Does Charmander deserve a Miscut grade?

Hey E4 Family,

A merry Xmas, and happy holidays to you all. Stay safe and enjoy the time with family & friends :blush:

I am sure I know the answer…but opinions and expertise would be very appreciated.

I had this Charmander graded recently…and had in the notes to have it considered for a Miscut (MC) grade. I get it back as a standard PSA6 card, as seen.

I have seen a fair few “softer” (or not as miscut) cards that get the MC grade, compared to the Charmander. As in the last photo, it even features the notorious alignment dot on the front bottom RHS.

It is badly miscut I do think, as it blatantly reveals just by looking at it. Your opinions would be valued as I mentioned though! From my gut instinct, I will ask PSA for a re-label.

Thanks everyone,
Dan

post a picture

2 Likes

Yes, it’s a strong candidate for an MC designation.

4 Likes

Should’ve been an 8 or 9 (MC), or at least (OC). Print dots are showing which are blatantly ignored by the grader (aka; grader has no knowledge of Pokémon). Dunno if they would relabel this though, since it’s only due to its severe centering issue it’s got a 6. Or do you want a 6 (MC)/6 (OC)? :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

Thanks genosha,
I think the actual photo does the card better justice, it is probably a 6-7 condition cosmetically with a fair bit of whitening on the sides.
The appeal of the card that made me purchase it was the miscut, not so much the condition. I can only try to send PSA some communications and see what they have to say. I think it ticks more the enough boxes for a Miscut.

How did that get 6 and not a MC grade

2 Likes

Yes seriously, like other’s have mentioned here, its blatantly a miscut… the only hassle would be sending it back and take forever to come back to you. I am not even sure on their policy is on mis-graded cards.

1 Like

Does it deserve the OC/MC qualifier? Yes.

Will PSA acknowledge that it deserves it? Probably not.

A few collectors and myself have been trying to grade all kinds of OC/MC. From slight to extreme cases. We haven’t had much luck whatsoever. Recently it took me sending around 15 OC cards for the grader to realize I actually sent them in for that very reason, and was given a handful of PSA8(OC)

Next time, once grades are posted, call them before they ship, and if they haven’t give you the OC/MC tell them to look again, and explain the extreme MC of the card. I tried it once and it worked to get a few cards a qualifier.

4 Likes

It looks like its on the border between OC and MC. But there’s definitely a difference between the intended purpose of the qualifier and how people in Pokemon treat it.

A qualifier is meant to be a signifier that the card is otherwise very nice but has an extreme flaw that would really impact the grade if it was fully considered. So instead of calling a stained card a PSA 4, they can call it a PSA 8 (ST). From PSA’s perspective, qualifiers are generally undesirable. Lower grade cards may get a straight grade instead of the qualifier.

In Pokemon, people generally like miscuts and severly off center cards. They treat the qualifer as a bonus and recognition that their card has a special feature.

There’s little consistency with how the centering qualifiers are given out. If you follow their grading scheme, lower condition cards require a higher degree of off centerness to get the qualifier. Qualifiers are probably the “PSA 8.5” equivalent in the world of sports so they are probably reluctant to hand out too many.

Overall, it’s a messy situation. If you crack and resubmit the charmander it’s a good candidate for a qualifier though.

2 Likes

@pkmnflyingmaster, @swolepoke, @teamrocketop, @jakew1992, @genosha, @funmonkey54

Appreciate all the love guys!

It is a sticky one, I gather. As I mentioned, at best, I think the card is a PSA7, as it has some quite obvious whitening on the rear, which is a tad hard to see in the rear photo as above.

I will send PSA a query, which will be very interesting to see what comes of it. I’ll try to highlight the obvious printing aligning dot. Not fussed at all if it keeps the 6 grade, TBH.

For anyone’s reference, I will keep this updated with what I hear back. We will see how we go.

Dan :blush:

2 Likes

PSA is very inconsistent with qualifiers… I once sent a MC card that came back with a “factory misprint, no grade” that was subsequently graded a PSA 8(MC) upon a second submission. Meh…

1 Like

I think you’re super lucky to avoid the dreaded qualifier:)

Thanks GH!

Do you think the card is more desirable marked as a “MC” or “OC”? Visually, anyone will realise the major flaw/factory error, which I assume makes it unique. Not 100% on which way to go about it!

A FYI - it will stay in my vaulted collection, too :grin:

I think PSA is less inclined to give qualifiers to cards that would score under an 8. I just sent in a Mew and it got an OC 9 and it wasn’t nearly as OC/MC as yours.

1 Like

There isn’t a single card in the world, sports or non-sports, that isn’t banged for having a qualifier.
This is uncharted territory Danny.

1 Like

Wise words! I will take that onboard :blush: