I empathize with waiting for months just to get disappointing grades from PSA. Near-miscuts on the back might not bother you (you didn't mention them), but PSA will dock a couple grades just for that alone. You were surprised that Yaz and Tidrow didn't both get 7, but compare the backs. Some of the first ones you revealed had terrible reverse centering. SGC gives less weight to reverse centering and more to the eye appeal up front.
Yeah, I have in the past misjudged the effect of poor back centering also. I have missed that again, don't know why I didn't notice. Sometimes I send to SGC. Thanks for watching
ty for sharing. I suggest considering SGC for your vintage. I think your Niekro would have been at least a 5 w/ SGC as the only thing I could see wrong with it was the diamond cut. the first couple cards were dangerously close to being miscut on the back. it almost seems they deducted 2 grades for that w/o giving you the qualifier.. e.g., one more centimeter and your Tiant could have been a 6 MC. they penalized you anyway (seemingly)
Thanks for that viewpoint. I sometimes submit to SGC with the old old stuff, like I have some T206's that I am going to send to them. For the mid-century cards, I have stayed with PSA, since they give the cards better value, though it is annoying how much tight they are with giving out higher grades for minor stuff like OC on the back.
I could see a ding on the upper left corner of the Yaz. I always look at corners and edges with a magnifier before I send anything because I know they do. Good video. Thanks!
Definitely a mixed bag! I don't think you could get much more variety than that. I thought the Ruth was a cool looking card. Thanks for sharing Mike. Take care and good luck on your next submission.
I usually agree, though it is pretty cool to see the words Mint 9 on a 1961 Marichal, even if the qualifier is there, just this one time. Thanks so much for watching, appreciate the view and comment
@@joemac999 yeah that was a mistake, but it looked so good that I thought it might gem or least be mint. But was way off. I had some other stars that I didn't send including a 75 McCovey and 68 Sutton, because I knew they wouldn't grade well.
I empathize with waiting for months just to get disappointing grades from PSA. Near-miscuts on the back might not bother you (you didn't mention them), but PSA will dock a couple grades just for that alone. You were surprised that Yaz and Tidrow didn't both get 7, but compare the backs. Some of the first ones you revealed had terrible reverse centering. SGC gives less weight to reverse centering and more to the eye appeal up front.
Yeah, I have in the past misjudged the effect of poor back centering also. I have missed that again, don't know why I didn't notice. Sometimes I send to SGC. Thanks for watching
ty for sharing. I suggest considering SGC for your vintage. I think your Niekro would have been at least a 5 w/ SGC as the only thing I could see wrong with it was the diamond cut. the first couple cards were dangerously close to being miscut on the back. it almost seems they deducted 2 grades for that w/o giving you the qualifier.. e.g., one more centimeter and your Tiant could have been a 6 MC. they penalized you anyway (seemingly)
Thanks for that viewpoint. I sometimes submit to SGC with the old old stuff, like I have some T206's that I am going to send to them. For the mid-century cards, I have stayed with PSA, since they give the cards better value, though it is annoying how much tight they are with giving out higher grades for minor stuff like OC on the back.
Whoah! The 9(OC) on the Marichal rookie puts that card in rare air for corners and surface! Nice reveal
Thanks very much, even with the qualifier, happily surprised to get the 9!
Nice pile of heaters bud 👍
Thanks man, appreciate it
That’s part of the excitement. You never know what you’re gonna get.
Exactly
I could see a ding on the upper left corner of the Yaz. I always look at corners and edges with a magnifier before I send anything because I know they do. Good video. Thanks!
Yeah I saw it later too. Thought I checked pretty carefully, I guess I missed it. Thanks for watching
Definitely a mixed bag! I don't think you could get much more variety than that. I thought the Ruth was a cool looking card. Thanks for sharing Mike. Take care and good luck on your next submission.
@@oldnewrips thanks Lance, a Ruth is a Ruth, I guess
Nice cards, well done. I hate qualifiers and really think PSA should stop using them..
I usually agree, though it is pretty cool to see the words Mint 9 on a 1961 Marichal, even if the qualifier is there, just this one time. Thanks so much for watching, appreciate the view and comment
If you're sending a 75 Carl Morton in to get graded, what aren't you sending in?
@@joemac999 yeah that was a mistake, but it looked so good that I thought it might gem or least be mint. But was way off. I had some other stars that I didn't send including a 75 McCovey and 68 Sutton, because I knew they wouldn't grade well.