Your conclusion seems to be the strongest possible: that there’s *definitely* no difference in grading standards or card quality. As is obvious to anyone looking objectively at this issue, such a strong conclusion does not follow from the available evidence.
Regardless, by reflexively insulting anyone who raises legitimate questions, you’ve shown that you’re not looking objectively and not concerned with the available evidence.
Imagine 7l7l is actually smpratte just trolling lol
I aint buying nothin till the 5 certs hit the market
can someone post pictures of 2 certs and 4 certs with certs/barcodes hidden and see if @7l7l can tell the difference. Almost all of mine are on eBay and could easily be looked up.
A “study” of this kind would be helpful. But it shouldn’t be done with just a few cards (the more, the better) and can’t be done with pictures.
Why not pictures? What specifically do you need to see to know if it’s a 2 cert or 4 cert. If I showed you 100 cards front and back how would you know a 2 vs 4?
I wouldn’t question 2 v. 4. I’m just observing that most people agree it’s very difficult to grade cards on pictures alone (let alone draw the granular distinctions we’re interested in here).
But your general idea (comparing 2 v. 4) is great. We just need large samples and certain controls.
It’s hard to grade on pictures, but you’re not grading. You’re telling me which is the 2 and which is the 4. I can tell through pictures which card is the ‘weaker’ grade.
What your argument lacks is actual things you can point to. If I say t17 is hard to grade and someone asks me why I have a response, the t17 often times has print lines, a ton of them have whitening on the sides.
When you say the grade is harder to get and I ask what makes it harsher I want an answer. They don’t allow as much edgeware as they used to, they tightened up their centering rules, or something. That way I can actually look at what was said and say okay, yes or no to that statement.
Saying a grade is weaker, doesn’t allow me to look at anything, it’s a subjective term. I can tell you right now I have way more 4 cert 10 than I ever had 2 cert 10. I can’t see any differences between the grades I do have. I even have a couple 1 cents I can’t see anything that jumps out to me.
Maybe I’m not explaining clearly. What I propose—and what would effectively test the hypothesis that there’s a difference in grading standards or card quality—is that:
• large samples of 2- and 4-series be collected;
• they be randomized and assigned for “re-grading” (double-blind); and that
• the person(s) conducting this study note differences (if any).
Do you see how that procedure would effectively test the hypothesis that there’s a difference in grading standards or card quality?
Although some dogmatically assert there’s no difference, it’s quite unclear what conclusive evidence they purport to rely on (and I believe only a procedure like the one I suggested can help explain the difference in the data we do in fact see).
So you can’t define what the difference in grades are, yet you still assert that there’s a difference? I’m pretty sure your evidence is the same, nothing conclusive. How come you get to assert that your inconclusive data is better than others to make your assertion?
If you want conclusive data, how about the fact that nobody at PSA has said there’s been changes in the company?
You’re free to get that data, if someone is going to claim something without any proof they should be the ones with the labor to prove their claim. Otherwise it’s wise not to fall victim to believing things without proof.
“If someone is going to claim something without any proof they should be the ones with the labor to prove their claim”—bingo!
I’m not sure whether there’s a difference: not asserting there is, not asserting there isn’t. I’m simply suggesting that there may be—and of course there *may* be, because we know there’s a lower proportion of 10s and we know many smart people think they see a difference—and we should test whether there is.
Contrast my position—it’s possible; we should test it—with others who dogmatically assert there’s no difference even though the hypothesis has never actually been tested.
The claim of 4 certs are better than 2 certs needs to be proven, not the other way around. You can’t just make a claim with no evidence. If you didn’t make that claim the standard still exists a 10 is a 10 and the cert doens’t matter. You’re trying to claim that people that fight for the standard need to provide proof is illogical. AKA, there isn’t a claim that the certs don’t matter untill the claim that they do comes forward. Quit being dumb and making others jump through hoops to disprove the theory.
You did assert that is. I’ve highlighted it.
Yes, the hypothesis has never been tested; therfore, the standard needs to be applied. Certs don’t matter.
Sir, it should be clear that noting that there’s evidence of some proposition is not the same as asserting that the proposition is true. I’m not sure whether the proposition is true.
The observation and framework I’m using are not much different than that used by scientists: observe, hypothesize, test.
All I’ve done is observed evidence of a difference (e.g., lower proportion of tens, many smart people thinking they see a difference); hypothesized that there could be a difference in grading standards or card quality; and suggested that the possibility be tested.
Do you understand my position?
You’ve gone from “significant evidence,” to people need to disprove the theory, to now saying we don’t know the truth. Got it.
Till evidence comes forward that 4 certs and 2 certs are different we don’t need to promote theories without making it clear that they’re unproven theories.
