Another nice reveal. Thank you! I’ll admit that I was spoiled to your videos being posted every 3 days. However, I do understand the time, not to mention money, it takes to produce this type of content. I appreciate what you do and will cut you some slack. Going forward, every 4 days is okay with me!
Regarding card #232 “The Empire Strikes Back” at 9:32, the title for the second Star Wars film had already been determined by Lucas by the time Topps was making the green 4th Series cards in late 1977. The title was shared with licensees in 1977 (with Topps being one of them). The guy who wrote the captions for the card sets, Gary Gerani, wrote “The Empire Strikes Back” on card #232 for fun - sneaking the title of the second film into the set. Thanks for sharing this Series 4 PSA reveal. Agree with the other commenters that the current PSA Vintage Graders seem to be harsher in the grading process than the graders 5-10 years ago. Look forward to seeing your next PSA reveals, especially your blue Series 1 return.
Heyyyy, glad to see another one from ya! Maybe you could change your TH-cam handle to "E-dub Rippin's Tuff"? Not too bad of an outcome here, but would've been nice to see a couple bump up a grade. Series 4, as you know is one of the tougher series. The grader seemed a bit tough here, but not like that series 5 return. You definitely honed in on the ones that looked like 9's and were right! That C-3PO errror PSA 6 gets pretty narrow spacing in the UL border. They measure the most extreme part of the card for spacing and it gets pretty tight up there! Either way, fun to see! Hope you are able to kick out a video here and there! Good luck with the house and have fun on spring break! 😉
I legit might might have to sneak in a logo alternate one day (Rippin’s Tuff)… keep an eye out 😉. Because golly gosh dog darn it…. I wonder when/if there will be another day I get a 10 😖. It will be exciting if I do! I have to do another 5 box! Anyway… I’ll be back. Thanks Ryan!
@@e-dubrippinstuff9820 That would be fun to see you do another box of series 5…Oh, maybe we can call it “Revenge of the Fifth!” 😅. Haa..Man, it’s hard to shut this witty little brain of mine off!!
The truth is that PSA has ratcheted down the grades for vintage cards to go along with their increased inconsistency... the yellow 'print defects' are supposed to be ok/insignificant if they are few and 'don't detract from the eye appeal' of the card, but having lots of them on one card is going to cost you on the grade... pretty good batch... my average for 4th series cards is just over 8...
Ok. Good to know (that your grades are around 8 too). We’ll see in a few days what my large return will garner, and whether things have changed for the better/worse or neither.
You would think that anything that comes out of a case fresh box and pack would get at least a minimum 8 psa is being harsh these days and I think it’s because of the amount of cards being sent in for investors purposes
you probably haven't opened a lot of stuff from the 70s, 80s and early 90s....quality control is horrible...it doesn't matter if you just pulled a card from a fresh pack -- that doesn't change the fact there are yellow splotches on a lot of these cards, or that they have a lot of tilt to them, or that they are off-centered a lot of the time...pulling a card from a fresh pack means very little when it comes to vintage cards
I haven’t received any of my Star Wars cards back from psa yet they are taking forever, once I do I’ll video that. Although I did receive back around 40 pre 1980 baseball cards that were pristine and not a single 10. All 8’s and 9’s with a few random 6’s. It’s almost like vintage 10’s are a thing of the past. Seems like so many 9’s these days are above the quality of old label tens or at least equal to. 🤷🏼♂️🤷🏼♂️ they’ve really cracked down on vintage.
The more likely answer is that it is just very difficult to find a card from the 70s and 80s that doesn't have some issue with it...they didn't have the capabilities back then that they do now to print very nice cards. The answer that everyone seems to throw out there is that PSA is tougher -- the more accurate response is that it is just hard to find cards that don't have any flaw. I would guess if you look over all of your cards under good lighting and high magnification that the flaws will show themselves
@@gradedcards5516 definitely could be true for sure. By no means did I expect 10’s on a bunch of them but for example I ripped 3 boxes of 1990 hockey and sent off some rookies roughly 40 cards, out of the 40 I selected I’d say 4 cards were flawless under good light and high magnification I went over these things hard. All 4 got 9’s it’s just disappointing not even high value cards or anything just pc stuff. Is what it is, I totally understand your point but I also think psa is frustrating more people then not due to not giving 10’s where 10’s are deserved. Idk doesn’t matter just annoying. I’d bet big dollars if I continued to send them and waste grading fees it’d be a 50/50 shot of those 4 coming back a 10 the next time 😆🤷🏼♂️
@@gradedcards5516 I agree with you. A variable within your theory is the current price of a box. If I spend $1,500+ on a box I’m hoping or maybe even expecting to pull a high percentage of 9s and a few 10s. I know that unrealistic but if it doesn’t materialize, my disappointment is greater than if I had only spent $50.
