Great video Graig! My New Year’s Card Resolution is to resist eBay. I have a bad habit of hopping on and spending $20 here and $20 there, and in the end, probably could have used a lot of that $$ on something that I wanted more. I don’t know if we call it be more patient or be less impulsive. Either way, I am attending Strongsville for the first time next year ad the majority of my entire year’s budget will be spent there. It is going to be tough to not buy regularly to scratch that itch, but I find watching TH-camrs in the hobby seems to satisfy that itch. I just hope it can continue.
Story of my last few years. Tons of last second ebay snipes and I could have just saved the money for a card I "Really" wanted. Impulsive is real. Good luck practicing restraint.
Your videos always make me think. I had written goals for collecting in 2024. Just went and updated it: 2025 Card Collecting Goals 1) Purchase Target cards - Define a limited number of target cards - Caitlin Clark, Terry Bradshaw, Roger Staubach, and some others (maybe 1953 Mickey Mantle low grade). Stick to my budget in 2025 2) Consolidate collection - keep 200 EBay card listings up regularly to consolidate my collection - eliminate all sets 3) Get some of remaining PC Cards graded - some mid tier cards desired to be slabbed with either TAG or CGC 4) Create more displays for key favorite cards - including very nice binders for top loader cards In 2024 I did a pretty good job sticking to my goals. Only a few hiccups (unplanned purchases). Goals can evolve over time, but always good to give us direction. Thanks for all of your videos!!!!!
I always liked Gil and did the same thing years ago. Still need his 49 cause I never liked or collected 49's. Another example as to why "I should have collected what I didn't like". I did Pick up a beautiful HR Derby and Stalled Meier weiner card this year and I love them.
Great video Graig. Eye opening. For next year, I hope to cut back on my spontaneous Ebay purchases. I need to focus only on the cards I really want and not get caught up in hype. I've been accumulating too much this year. So PSA admits they do pop control on the big cards. Disappointing again with them. So they cheat us on grades to they can save money on insurance or something? The grading industry appears scam-ish. Have a great Christmas dude!
Out of 38,224 Henderson 1980, only 25 have been 10s.. a TINY fraction of a percent.. but Jim Barr has 47 10s out of 79. Yeah more Rickeys are submitted and most Jim Barr submissions are already possible 10s. But when examining each player in the set it is OBVIOUS they most definitely give Rickey 10s a 9 or 8. And OF COURSE the graders are well aware of the iconic cards and the difference in price between a 8, 9 or 10. Its their actual profession.. they see these cards every day and realize the power they have.
Hey Graig!! This week's question is one of my favorites to think about around this time of year. It seems each year I start formulating my collecting plan for the coming year in late-November. I usually look around at what my hobby friends are doing, and try and think about what things are missing from my collection that I'd like to own. The answer for 2025 is that I feel my collection needs more vintage boxing cards, as well as 90s football refractors. I'm a long-time vintage football collector, but at this point there aren't many vintage football cards left for me to chase. I picked up vintage boxing this summer to scratch my itch to own rare pieces of history, and boy is it working! I definitely plan to keep going with vintage boxing in 2025. That said, watching you and other TH-camrs (specifically Adam at Splendid Sports) talking about the nostalgic cards in your collections has made me want to add more cards I wanted, but could not afford as a kid. For me, that means refractors of hall of famers from mid-90s releases of Topps Finest, Chrome, and Bowman's Best. Within that there will definitely be a heavy dose of my all-time favorite player: Barry Sanders. Excited to see what 2025 brings! Good luck to you and the rest of the Midlife community with your 2025 collecting goals!
I have never understood how PSA would be incentivized by manufacturing the scarcity of certain grades. Why would they even care what PSA 10s are worth? They are not investing in these cards, they are simply grading them. It’s really the people investing in certain cards that seem like they would have an interest in lower pop counts. That said, just because I don’t understand the “why” doesn’t mean they are not doing it. The basic mathematical comparison angle is probably the best evidence, and I think the best way to investigate it would be to simply compare gem rates of different cards within the same exact set.
I think this is a fair point. But....if some cards have MASSIVE values in 10s....doesn't that entice more people to chase the grade of a 10 to get the massive value, thus encouraging people to submit cards they wouldn't have otherwise?
@ Absolutely. And that’s only more business for PSA. So again, not quite sure why they would care. The liability piece makes sense, but I think it would help to provide an example of how their guarantee and liability intersect. If they grade a big card a 10, that’s it. It’s a 10 forever (regardless of any misgrading). So how would liability enter the picture?
About to watch now Graig. Yes, for certain sets, players , & cards are 100% pop controlled especially w/ the higher grades. At the same time, the stricter grading standards make it appear pop control is done more often.
Great video and I agree that this topic is very nuanced. Here's my take, for what it's worth: In theory, I don't really have a problem with grading companies admitting they scrutinize more iconic/popular cards more closely. If I send in a 1980 Topps Rickey Henderson, in presumably NM+ condition, yes, I expect it will be looked at for a few extra minutes than some base 2024 optic football card that doesn't carry the same "prestige." I have no problem with that. I do wonder whether PSA can get a bit skittish to give these iconic cards a grade of 10, for fear of social media backlash if there is any whiff of slight off centering, etc. Just look at what happened with the Wemby Black Prizm 1/1. Lots pf people looked at the card and immediately said "that centering is poor for a 10." Whether the centering was or wasn't perfect wasn't even the issue. The issue was the negative feedback to the 10 grade in that scenario. I also think it can be easier for graders to find a flaw with a card to argue against a 10 than it is to say "yeah this is an amazing example, and it deserves a 10." Graders are paid to scrutinize. I think if we all looked hard enough, we could find a flaw with every 10 that has ever been graded! I do not think PSA is maliciously controlling population counts, but more scrutiny/tikme spent grading certain cards does, by nature, imply stricter guidelines for said cards.