The only person who needs to “disprove the theory” is someone who definitively asserts there’s no difference. (This consequence follows from the principles we agreed on above. But the preferable course, obviously, is withholding definitive judgment.) I agree with the other two things you said: there’s significant evidence; but at this point we don’t really know one way or the other.
You should recognize that there is evidence—e.g., difference in proportion of tens, many smart people thinking there’s a difference—but we agree it’s not conclusive. Hence my position: Test the hypothesis.
You believe whatever you want. You should also join the church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster if you want people to have to disprove the theory and entertain both sides instead of come to an agreement that the standard is set until proven otherwise.
It seems you’re relying directly on a fallacious false equivalence. There is absolutely no evidence to support the proposition there’s a Spaghetti Monster. (Please correct me if you think there’s such evidence/state it and explain it.)
Here, there’s significant evidence (difference in proportion of tens, many smart people thinking there’s a difference)—but we agree it’s not conclusive.
Just had to google the word dogmatically. I’ll have to try get that into an email I write within the next week
There’s a whole book of evidence on the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Does this even surprise anyone? It’s harder and harder to find gem mint WotC cards as time goes by, and a lot more people grade cards these days than before. In the past (i.e. ten years ago), a 1st ed. Base Set Charizard would primarily be send in for grading if people thought it had a shot at a 7-10. These days everyone send it in, even if they know beforehand it will get a 1-5. Also, there are a lot more returning collectors who jumped on the grading bandwagon without too much grading experience yet; and some also grade cards from their youth that in a lot of cases might still look NM, but given their age, have a pretty slim chance of getting a 10.
If you want to compare the proportion of 10s for 2xxx and 4xxx, you should only look at the cards that were modern (for example less than two years old) at time of grading. But even then it’s hardly conclusive. Some sets are covered with print lines on all holofoil cards, and other sets are in excellent quality overall. It wouldn’t surprise me if 2xxx grades would actually have a lower 10s percentage than 4xxx for modern cards only tbh, if we look at how good the quality is in for example the Hidden Fates set (there are freaking 150+ BGS Black Label Shiny Charizards…).
Besides, let’s say in theory everything people claim is indeed correct and 4xxx 10s are ‘better’ than 2xxx 10s. It still doesn’t mean a single thing what cert is on the PSA case. Why? Because you should buy the card, not the grade (or cert). I’ve seen 10s that should have been 8s for 1xxx, 2xxx, and 4xxx. I’ve seen 4s (with a minor almost invisible crease) that had a lot better eye appeal at the front of the card than some 7s. (I will be honest here though, I personally look more at the grade than the card in for example my Moltres WotC #21 promo collection. But that’s mostly because I don’t care too much about the condition of cards in general, and simply collect PSA-10s. Thought I’d mention that, since it’s actually the opposite of what I just said people should look at.)
Anyway, these 2xxx vs 4xxx discussions remind me a lot of religions. Why? Because I think you’re free to believe whatever you want. If you want to believe 4xxx are better than 2xxx, be my guest. I’m not stopping you. You want to believe in God or holy spirits, be my guest. I’m not stopping you. But whatever you believe in, don’t force your believes on others who have different believes. Sure, I’m all open to arguments why I should believe in something or not. Last time someone came at my door stating ‘Do you have some time to talk about our lord and savior?’ I patiently listened to what they had to say, even though I already knew beforehand I would be extremely unlikely to change my mind. Doing so, I actually learned something, since they showed me a short video of the history of their religion on a tablet, which was pretty interesting. But even after that, I thanked them for their time and send them away. I’m an atheist personally, but I think everyone is free to believe whatever they want, as long as they don’t force it onto others. That forceful behavior is usually the cause of war in this world…
Some discussions here are rather similar (although on smaller scale of course). We each listen to arguments of each other, and everyone has their own opinions, morals, and believes. Having a discussions every now and then is what this forum is all about of course, and I greatly encourage it in general. But it’s rather pointless to have endless back and forth of comments without actually listening to one another. At a certain point, it’s just best to agree to disagree so both parties won’t have to waste any more time trying to convince the other group otherwise, since neither side will bulge.
It’s not just with this 2xxx vs 4xxx discussion, but all discussions in general. Lately I see so many topics that come up 10+ times in different threads and a lot of time end up being locked at the end because people are spitting comments back and forth at each other without actually listening, since they already made up their mind beforehand. I don’t really get the point of trying to convince someone who clearly doesn’t want to be convinced (from the perspective of either side of the coin towards the other), but maybe that’s just me.
PS: If you want to know what side I am on in this 2xxx vs 4xxx discussion, the answer is neither. I’ve only graded about ten cards in my life thus far, so I hardly have the experience or knowledge to pick a side. I honestly also don’t really care either way anyway.
Greetz,
Quuador