PSA - New certs Vs Old certs

[7l7l]

@smpratte

@noivern

Well surely they didn’t have a single person grade ALL of these cards. Yeah, it wasn’t 88, but I’m sure they used everyone they had on staff working on it.

It was done by a single grader.

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe at least two sets of eyes are used in grading every card at PSA.

[smpratte]

@7l7l

Someone correct me if I’m wrong.

You’re wrong.

[7l7l]

@smpratte

@7l7l

Someone correct me if I’m wrong.

You’re wrong.

So you’re under the impression that the grades on all cards in a submission are all completely determined by the review of a single person?

[smpratte]

@7l7l

@pfm

The only confirmation bias here is with you. You’re starting with the conclusion and working backwards to find evidence to support it. Then you reject all counter evidence with how you feel PSA should be operating

Where’s the “counter evidence” (and evidence on what point)?

There is all grade data for Modern English, the cards being referenced. There is no change. If anything, the most difficult time for 10’s was in 2018, during the 2xxx certs…

[7l7l]

@smpratte

@7l7l

Where’s the “counter evidence” (and evidence on what point)?

There is all grade data for Modern English, the cards being referenced. There is no change. If anything, the most difficult time for 10’s was in 2018, during the 2xxx certs…

“There is no change” regarding what? Those data seem to go back only to the end of 2017. But the vast majority of 2xx certs predate the end 2017. Also, for the few 2017 datapoints on there, the proportion of tens is in two of three cases higher than all of the following points.

Does anyone have any data that actually include all (or at least most) of the 2xx series?

[pfm]

@7l7l

@pfm

The only confirmation bias here is with you. You’re starting with the conclusion and working backwards to find evidence to support it. Then you reject all counter evidence with how you feel PSA should be operating

Where’s the “counter evidence” (and evidence on what point)?

For the record I’ve already committed to never engaging with you again since it’s basically a waste of my time. Hopefully this will be my last reply to any of your posts

[shadowless]

@7l7l

@smpratte

There is all grade data for Modern English, the cards being referenced. There is no change. If anything, the most difficult time for 10’s was in 2018, during the 2xxx certs…

“There is no change” regarding what? Those data seem to go back only to the end of 2017. But the vast majority of 2xx certs predate the end 2017. Also, for the few 2017 datapoints on there, the proportion of tens is in two of three cases higher than all of the following points.

Does anyone have any data that actually include all (or at least most) of the 2xx series?

Scrape the data and show us some better analytics if this is not evidence enough

[7l7l]

@pfm

@7l7l

Where’s the “counter evidence” (and evidence on what point)?

For the record I’ve already committed to never engaging with you again since it’s basically a waste of my time. Hopefully this will be my last reply to any of your posts

Great argument; thanks for that. Also, thanks for the kind attitude; that’s what the forum needs.

[7l7l]

@shadowless

@7l7l

“There is no change” regarding what? Those data seem to go back only to the end of 2017. But the vast majority of 2xx certs predate the end 2017. Also, for the few 2017 datapoints on there, the proportion of tens is in two of three cases higher than all of the following points.

Does anyone have any data that actually include all (or at least most) of the 2xx series?

Scrape the data and show us some better analytics if this is not evidence enough

“Evidence enough” for what? I’m not using those data to assert that there’s a difference between 2xx and 4xx. *Others are using those data* to assert there’s *not* a difference. (But there are only minimal, if any, conclusions to draw from the data because they apparently omit the vast majority of the 2xx series.)

[mightymax]

@7l7l, stop trolling

[7l7l]

@mightymax

@7l7l, stop trolling

Look up the definition of trolling. I’m raising a valid point: Here, that those data only begin with the tail end of the 2xx series. (Is that false? Is there any indicium of trolling at all?)

If you have a response, I’d like to hear it. (I’m seeking to engage via logical reasoning, respectfully and in good faith, with anyone who is interested.) Otherwise, please don’t baselessly accuse me of being troll.

[smpratte]

@7l7l, You realize someone spent hours scrapping that psa data, for you to just completely ignore. This is why people say you are trolling. You are ignoring literal data/facts to make pointless contrarian arguments that waste everyones time.