This was very informative and you have to go by trust. The downside is the individual that grades the card. How are they feeling that day and are they being truly accurate and are not caring who submitted the card whether they’re common people or the high end card collectors. In one retrospect I collect cards. for the achievement that the players and their love of the game achieved now having a nicer card is always nice. That isn’t always the case, but I still care about the card that isn’t a pristine card it’s because of who the card is representing. Grading cards I think is a waste of my money because all of my cards mean the utmost appreciation for all the players that played and earn the respect of the baseball league and to go into the Hall of Fame.
Poor Hunter with the spiky hair, leave him alone, haha. But great video. As someone who mostly collects raw cards, I always get some new knowledge out of grading related videos.
Your point about greater liability for more expensive cards makes a lot of sense. Still, I have a hard time accepting that all cards would not be treated with the same level of scrutiny. The cards themselves (at least for vintage) were not handled differently when printed and packaged, so why should they be graded differently? As we highlight so often, grading is a subjective process -- it's based on the opinion of the trained grader who happens to be assigned to a given card. For me, the randomness of which card gets assigned to which grader is part of the subjectivity we've all bought into. Giving more sought after cards more scrutiny begins to take away from the subjectivity of the process. In my mind, that raises red flags. For next year, my goals are to continue condensing my collection while concentrating primarily on vintage. I am new to the hobby and spent most of last year building modern sets, but in a NYC apartment you start to run out of space very quickly! Additionally, I aim to be more interactive in the hobby, which includes commenting on videos like yours.
Setting goals, then having the motivation and also focus to follow goals are, something I struggle with. I think, when, it comes to a New Years Resolution hobby goal. I feel collecting strategies can be so transient and change organically. For me, saying I am going to buy Pre-War in February, Vintage in April, and Modern in July or August, it just doesn't work. But, maybe for other collectors that, is a plan they adhere to. Great question, and video.
There is a cause/effect with the PSA President admitting that they take extra care looking over iconic cards. They are essentially admitting that they are not as consistent for everything else. This furthers the narrative that a modern card submitted could be PSA 9 on Monday, could be a 10 Tuesday , and could be a 9 on Wednesday. Yet the 10 is worth 3x or 5x more than the 9 when the President of company admits they aren’t inspecting it like specific iconic cards?
My New Year's Resolution is to lose weight, at least 30 pounds. Oh wait, you meant about cards. For next year, I have several goals when it comes to my collection. I have WAY too many cards presently, so I plan to sell as many duplicates and unimportant, un-needed cards as I can on eBay and use that money to grab a few higher end cards that I have been eyeing. I would like to buy a higher end PSA or SGC perfectly centered 1980 Topps Larry Bird/Magic card and a 1960 Topps Yaz Rookie, with both cards missing that nasty print defect that is so common. I would also like to purchase my very first 1950's era Mickey Mantle card in at least a PSA 5/6. I would also like to go to my very first card show, which will likely be in Nashville. I think all of these New Year's goals are doable, except maybe the weight issue. Happy New Year to you, Graig, and your wonderful family.
My opinion.. no population control but a reluctance to grade higher if a card is older. I also don’t think there’s a normal curve like with school grades. Actually a 9 for a 60 year old card isn’t as good as a 9 for a new card.imho
To me what's wrong in the hobby is a small amount of power players are determining how much cards are worth. For example I think that a rookie Hof player should have an equal value no matter what company puts it out. Also no group of power players should be able to say what grading company rules over the others. I realize that demand has a lot to do with it, but I still think that a small number of people control the majority.
The power players are in every market imaginable. They are the Illuminati that conspiracy heads talk about. Do they exist? You bet your sweet ass they do. That's why I'm hesitant to get into BTC. The whales have too much ability to control that market. When they want to crash it, they conspire to dump a bunch on the market. Then they buy it all back when people panic. It's a tried and true way for the rich to get richer.
In terms of your question for this week, I think you already know part of my answer. I'm fully committed to a change in collecting strategy, not necessarily being more "narrow", but in terms of patience, and being more discriminating and precise about the particular examples that I buy. My friends in the hobby have been so helpful and supportive in sharing strategies and experiences both good and bad in building their collections. I'd like to think that I'm open to acknowledging the mistakes I've made and learning to correct them. Oh, and I'm also targeting one card for the National and setting up a long-range savings box separate and apart from other hobby funds just for that particular card. Video reveal of the plan coming soon!
nice job w/ this topic, Graig. I think you covered it from all angles and shared some thoughts that I had not considered myself. it seems that there is indeed some form of pop control going on but, IMO, I think it is reasonable. the idea that a '75 Topps George Brett might get a second set of eyes on it vs. a '75 Topps George Mitterwald makes plenty sense to me. I think if people want to increase their chances of getting better grades, they should consider the context in which they are presenting their cards for grading. short anecdote to explain what I mean... I sold through my uncle's collection of late 60's / early 70's cards for him on eBay. I remember looking at the cards w/ him when I was collecting as a kid and he had them in a dresser drawer. they weren't in neat stacks. they were literally just thrown in the drawer. it was a free for all. as a result, the cards ranged from GD - VGEX. there was a '64 Mantle, a '64 Clemente, a Brett rookie and a few other high profile cards from the era. I considered for a minute whether to have anything graded for him but decided against it. now, if I were to have decided to grade some of those cards, I would not send them in with other cards from that dresser drawer. I would have sent them in with other cards that I thought to be 5's and 6's if my goal was to get a higher floor for his cards. I also think it is a must to send them all in penny sleeves in brand new semi-rigids all of the same brand. to some level, "preferential treatment" is human nature. what collectors need to do is present as if our cards have been well taken care of and that we are meticulous and careful w/ our collection. earn the human nature psychological points there - in a place where we can get them.