@@gradedcards5516 It's true that the passing of time will generally mean that cards suffer condition issues whether in packs or in a shoebox. But actually, I think the MORE likely answer is a bit of human nature: PSA started accepting cards in the early 90s and over the decades the evidence in the form of the graded cards themselves show(pretty conclusively) that there is a conservative trend in opinion on what constitutes the attributes of any given grade. My biggest concern is that anyone who grew up collecting in the late 90s and beyond and that is now grading cards professionally: do they have a grasp of what the true limits of vintage card production are/were? I often get baffling returns and I've resubbed a few of the same cards and gotten much better results. That really shouldn't happen if the grading process is a sound one.
Great video Phil!!! Everyone who loves Star Wars and Topps need to subscribe to this channel let’s get this channel to 10k subs.Keep up the great content
Another nice reveal. Thank you!
I’ll admit that I was spoiled to your videos being posted every 3 days. However, I do understand the time, not to mention money, it takes to produce this type of content. I appreciate what you do and will cut you some slack. Going forward, every 4 days is okay with me!
Regarding card #232 “The Empire Strikes Back” at 9:32, the title for the second Star Wars film had already been determined by Lucas by the time Topps was making the green 4th Series cards in late 1977. The title was shared with licensees in 1977 (with Topps being one of them). The guy who wrote the captions for the card sets, Gary Gerani, wrote “The Empire Strikes Back” on card #232 for fun - sneaking the title of the second film into the set.
Thanks for sharing this Series 4 PSA reveal. Agree with the other commenters that the current PSA Vintage Graders seem to be harsher in the grading process than the graders 5-10 years ago. Look forward to seeing your next PSA reveals, especially your blue Series 1 return.
Great information! I had always wondered about that card. Now I know it wasn’t a coincidence.
Great video mate, love your stuff.
Love that #1 comic another epic piece of Star Wars history congrats and enjoy!!
nice cards...I thought the batch was really fairly graded...congrats to you and to the person who graded them....jobs well done
Heyyyy, glad to see another one from ya! Maybe you could change your TH-cam handle to "E-dub Rippin's Tuff"? Not too bad of an outcome here, but would've been nice to see a couple bump up a grade. Series 4, as you know is one of the tougher series. The grader seemed a bit tough here, but not like that series 5 return. You definitely honed in on the ones that looked like 9's and were right! That C-3PO errror PSA 6 gets pretty narrow spacing in the UL border. They measure the most extreme part of the card for spacing and it gets pretty tight up there! Either way, fun to see! Hope you are able to kick out a video here and there! Good luck with the house and have fun on spring break! 😉
I legit might might have to sneak in a logo alternate one day (Rippin’s Tuff)… keep an eye out 😉. Because golly gosh dog darn it…. I wonder when/if there will be another day I get a 10 😖. It will be exciting if I do! I have to do another 5 box! Anyway… I’ll be back. Thanks Ryan!
@@e-dubrippinstuff9820 That would be fun to see you do another box of series 5…Oh, maybe we can call it “Revenge of the Fifth!” 😅. Haa..Man, it’s hard to shut this witty little brain of mine off!!
Comics can actually go a perfect 10 but it is extremely hard to get. I've only seen it done twice.
Another great video. Thanks again for the Ben card.
Thanks! …and you’re most welcome!!
My Star Wars #1 is also a 9.4 and my #2 is an 8.5 but it's the 35 cent price variant.
