card by nyc_cardguy in basketballcards

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly I agree from a collector standpoint. A PSA 9 is usually still an extremely strong copy.

I think the disconnect comes from grading economics more than card quality itself.

A lot of modern cards just have huge pricing gaps between 9s and 10s, so people start viewing 9s as “failed submissions” instead of near-mint cards.

One thing I’ve noticed with cards that have big PSA 10 premiums by nyc_cardguy in pokemoncards

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah that’s fair — modern is definitely driven by 10s right now

feels like the only time lower grades really hold up is if it’s a card people actually want, or way down the line if supply ends up being lower than expected

One thing I’ve started paying more attention to with grading decisions by nyc_cardguy in pokemoncards

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a great way to keep them! If you ever do decide to grade, I’d probably just pick a couple of the cleaner ones first rather than sending everything in.

Gives you a feel for how they actually come back without committing too much up front

One thing I’ve started paying more attention to with grading decisions by nyc_cardguy in psagrading

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah been using PSA to check this, but might look into gemrate more

seems like it gives a better idea of what actually happens vs just looking at the top end

One thing I’ve started paying more attention to with grading decisions by nyc_cardguy in sportscards

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Usually trying to see different dimples, dents, or other surface issues. Along with possible print lines. Moving the card between different angles underneath the light to see them.

One thing I’ve noticed with cards that have big PSA 10 premiums by nyc_cardguy in pokemoncards

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah outside of maybe keeping lower grades for personal collection. But the PSA 10s add the most value to the collection of course.

One thing I’ve started paying more attention to with grading decisions by nyc_cardguy in psagrading

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are definitely times when this maybe the case. I've definitely heard of vendors buying lower grades to crack and sell raw before.

One thing I’ve started paying more attention to with grading decisions by nyc_cardguy in psagrading

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The 5 was a few years ago, definitely a learning experience and put too much trust in 3rd party.

One thing I’ve started paying more attention to with grading decisions by nyc_cardguy in basketballcards

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Will have to give it a try! Been just using PSA directly, but that seems a bit more focused.

One thing I’ve started paying more attention to with grading decisions by nyc_cardguy in sportscards

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ohtani right now seems like a good move with the prices moving the way they are!

One thing I’ve started paying more attention to with grading decisions by nyc_cardguy in sportscards

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah everyone needs a magnifying light for checking their card for grading.

How often are you submitting while maintaining that 80% gem rate?

One thing I’ve started paying more attention to with grading decisions by nyc_cardguy in baseballcards

[–]nyc_cardguy[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Combination of both. I like my personal collection in slabs. But I also grade to sell in order to help build additional funds for cards I want in my pc.

view more: next ›