Fully demonstrates why it’s better to collect actual rarity (like pre-war) over condition rarity (Rickey Henderson). The latter is just a meaningless crapshoot.
Hi Graig, as far as my collection goes. I’m going to be on the lookout for rare vintage cards that fit my collection. But more importantly, I would like to help other vintage collectors with their collection. Weather it’s contributing to your questions with comments, or hanging around at shows to meet and help out other collectors with like interests. It will always be about the people to me. There’s nothing wrong with making new friends.
I’m one who owes a great deal of thanks to you Obi-Won Kenobi for helping rebuild a strong vintage collection due to your knowledge and friendship. Passing on your knowledge to others can only increase their enjoyment and strengthen the hobby.
I always look forward to your opinions and thoughts. I would be my privilege to have you evaluate my personal collection some time. Your opinion ranks high in my book.
I think they are just grading harder because they are trying to actually follow their criteria , 5 yrs ago , 10 yrs ago 15 yrs ago, they were not as strict and now they are, so it feels like pop control but its really just the enforcement of there own grade rules. On the other hand there has to be a little tilt as they have to be looking at iconic cards a bit harder; it's human nature that helps to fulfil the prophecy of pop count.
I tend to agree with this...I think they are using some AI images that identify small defects that they previously couldn't see, so many more cards are getting PSA 9s and they used to be PSA 10s, thus grading has gotten higher, but I agree with 2 main points mentioned so far -- it would be hard for them to go thru a millions cards a month and know which cards are to be pop-controlled -- and if it ever did get out, like when a grader left the company, and he\she said anonymously on some message board that they were specifically told to not give out high grades on certain cards, it would be very harmful to the PSA brand...
The best discussion I’ve heard on this subject which brought to light some arguments I hadn’t considered before. As usual Graig, your analogies & logic are on the same level as Spock or Data 😂
Cards and Comics did the best video on this about a year ago - lots of analysis. It will not allow me to link to it but if interested in this topic I suggest you search PSA Pop Control Cards and Comics. In no way affiliated with his channel just think it was well done. If I buy a graded Griffey it will be a 9. I cannot tell the difference between a 9 and a 10 anyway. For Henderson I will eventually get an 8.5.
Pop control? PSA upcharges for more valuable cards. If PSA were to give out more 10's to more higher value cards they would make more money but get a bad reputation. Seeing as how they don't give out higher percentage of 10's to those big dollar cards leads me to believe that they are grading them fairly. Lets be honest, people get a Rickey rookie and hope they hit the lottery. They are more willing to take a chance on it and even if it comes back a 7 or 8 it's worth grading in the hopes that they might get lucky with a 9 or 10. More lower grade Rickeys will be sent in than a decent player that only makes grading fees with a 9 and profit with a 10. Those lower value players are going to get a much higher percentage of high quality cards sent in. Not many people would send in a 1980 Sparky Lyle unless they thought it had an excellent chance for a 10? It has a 28% gem 10 pop rate because lower grades just aren't worth grading. It makes sense that big $ cards have a much larger percentage of lower grade cards sent in while low $ cards have a much larger percentage of high grade cards sent in for grading. Economics not pop control!
I would hope that grading companies route the high end cards to very senior graders as opposed to less experienced graders. That way, it seems, there would less variability on those expensive cards. Modern? Most are pack fresh and less variability, right?
Some great comments and a great discussion. My hobby resolution for 2025 is to actually leave my keyboard and get to a few card shows. Maybe you can put together a 2025 MidLife "National" in California at a card show.
When grading 70’s and 80’s cards I think it’s more likely to get a 10 that should have been a 9 than a 9 that should be a 10. I would hope that the most experienced graders get the big iconic cards.
Isn't more concise and accurate to say, "It is basically true - even, if it's inadvertently so - that there's pop control simply by the fact that more important cards get more scrutiny, thus causing a lower pop on the highest value cards in a given set." From the Rickey to the 1984 Donruss Mattingly, to the SP Jeter, there's just so much overwhelming evidence that these cards getting so few 10's just doesn't fit into any laws of probability. Their actions and methods are creating a pop control, and whether it's intentional/malevolent/inadvertent doesn't really matter in the end. They have created a de facto pop control.
PSA standing by a guarantee may apply to the grade a card receives, but more commonly applies to a card being authentic and unaltered. After all, if you file a complaint about the grade a card receives, who is going to be judge and jury? Of course it’s PSA. If it’s a counterfeit or altered card and receives ANY grade, much less a 10, then PSA has hell to pay in the form of their guarantee. Guarantee on what grade it receives? No.
I agree with the credibility argument. Don’t agree it would take more time, this wouldn’t happen by the grader. It would be in Research & ID and could be flagged automatically during that process
To help to get to the bottom of this, someone needs to take a close look at grades of iconic cards by date. My hunch is that a vast majority of 10’s for a Rickey Henderson RC (for example) came years ago and the talked off significantly over time. It would be an interesting exercise. Pick your RC and do the research.
I think added scrutiny given to iconic, expensive cards results in a bias towards lower grades. That’s just the human element of grading. So I believe it’s a function of their grading process and the result is population control.