[dblast]

Is this the thread to talk about charizards? I really like them and currently collecting 4x preferably and then 2x is fine too. Like if 2x is cheaper, that would be a further consideration to choose 2x, for me at least.

Because both 2x/4x’s miss centering and neither version is waterproof either. Both are typically important to collectors.

If you want the most scrutinizing grades, check out BGS. It can also be very rewarding with Black Label, they are the best of the best in grading.

[shadowless]

@dblast

Is this the thread to talk about charizards? I really like them and currently collecting 4x preferably and then 2x is fine too. Like if 2x is cheaper, that would be a further consideration to choose 2x, for me at least.

Because both 2x/4x’s miss centering and neither version is waterproof either. Both are typically important to collectors.

If you want the most scrutinizing grades, check out BGS. It can also be very rewarding with Black Label, they are the best of the best in grading.

I´m in tears right now

[7l7l]

@smpratte

@7l7l, You realize someone spent hours scrapping that psa data, for you to just completely ignore. This is why people say you are trolling. You are ignoring literal data/facts to make pointless contrarian arguments that waste everyones time.

I am taking the time to write this message in hopes you consider this before continuing down this path. Otherwise consistently derailing threads is against the Rules.

I don’t mean to ignore the data. I’m simply pointing out their limited utility if they incorporate only the tail end of the 2xx series. (Am I missing something? Or do we agree the vast majority of 2xx certs predated the last three months of 2017?)

I also don’t want to derail this thread (I thought the topic was “new certs Vs old certs”). If I want to discuss those data, where should I post? Thank you

[jonandek]

@dblast

Is this the thread to talk about charizards? I really like them and currently collecting 4x preferably and then 2x is fine too. Like if 2x is cheaper, that would be a further consideration to choose 2x, for me at least.

Because both 2x/4x’s miss centering and neither version is waterproof either. Both are typically important to collectors.

If you want the most scrutinizing grades, check out BGS. It can also be very rewarding with Black Label, they are the best of the best in grading.

that was your best post ever

[dblast]

I could be wrong, and I love 2x more then. One day we can talk about your dragonite, he’s a pretty dragon as well. Please don’t quote me, I don’t want to get in trouble.

[pfm]

@smpratte

@7l7l, You realize someone spent hours scrapping that psa data, for you to just completely ignore. This is why people say you are trolling. You are ignoring literal data/facts to make pointless contrarian arguments that waste everyones time.

I am taking the time to write this message in hopes you consider this before continuing down this path. Otherwise consistently derailing threads is against the Rules.

Literally wrote code to scrape the PSA set registry and scraped it for 2+ years straight. Spent hours trying to break down the data and plot it in an honest and informative way. Recorded a 20 minute video which took 3 takes. Shared the data and results publicly, free of charge, asking for nothing in return. Only to be told by someone - who’s only contribution to the conversation has only been concern trolling - that the data is not good enough.

In the end though I’m hardly bothered. I did the work for myself and the people who appreciate it. I’m not really concerned with the opinions of perpetual timewasters

[dblast]

To be honest, I really like the 1x certs, it shows how impressive the grader was to grade during those early years. It’s quite a treasure I’d say. The lower the certs, the better with that train of thought.

This topic has been discussed for months. Maybe we will know the answer by 2021. Have a good discussion.

[7l7l]

@pfm

@smpratte

@7l7l, You realize someone spent hours scrapping that psa data, for you to just completely ignore. This is why people say you are trolling. You are ignoring literal data/facts to make pointless contrarian arguments that waste everyones time.

I am taking the time to write this message in hopes you consider this before continuing down this path. Otherwise consistently derailing threads is against the Rules.

Literally wrote code to scrape the PSA set registry and scraped it for 2+ years straight. Spent hours trying to break down the data and plot it in an honest and informative way. Recorded a 20 minute video which took 3 takes. Shared the data and results publicly, free of charge, asking for nothing in return. Only to be told by someone - who’s only contribution to the conversation has only been concern trolling - that the data is not good enough.

In the end though I’m hardly bothered. I did the work for myself and the people who appreciate it. I’m not really concerned with the opinions of perpetual timewasters

I do appreciate your time and effort. I apologize if I haven’t been sensitive or have overlooked the emotional aspects of this issue. I simply mean to ask pointed questions that will shed light on the question. I apologize for any offense