The truth is that PSA has ratcheted down the grades for vintage cards to go along with their increased inconsistency... the yellow 'print defects' are supposed to be ok/insignificant if they are few and 'don't detract from the eye appeal' of the card, but having lots of them on one card is going to cost you on the grade... pretty good batch... my average for 4th series cards is just over 8...
Ok. Good to know (that your grades are around 8 too). We’ll see in a few days what my large return will garner, and whether things have changed for the better/worse or neither.
Sorry guys I meant to type Eric and instead Phil came up lol keep up the great work Eric love the passion for the hobby
Ha! Not a problem Tony. I’ve done this COUNTLESS times. Thanks for the support buddy!
You would think that anything that comes out of a case fresh box and pack would get at least a minimum 8 psa is being harsh these days and I think it’s because of the amount of cards being sent in for investors purposes
Yah… there has to be an answer. This seems logical though. The sheer number flowing must be dictating. 🤷🏻♂️
you probably haven't opened a lot of stuff from the 70s, 80s and early 90s....quality control is horrible...it doesn't matter if you just pulled a card from a fresh pack -- that doesn't change the fact there are yellow splotches on a lot of these cards, or that they have a lot of tilt to them, or that they are off-centered a lot of the time...pulling a card from a fresh pack means very little when it comes to vintage cards
I haven’t received any of my Star Wars cards back from psa yet they are taking forever, once I do I’ll video that. Although I did receive back around 40 pre 1980 baseball cards that were pristine and not a single 10. All 8’s and 9’s with a few random 6’s. It’s almost like vintage 10’s are a thing of the past. Seems like so many 9’s these days are above the quality of old label tens or at least equal to. 🤷🏼♂️🤷🏼♂️ they’ve really cracked down on vintage.
Yep! 😕 …they seem to be consistent these days… sadly
The more likely answer is that it is just very difficult to find a card from the 70s and 80s that doesn't have some issue with it...they didn't have the capabilities back then that they do now to print very nice cards. The answer that everyone seems to throw out there is that PSA is tougher -- the more accurate response is that it is just hard to find cards that don't have any flaw. I would guess if you look over all of your cards under good lighting and high magnification that the flaws will show themselves
@@gradedcards5516 definitely could be true for sure. By no means did I expect 10’s on a bunch of them but for example I ripped 3 boxes of 1990 hockey and sent off some rookies roughly 40 cards, out of the 40 I selected I’d say 4 cards were flawless under good light and high magnification I went over these things hard. All 4 got 9’s it’s just disappointing not even high value cards or anything just pc stuff. Is what it is, I totally understand your point but I also think psa is frustrating more people then not due to not giving 10’s where 10’s are deserved. Idk doesn’t matter just annoying. I’d bet big dollars if I continued to send them and waste grading fees it’d be a 50/50 shot of those 4 coming back a 10 the next time 😆🤷🏼♂️
@@gradedcards5516 I agree with you. A variable within your theory is the current price of a box. If I spend $1,500+ on a box I’m hoping or maybe even expecting to pull a high percentage of 9s and a few 10s. I know that unrealistic but if it doesn’t materialize, my disappointment is greater than if I had only spent $50.
@@gradedcards5516 It's true that the passing of time will generally mean that cards suffer condition issues whether in packs or in a shoebox. But actually, I think the MORE likely answer is a bit of human nature: PSA started accepting cards in the early 90s and over the decades the evidence in the form of the graded cards themselves show(pretty conclusively) that there is a conservative trend in opinion on what constitutes the attributes of any given grade. My biggest concern is that anyone who grew up collecting in the late 90s and beyond and that is now grading cards professionally: do they have a grasp of what the true limits of vintage card production are/were? I often get baffling returns and I've resubbed a few of the same cards and gotten much better results. That really shouldn't happen if the grading process is a sound one.
I recently opened a pack of series 4 myself and every single card was just riddled with those yellow print marks :/
Hm… did you submit any? Or are you just gonna pass on submitting those?
@@e-dubrippinstuff9820 I put 1 like in my maybe I’ll submit pile the rest were no go’s
@@pocketsfullofwax4238 dang 😕
E-dub rips again! Welcome back!
Great video Phil!!! Everyone who loves Star Wars and Topps need to subscribe to this channel let’s get this channel to 10k subs.Keep up the great content