You need to get a former grader for these grading issues on this forum…but because of legal obstacles, I fear you may never receive an honest answer Graig…Until then, it will all remain well researched guess work, which does add a layer of intrigue and outright speculation to our hobby!
Definitely the Rickey rookie. Since we're talking rickey they seem to control the 86 topps also. Easy to blame the "solid black border" but if you search 86 psa 10, there are tons. But not rickey and not nolan ryan. Coincidence? Maybe! Also - Orlando's comment seems like one of the most valuable opinions on this. Most people want their day to go smoothly so why make your boss look over your work when you can say 9.
Why do people think that because "10s" aren't showing up for Henderson Rookie Cards is "evidence" that there is pop control? PSA isn't beholden to holders of existing cards. To me a better argument could be made that they are incentivized to "please" those who send in a ton of cards for grading. That's where their money is. They indirectly make money on the sense that PSA is the more prestigious grading company, but I don't see how grading a card that deserves a 10 as a 9 really enhances that. To me the reason that 10s aren't showing up any more for things like the Henderson RC is because that card is 44 years old. Even when we try to take care of them it doesn't take much over 40+ years that could cause a card to be chipped, scuffed etc.
Fair question. I couldn't find any recent sales for Rickey Henderson 1980 Topps on eBay, in a PSA 10, SGC 10 or BGS (Beckett) 10. It probably does not come around often, and is a super expensive card across each one of those grading companies. If is is, however ''Pop control.'' I would predict the odds of submitting a Henderson '80 Topps, in hopes of a 10 to SGC or BGS might not be any greater than PSA.
I do think bigger dealers have gotten preferential treatment especially early days. That said larger dealers are probably submitting the right cards more often than smaller collectors based on there experience. My opinion on Geoff Wilson is he would make a boo hoo I got bad grades video for the clicks and if asked too by the right people .
My New Year's resolution is to stop buying very high end commons from sets I'm not collecting. When see killer ungraded common cards I have no self control. If anyone needs 57, 58, 60 and 61's you know a guy. 😀Anyone interested you can contact Graig.
There are so many obvious answers just glossed over . PSA is a business not colllectors . Tell me how they make money off it and I’ll believe you . If Rickey rookie gets an 8 by the minimum wage grader fine it’s gets passed along. If it’s gets a 10 it will for sure get looked at by a more experienced grader. For obvious reasons more expensive things get more attention .
If you don't believe they cater to some and not to others, you have not been paying attention over their many years in existence. "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Collectors Universe has absolute power.
Your videos always make me think. I had written goals for collecting in 2024. Just went and updated it: 2025 Card Collecting Goals 1) Purchase Target cards - Define a limited number of target cards - Caitlin Clark, Terry Bradshaw, Roger Staubach, and some others (maybe 1953 Mickey Mantle low grade). Stick to my budget in 2025 2) Consolidate collection - keep 200 EBay card listings up regularly to consolidate my collection - eliminate all sets 3) Get some of remaining PC Cards graded - some mid tier cards desired to be slabbed with either TAG or CGC 4) Create more displays for key favorite cards - including very nice binders for top loader cards In 2024 I did a pretty good job sticking to my goals. Only a few hiccups (unplanned purchases). Goals can evolve over time, but always good to give us direction. Thanks for all of your videos!!!!!
Always love your teacher analogies! I completely love that the teacher who gives no F's being excluded from being evaluated..😃
'😁😉I agree Coach
I'd give less Fs....so they'd just leave me alone.
@@MidLifeCards 🤣
Great video Graig! My New Year’s Card Resolution is to resist eBay. I have a bad habit of hopping on and spending $20 here and $20 there, and in the end, probably could have used a lot of that $$ on something that I wanted more. I don’t know if we call it be more patient or be less impulsive. Either way, I am attending Strongsville for the first time next year ad the majority of my entire year’s budget will be spent there. It is going to be tough to not buy regularly to scratch that itch, but I find watching TH-camrs in the hobby seems to satisfy that itch. I just hope it can continue.
Story of my last few years. Tons of last second ebay snipes and I could have just saved the money for a card I "Really" wanted. Impulsive is real. Good luck practicing restraint.
I feel your pain.
Your videos always make me think. I had written goals for collecting in 2024. Just went and updated it:
2025 Card Collecting Goals
1) Purchase Target cards - Define a limited number of target cards - Caitlin Clark, Terry Bradshaw, Roger Staubach, and some others (maybe 1953 Mickey Mantle low grade). Stick to my budget in 2025
2) Consolidate collection - keep 200 EBay card listings up regularly to consolidate my collection - eliminate all sets
3) Get some of remaining PC Cards graded - some mid tier cards desired to be slabbed with either TAG or CGC
4) Create more displays for key favorite cards - including very nice binders for top loader cards
In 2024 I did a pretty good job sticking to my goals. Only a few hiccups (unplanned purchases). Goals can evolve over time, but always good to give us direction.
Thanks for all of your videos!!!!!
Great episode as always . For 2025 I am just going to do one player run and that is Gil Hodges . From rookie card to his last card .
I always liked Gil and did the same thing years ago. Still need his 49 cause I never liked or collected 49's. Another example as to why "I should have collected what I didn't like". I did Pick up a beautiful HR Derby and Stalled Meier weiner card this year and I love them.
@ the 48 and 49 Bowman’s are growing on me lol . Thank you for that comment reply Mr Petty.
Good luck with your Gil Hodges player run. Have fun.
Gil Hodges is a great choice. An undervalued HOFer who played for some big teams.
Great video Graig. Eye opening.
