Exactly! I tell this story every time this conversation reemerges:
I remember doing a call with someone during 2020 who wanted to get a card that only had a handful of psa 10 examples. This was when the cert noise was louder; ironically the apparent “stronger” certs then are now the “weaker” certs today. One appeared for sale and was a 0 cert, so they declined. I explained to them this card is most likely not going to have many more gem mint copies.
Fast forward to today, they still don’t have the card, and most likely never will.
PSA 10 Shadowless Chansey. Notoriously always a tough card to grade. I also recently had someone else message me about another low pop PSA 10 shadowless card. They weren’t going to bid because the grade was weak. Strategies to never own a card.
This has been discussed a lot, but IMO it all comes down to each individual card. You can find ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ grades from all cert # ranges. I would not judge the cert, I would judge the card itself. I own a variety of slabs from a variety of cert #'s and I have found them all consistent when purchased with my own added discernment & knowledge applied.
Another thing I can add is this: Logan Paul bought an old cert PSA 10 1st Ed Charizard during Covid. It became a BGS 10 (supposedly tougher grade to score). Maybe it was marketing by BGS to give this grade out, maybe it’s because PSA has always graded hard when giving out 10s. Regardless, it shows that old certs aren’t always ‘weak’ by any stretch of the imagination, despite the opinion of many out there.
There’s going to be anecdotal grading mistakes from time to time given the massive amount of cards graded by PSA over the years. By and large though, the standard is quite rigorous to me. I have also personally seen ‘weak’ examples in newer cert # ranges as well, especially stuff graded during Covid that was obviously lazy and/or rushed potentially due to the massive influx of cards or other unusual circumstances at the grading companies during that time.
Top secret niche hint for those who think that old certs are weaker: I bought two old certs (PSA 10 holo 1st base) that looked like weak 10s. Fast forward: Both had residual dust not damage. I think the encapsulation process was a bit more sloppy back then and/or PSA simply did not care as it was a cheap Pokemon card.
This is true but also be reminded that Gary personally graded that one and he always had a really keen eye for quality. The BGS 10 re-grade was definitely marketing but also likely a strong card
It’s really not hard. The best examples of cards with the earlier certs will be some of the cleanest ones ever graded because they spent less time in packs, pack-fresh copies were easily available and people had to be a bit more particular about what they are grading.
On the other hand PSA treated Pokémon like they probably treat the Sabrina the Teenage Witch TCG today. The stakes were lower and the level of experience of everyone involved in the process was lower.
So the variance in a grade is probably higher to begin with.
Then add into that the fact that strong copies stay in collections, weak copies are replaced and flipped, stronger copies are regraded/crossgraded.
The benefit of buying a freshly graded copy is that you are getting an unbiased sample of the distribution, whereas older copies will skew towards weaker copies whether its 2xxx, 4xxx, 6xxx or one day 8xxx. Because an older slab is something someone chose to sell for some reason and likely not something graded by the seller for the intention to turn around and flip.
There will always be a range in quality for any cert number. To make a sweeping claim that all 2xxx or 4xxx (which used to be a strong cert lol) cards are worse than 8xxx, you have to assume that somehow people have systematic access to a degree of quality today that didn’t exist when vintage booster boxes were a few hundred dollars. If you acknowledge that the top 5% quality cards submitted in 2014 are generally comparable to the top 5% quality cards submitted today, then logically the top 5% of 2xxx certs are going to be comparable to the top 5% of 8xxx certs.
As always, if you care about condition look at the card. If you are blindly buying a massive amount of cards the cert might matter to improve your average. But if you’re hand-picking and inspecting each card you buy then you will do better by inspecting the card than the barcode.
This is what I was also going to say. That earlier certs for vintage pokemon were during a period where more “gem mint” cards were readily available/less handled. As the specific card ages, it makes sense that their are less raw gem mint copies in the wild. Years and years worth of storage, handling, dust, movements etc.
Very true. Although there are instances of it happening even today. There was a eFour member a couple weeks who submitted a full shadowless base set Holo set and he got 2 10s out of it. One being Raichu which is very low pop compared against the other shadowless holos. He said he had it in storage and from his childhood. Who knows. I’ve seen BGS black labels that clearly are not 10 centering or 10 corners but once it gets to that point you’re just knick picking on things. One persons eye isn’t better than the other to see “damage” in my opinion
If we are talking about 10s this doesn’t fully make sense. I’m open to an argument that 9/10 boundary may have shifted or tightened/loosened over time but by definition these are the weakest 10s. The strongest 10s are at the other end of the distribution, and again the only way to change that side of the distribution is to assume better cards are being submitted today than at any other point in time.
the people who are shopping strictly for a newer cert are putting too much trust in grading companies. consider any want to have a certain cert or paying a premium for it a tax on unintelligent buyers.
I faced similar dilemmas when i was working on some of my PSA 10 unlimited WoTC holo collection a few years ago. Cards like Giovanni’s Persian and Misty’s Golduck are hard set cards to grade in a 10. I think they are both still less than 25 copies each. When they finally came up for auction after years of waiting I didnt care about the cert #, just what the card looked like. A crazy concept I know lol.
I’m not here to debate it. From my experiences and observations, I feel as if PSA adopted more stringent grading standards after 6xxx. Your own experiences and observations may differ from mine. While I do value others’ experiences in creating an opinion, this song and dance has been played out many times, I’ve read them all. In rare coins, a fundamentally similar hobby, old PCGS holders (“old green holders”, or “rattlers”) often achieve considerable premiums at auction over new holders of an equivalent grade because they are perceived to be graded more stringently.
Same here as well. In my experience buying slabs, usually the 2x and before certs disappoint me the most. Not to say my sample size is relevant or anything, but for me personally I won’t touch 2x and before certs, unless majority of the card’s population is graded very early on.
I feel like the sky is green. I’m not here to debate it. From my experiences and observations, I feel as if the sky is green. Your own experiences and observations may differ from mine. While I do value others’ experiences in creating an opinion, this song and dance has been played out many times, I’ve read them all.
