psa sloppiness

seems like they've been really inconsistent with the MK qualifier. not sure if they're just missing the mark or letting them through. i almost just now made a snipe on this plank but then caught that the uniform is not supposed to have the red "A's". bleh. hope winner realizes this.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/E95-1909-Philadelphia-Caramels-Eddie-Plank-As-Portrait-HOFer-PSA-3-VG-NICER-/370623642690?pt=US_Baseball&hash=item564ae3fc42

Wow. I'm wondering if I should be worried about that, because I've bought quite a few T206's from this guy. But you're right: This card really should've been marked MK.

Doesn't PSA give you the choice of a high grade with qualifier or lower grade without?

that's only for off-center and the OC qualifier. just like the REA wagner psa2 that had the big date stamp on the back...no MK either. just really weird.

LucasRiley wrote:Wow. I'm wondering if I should be worried about that, because I've bought quite a few T206's from this guy. But you're right: This card really should've been marked MK.

lucas--psa and sgc does occasionally miss some mark or stamping on uniforms...like the e95 plank the A's almost looks like part of the uni and card design.

The whole point of a qualifier I believe is that it indicates that the card is high grade except for one qualifier. But if the entire card is low grade then the qualifier would be a moot point.

This doesn't mean that they didn't miss the A on the Plank, they still may have. I agree, it does look very natural there.

jamie--i've seen examples of psa1mk...which imo is totally redundant. i think a noob grader just blew it on this plank. would've been irked if i won the card and saw that. of course now i'm also pissed because if they graded correct as a psa3mk the price would've been a couple hundos less and i would've had a good shot at it.

cccc wrote:jamie--i've seen examples of psa1mk...which imo is totally redundant.

Without the (MK) qualifier I could have missed the mark (pun intended) on this one.