For next year, I hope to cut back on my spontaneous Ebay purchases. I need to focus only on the cards I really want and not get caught up in hype. I've been accumulating too much this year.
So PSA admits they do pop control on the big cards. Disappointing again with them. So they cheat us on grades to they can save money on insurance or something? The grading industry appears scam-ish.
Have a great Christmas dude!
Appreciate this.
Out of 38,224 Henderson 1980, only 25 have been 10s.. a TINY fraction of a percent.. but Jim Barr has 47 10s out of 79. Yeah more Rickeys are submitted and most Jim Barr submissions are already possible 10s. But when examining each player in the set it is OBVIOUS they most definitely give Rickey 10s a 9 or 8. And OF COURSE the graders are well aware of the iconic cards and the difference in price between a 8, 9 or 10. Its their actual profession.. they see these cards every day and realize the power they have.
Numbers show something...no doubt.
Hey Graig!! This week's question is one of my favorites to think about around this time of year. It seems each year I start formulating my collecting plan for the coming year in late-November. I usually look around at what my hobby friends are doing, and try and think about what things are missing from my collection that I'd like to own. The answer for 2025 is that I feel my collection needs more vintage boxing cards, as well as 90s football refractors. I'm a long-time vintage football collector, but at this point there aren't many vintage football cards left for me to chase. I picked up vintage boxing this summer to scratch my itch to own rare pieces of history, and boy is it working! I definitely plan to keep going with vintage boxing in 2025. That said, watching you and other TH-camrs (specifically Adam at Splendid Sports) talking about the nostalgic cards in your collections has made me want to add more cards I wanted, but could not afford as a kid. For me, that means refractors of hall of famers from mid-90s releases of Topps Finest, Chrome, and Bowman's Best. Within that there will definitely be a heavy dose of my all-time favorite player: Barry Sanders. Excited to see what 2025 brings! Good luck to you and the rest of the Midlife community with your 2025 collecting goals!
Great response. Appreciate all of this.
I have never understood how PSA would be incentivized by manufacturing the scarcity of certain grades. Why would they even care what PSA 10s are worth? They are not investing in these cards, they are simply grading them. It’s really the people investing in certain cards that seem like they would have an interest in lower pop counts. That said, just because I don’t understand the “why” doesn’t mean they are not doing it. The basic mathematical comparison angle is probably the best evidence, and I think the best way to investigate it would be to simply compare gem rates of different cards within the same exact set.
I think this is a fair point. But....if some cards have MASSIVE values in 10s....doesn't that entice more people to chase the grade of a 10 to get the massive value, thus encouraging people to submit cards they wouldn't have otherwise?
@ Absolutely. And that’s only more business for PSA. So again, not quite sure why they would care. The liability piece makes sense, but I think it would help to provide an example of how their guarantee and liability intersect. If they grade a big card a 10, that’s it. It’s a 10 forever (regardless of any misgrading). So how would liability enter the picture?
Excellent video .One of your best .I agree that iconic cards receive extra scrutiny and higher grades are therefor harder to obtain
Thanks very much. Appreciate that.
About to watch now Graig.
Yes, for certain sets, players , & cards are 100% pop controlled especially w/ the higher grades.
At the same time, the stricter grading standards make it appear pop control is done more often.
Could be, for sure. Looks like you had fun at the Philly Show.
Great video and I agree that this topic is very nuanced. Here's my take, for what it's worth: In theory, I don't really have a problem with grading companies admitting they scrutinize more iconic/popular cards more closely. If I send in a 1980 Topps Rickey Henderson, in presumably NM+ condition, yes, I expect it will be looked at for a few extra minutes than some base 2024 optic football card that doesn't carry the same "prestige." I have no problem with that. I do wonder whether PSA can get a bit skittish to give these iconic cards a grade of 10, for fear of social media backlash if there is any whiff of slight off centering, etc. Just look at what happened with the Wemby Black Prizm 1/1. Lots pf people looked at the card and immediately said "that centering is poor for a 10." Whether the centering was or wasn't perfect wasn't even the issue. The issue was the negative feedback to the 10 grade in that scenario. I also think it can be easier for graders to find a flaw with a card to argue against a 10 than it is to say "yeah this is an amazing example, and it deserves a 10." Graders are paid to scrutinize. I think if we all looked hard enough, we could find a flaw with every 10 that has ever been graded!
I do not think PSA is maliciously controlling population counts, but more scrutiny/tikme spent grading certain cards does, by nature, imply stricter guidelines for said cards.
Good points. I get it...it makes sense...but also doesn't seem right....all at the same time.
This was very informative and you have to go by trust. The downside is the individual that grades the card. How are they feeling that day and are they being truly accurate and are not caring who submitted the card whether they’re common people or the high end card collectors. In one retrospect I collect cards. for the achievement that the players and their love of the game achieved now having a nicer card is always nice. That isn’t always the case, but I still care about the card that isn’t a pristine card it’s because of who the card is representing. Grading cards I think is a waste of my money because all of my cards mean the utmost appreciation for all the players that played and earn the respect of the baseball league and to go into the Hall of Fame.
I totally respect people who grade cards and people who don't.
Poor Hunter with the spiky hair, leave him alone, haha. But great video. As someone who mostly collects raw cards, I always get some new knowledge out of grading related videos.
Your point about greater liability for more expensive cards makes a lot of sense. Still, I have a hard time accepting that all cards would not be treated with the same level of scrutiny. The cards themselves (at least for vintage) were not handled differently when printed and packaged, so why should they be graded differently? As we highlight so often, grading is a subjective process -- it's based on the opinion of the trained grader who happens to be assigned to a given card. For me, the randomness of which card gets assigned to which grader is part of the subjectivity we've all bought into. Giving more sought after cards more scrutiny begins to take away from the subjectivity of the process. In my mind, that raises red flags.
For next year, my goals are to continue condensing my collection while concentrating primarily on vintage. I am new to the hobby and spent most of last year building modern sets, but in a NYC apartment you start to run out of space very quickly! Additionally, I aim to be more interactive in the hobby, which includes commenting on videos like yours.
Good Strategy. I'm subscribing to the less is more too. 800 Graded and 800 raw and I still feel a little bloated in a decent sized house, 🤣
Great goals for 2025
Setting goals, then having the motivation and also focus to follow goals are, something I struggle with. I think, when, it comes to a New Years Resolution hobby goal. I feel collecting strategies can be so transient and change organically. For me, saying I am going to buy Pre-War in February, Vintage in April, and Modern in July or August, it just doesn't work. But, maybe for other collectors that, is a plan they adhere to. Great question, and video.
Thanks my friend.
Congrats on 6k subscribers, well deserved. Really appreciate hearing your thoughts and others opinions. Thank you for sharing.
Thanks so much!
There is a cause/effect with the PSA President admitting that they take extra care looking over iconic cards. They are essentially admitting that they are not as consistent for everything else. This furthers the narrative that a modern card submitted could be PSA 9 on Monday, could be a 10 Tuesday , and could be a 9 on Wednesday. Yet the 10 is worth 3x or 5x more than the 9 when the President of company admits they aren’t inspecting it like specific iconic cards?
Well said.
My New Year's Resolution is to lose weight, at least 30 pounds. Oh wait, you meant about cards. For next year, I have several goals when it comes to my collection. I have WAY too many cards presently, so I plan to sell as many duplicates and unimportant, un-needed cards as I can on eBay and use that money to grab a few higher end cards that I have been eyeing. I would like to buy a higher end PSA or SGC perfectly centered 1980 Topps Larry Bird/Magic card and a 1960 Topps Yaz Rookie, with both cards missing that nasty print defect that is so common. I would also like to purchase my very first 1950's era Mickey Mantle card in at least a PSA 5/6. I would also like to go to my very first card show, which will likely be in Nashville. I think all of these New Year's goals are doable, except maybe the weight issue. Happy New Year to you, Graig, and your wonderful family.
I wanna lose weight, too!!
Hi Craig....Good video Below from Vintage Card Curator
Thanks for sharing.
My opinion.. no population control but a reluctance to grade higher if a card is older. I also don’t think there’s a normal curve like with school grades. Actually a 9 for a 60 year old card isn’t as good as a 9 for a new card.imho
Fair point.
To me what's wrong in the hobby is a small amount of power players are determining how much cards are worth. For example I think that a rookie Hof player should have an equal value no matter what company puts it out. Also no group of power players should be able to say what grading company rules over the others. I realize that demand has a lot to do with it, but I still think that a small number of people control the majority.
The power players are in every market imaginable. They are the Illuminati that conspiracy heads talk about. Do they exist? You bet your sweet ass they do. That's why I'm hesitant to get into BTC. The whales have too much ability to control that market. When they want to crash it, they conspire to dump a bunch on the market. Then they buy it all back when people panic. It's a tried and true way for the rich to get richer.
I really appreciate you sharing your thoughts.
In terms of your question for this week, I think you already know part of my answer. I'm fully committed to a change in collecting strategy, not necessarily being more "narrow", but in terms of patience, and being more discriminating and precise about the particular examples that I buy. My friends in the hobby have been so helpful and supportive in sharing strategies and experiences both good and bad in building their collections. I'd like to think that I'm open to acknowledging the mistakes I've made and learning to correct them. Oh, and I'm also targeting one card for the National and setting up a long-range savings box separate and apart from other hobby funds just for that particular card. Video reveal of the plan coming soon!
GREAT plan. I look forward to the video on it.
nice job w/ this topic, Graig. I think you covered it from all angles and shared some thoughts that I had not considered myself. it seems that there is indeed some form of pop control going on but, IMO, I think it is reasonable. the idea that a '75 Topps George Brett might get a second set of eyes on it vs. a '75 Topps George Mitterwald makes plenty sense to me. I think if people want to increase their chances of getting better grades, they should consider the context in which they are presenting their cards for grading. short anecdote to explain what I mean... I sold through my uncle's collection of late 60's / early 70's cards for him on eBay. I remember looking at the cards w/ him when I was collecting as a kid and he had them in a dresser drawer. they weren't in neat stacks. they were literally just thrown in the drawer. it was a free for all. as a result, the cards ranged from GD - VGEX. there was a '64 Mantle, a '64 Clemente, a Brett rookie and a few other high profile cards from the era. I considered for a minute whether to have anything graded for him but decided against it. now, if I were to have decided to grade some of those cards, I would not send them in with other cards from that dresser drawer. I would have sent them in with other cards that I thought to be 5's and 6's if my goal was to get a higher floor for his cards. I also think it is a must to send them all in penny sleeves in brand new semi-rigids all of the same brand. to some level, "preferential treatment" is human nature. what collectors need to do is present as if our cards have been well taken care of and that we are meticulous and careful w/ our collection. earn the human nature psychological points there - in a place where we can get them.
Well said all around.
Great video, Graig! By the way, the Rickey Henderson in a 10 is not tens of thousands of dollars, it’s hundreds of thousands of dollars. 😮
Yeah. It's pretty crazy.
Fully demonstrates why it’s better to collect actual rarity (like pre-war) over condition rarity (Rickey Henderson). The latter is just a meaningless crapshoot.
No argument from me.
Great video and loved the thoughts from you and the community. My New Year’s resolution is to set a budget and stick to it. 😊
Good luck Tony. But....I hope you blow your budget so I can have visitation rights to more amazing cards!!
What better way to ensure the value of his OWN collection that to have POP control???
To put the reputation of the entire company on the line just to protect the value of his collection? That seems fairly extreme in my eyes.
Hi Graig, as far as my collection goes. I’m going to be on the lookout for rare vintage cards that fit my collection. But more importantly, I would like to help other vintage collectors with their collection. Weather it’s contributing to your questions with comments, or hanging around at shows to meet and help out other collectors with like interests. It will always be about the people to me. There’s nothing wrong with making new friends.
Well said Don. Look....we became friends in 2024!!
I’m one who owes a great deal of thanks to you Obi-Won Kenobi for helping rebuild a strong vintage collection due to your knowledge and friendship.
Passing on your knowledge to others can only increase their enjoyment and strengthen the hobby.
Another great one
Thanks so much.
You need to get Walt, from PSA, on your show 😂! Great video, Graig!
I agree. Walt would be a hell of an interview.
I always look forward to your opinions and thoughts. I would be my privilege to have you evaluate my personal collection some time. Your opinion ranks high in my book.
Thanks. That truly means a lot to me.
I think they are just grading harder because they are trying to actually follow their criteria , 5 yrs ago , 10 yrs ago 15 yrs ago, they were not as strict and now they are, so it feels like pop control but its really just the enforcement of there own grade rules. On the other hand there has to be a little tilt as they have to be looking at iconic cards a bit harder; it's human nature that helps to fulfil the prophecy of pop count.
I tend to agree with this...I think they are using some AI images that identify small defects that they previously couldn't see, so many more cards are getting PSA 9s and they used to be PSA 10s, thus grading has gotten higher, but I agree with 2 main points mentioned so far -- it would be hard for them to go thru a millions cards a month and know which cards are to be pop-controlled -- and if it ever did get out, like when a grader left the company, and he\she said anonymously on some message board that they were specifically told to not give out high grades on certain cards, it would be very harmful to the PSA brand...
Could be. But, if it's different, then doesn't it make the "old grades" different and have a "different" value?
The best discussion I’ve heard on this subject which brought to light some arguments I hadn’t considered before. As usual Graig, your analogies & logic are on the same level as Spock or Data 😂
LOL. Thanks my friend. Believe it or not....my silly analogies pop in my head as I go...no planning involved.
I like your dad’s approach, make em look you in the eye!
It worked, too.
Just noticing you are at 6K subscribers. Congratulations. No one deserves it more.
Thanks amigo.
Cards and Comics did the best video on this about a year ago - lots of analysis. It will not allow me to link to it but if interested in this topic I suggest you search PSA Pop Control Cards and Comics. In no way affiliated with his channel just think it was well done.
If I buy a graded Griffey it will be a 9. I cannot tell the difference between a 9 and a 10 anyway. For Henderson I will eventually get an 8.5.
I watch his channel. He does a good job. I'm subscribed.
Pop control? PSA upcharges for more valuable cards. If PSA were to give out more 10's to more higher value cards they would make more money but get a bad reputation. Seeing as how they don't give out higher percentage of 10's to those big dollar cards leads me to believe that they are grading them fairly.
Lets be honest, people get a Rickey rookie and hope they hit the lottery. They are more willing to take a chance on it and even if it comes back a 7 or 8 it's worth grading in the hopes that they might get lucky with a 9 or 10. More lower grade Rickeys will be sent in than a decent player that only makes grading fees with a 9 and profit with a 10. Those lower value players are going to get a much higher percentage of high quality cards sent in.
Not many people would send in a 1980 Sparky Lyle unless they thought it had an excellent chance for a 10? It has a 28% gem 10 pop rate because lower grades just aren't worth grading. It makes sense that big $ cards have a much larger percentage of lower grade cards sent in while low $ cards have a much larger percentage of high grade cards sent in for grading.
Economics not pop control!
There are some good arguments in here. No doubt.
I would hope that grading companies route the high end cards to very senior graders as opposed to less experienced graders. That way, it seems, there would less variability on those expensive cards. Modern? Most are pack fresh and less variability, right?
But isn't having experienced graders instead of "normal" graders a form of pop control?
One time PSA graded my card, gave it a 10 and messed up the corner of the card when they put it in the slab, I was pissed off too
Yikes.
Some great comments and a great discussion. My hobby resolution for 2025 is to actually leave my keyboard and get to a few card shows. Maybe you can put together a 2025 MidLife "National" in California at a card show.
The Sacramento shows are really good as is Beerbanks. Ontario is probably much cheaper due to the difference between Disneyland and Gangland.
I'd love to. But, I don't think most of the East Coast dealers would want to come all the way out this way.
@@MidLifeCardsThey are spoiled out there not having to travel. :(
When grading 70’s and 80’s cards I think it’s more likely to get a 10 that should have been a 9 than a 9 that should be a 10. I would hope that the most experienced graders get the big iconic cards.
Could be.
Isn't more concise and accurate to say, "It is basically true - even, if it's inadvertently so - that there's pop control simply by the fact that more important cards get more scrutiny, thus causing a lower pop on the highest value cards in a given set." From the Rickey to the 1984 Donruss Mattingly, to the SP Jeter, there's just so much overwhelming evidence that these cards getting so few 10's just doesn't fit into any laws of probability. Their actions and methods are creating a pop control, and whether it's intentional/malevolent/inadvertent doesn't really matter in the end. They have created a de facto pop control.
Yes. I believe that's a fair statement.
PSA standing by a guarantee may apply to the grade a card receives, but more commonly applies to a card being authentic and unaltered. After all, if you file a complaint about the grade a card receives, who is going to be judge and jury? Of course it’s PSA. If it’s a counterfeit or altered card and receives ANY grade, much less a 10, then PSA has hell to pay in the form of their guarantee. Guarantee on what grade it receives? No.
I agree with the credibility argument. Don’t agree it would take more time, this wouldn’t happen by the grader. It would be in Research & ID and could be flagged automatically during that process
Fair points.
To help to get to the bottom of this, someone needs to take a close look at grades of iconic cards by date. My hunch is that a vast majority of 10’s for a Rickey Henderson RC (for example) came years ago and the talked off significantly over time. It would be an interesting exercise. Pick your RC and do the research.
I agree. But, I'm not sure how we could obtain that information.
I think added scrutiny given to iconic, expensive cards results in a bias towards lower grades. That’s just the human element of grading. So I believe it’s a function of their grading process and the result is population control.
Good point.
Coach Miller got right to the core of the Apple, as usual. I associate myself with his remarks!
Coach Miller loves M.C.
You need to get a former grader for these grading issues on this forum…but because of legal obstacles, I fear you may never receive an honest answer Graig…Until then, it will all remain well researched guess work, which does add a layer of intrigue and outright speculation to our hobby!
I think they sign non disclosure agreements. So, I don't think they can talk publicly.
I totally agree with you on the walt subject 💯 percent
Lol
Definitely the Rickey rookie. Since we're talking rickey they seem to control the 86 topps also. Easy to blame the "solid black border" but if you search 86 psa 10, there are tons. But not rickey and not nolan ryan. Coincidence? Maybe! Also - Orlando's comment seems like one of the most valuable opinions on this. Most people want their day to go smoothly so why make your boss look over your work when you can say 9.
That's interesting about the 86 topps. Love that set.
Why do people think that because "10s" aren't showing up for Henderson Rookie Cards is "evidence" that there is pop control? PSA isn't beholden to holders of existing cards. To me a better argument could be made that they are incentivized to "please" those who send in a ton of cards for grading. That's where their money is. They indirectly make money on the sense that PSA is the more prestigious grading company, but I don't see how grading a card that deserves a 10 as a 9 really enhances that. To me the reason that 10s aren't showing up any more for things like the Henderson RC is because that card is 44 years old. Even when we try to take care of them it doesn't take much over 40+ years that could cause a card to be chipped, scuffed etc.
Fair question. I couldn't find any recent sales for Rickey Henderson 1980 Topps on eBay, in a PSA 10, SGC 10 or BGS (Beckett) 10. It probably does not come around often, and is a super expensive card across each one of those grading companies. If is is, however ''Pop control.'' I would predict the odds of submitting a Henderson '80 Topps, in hopes of a 10 to SGC or BGS might not be any greater than PSA.
Good question and fair points.
If they’re taking more time on big cards, then they should charge us less per card on the smaller cards.
they do charge you less for the lower value cards and more for the higher value cards
@@gradedcards5516 I may have several Griffeys or Hendersons (or similar) in a normal value bulk order.
They do have different pricing levels based on value.
@@MidLifeCards but I could easily have a big bulk price order that includes many Hendersons, Griffeys, and similar…?
I do think bigger dealers have gotten preferential treatment especially early days. That said larger dealers are probably submitting the right cards more often than smaller collectors based on there experience. My opinion on Geoff Wilson is he would make a boo hoo I got bad grades video for the clicks and if asked too by the right people .
Well stated.
My New Year's resolution is to stop buying very high end commons from sets I'm not collecting. When see killer ungraded common cards I have no self control. If anyone needs 57, 58, 60 and 61's you know a guy. 😀Anyone interested you can contact Graig.
This is how Graig should be using the channel. Send him your list. 🥲
I don’t trust Walt either.
Lol
On the bird magic Rickey Henderson and a few others yea probably lol
It's for sure possible.
😂Slow things down?😂 PSA = lightspeed grading😂
No doubt.
There are so many obvious answers just glossed over . PSA is a business not colllectors . Tell me how they make money off it and I’ll believe you . If Rickey rookie gets an 8 by the minimum wage grader fine it’s gets passed along. If it’s gets a 10 it will for sure get looked at by a more experienced grader. For obvious reasons more expensive things get more attention .
If you don't believe they cater to some and not to others, you have not been paying attention over their many years in existence. "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely". Collectors Universe has absolute power.
Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.
th-cam.com/video/6wTMS1dmddc/w-d-xo.html
Your videos always make me think. I had written goals for collecting in 2024. Just went and updated it:
2025 Card Collecting Goals
1) Purchase Target cards - Define a limited number of target cards - Caitlin Clark, Terry Bradshaw, Roger Staubach, and some others (maybe 1953 Mickey Mantle low grade). Stick to my budget in 2025
2) Consolidate collection - keep 200 EBay card listings up regularly to consolidate my collection - eliminate all sets
3) Get some of remaining PC Cards graded - some mid tier cards desired to be slabbed with either TAG or CGC
4) Create more displays for key favorite cards - including very nice binders for top loader cards
In 2024 I did a pretty good job sticking to my goals. Only a few hiccups (unplanned purchases). Goals can evolve over time, but always good to give us direction.
Thanks for all of your videos!!!!!