I sent my extremely off centered Blastoise to PSA. I was fully expecting an 8 (OC). Instead I got a straight up 6 with no qualifier. What gives?
For the record, 3 generations cards received the OC qualifier and 3 other cards got an MC qualifier in the same order. I know for sure I didn’t check the “No qualifier” box. What gives?
Tolerance for PSA 6 is 80/20. That card looks to be in the 80/20 range, the lower the grades the more tolerance they have and qualifiers become impossible.
That card looks like it fits the straight PSA 6 range.
but it’s clearly off centered. I don’t understand. Is it just under the mark to be considered OC?
OC is a qualifier used when every other attribute meets the grade except the centering, if I understand it correctly. Because lower grades incorporate off-centeredness into their position on the scale, the qualifier becomes unnecessary. So, because PSA 6 as a grade already incorporates a degree of off-centeredness within which your card falls, the qualifier is unnecessary. If it were flawless in every other way, you might receive a higher grade with the qualifier affixed.
Alright I understand. It’s pretty disappointing not getting the qualifier though
The whole qualifier system is ridiculous IMO. There is no consistency to it.
Some cards are OC and get 9 (OC) and other with the exact same centering get 6/7/8. =\
I haven’t had any experience with inconsistent qualifiers. I wonder if the graders have the option to choose between straight grades and qualifiers with cards that are less than mint? After getting a better understanding from everyone is this thread I do understand my grade. It should be a 6 but it would have been nice to get the OC on the label 
I didn’t see your post. thanks for your input!
Just want to post some pics here, taken from eBay;
How is the centering on these not worthy of a lower grade then? I’m calling BS on it. Seems really inconsistent.
@ozenigma, image this scenario if qualifiers didn’t exist. You pull a card out of a booster pack and it has perfect sides, edges, and surface. You send it to PSA and they put a PSA 6 on it only because of the centering. Someone else has the same card sitting in their dresser, they find it after years of neglect, it has surface scratches and edgeware. They decide to send it to PSA and it gets a 6 as well. Which card is more desirable to you?
Look at the example above from @fritz and tell me if you think his card should be graded higher?
My comment was in response to you saying the qualifier system is ridiculous. My point is that the qualifiers serve their purpose. I don’t want to go into a debate about PSA’s inconsistency I’ve avoided those threads and will continue to do so.
Its not terribly uncommon, unfortunately. For example my partial holo Kangaskhan (only confirmed partial holo in the world, that I know of) was given a 6 instead of its PD (print defect) qualifier.
@jkanly only confirmed partial holo in the world eh? I guess the count is up to two now. Look what I bought recently
That’s pretty sweet!! I was honestly hoping to see more of these. And the odds of it being in the same thread… Great find mate
yes there is! I saw a picture of it looooong ago. I completely forgot about until now. I’ll search on google for it
Awesome. Would love to see the snorlax… surprised I haven’t come across it yet, or maybe forgot lol
Tony,
You’re picking up some really cool cards out of the woodwork. Either sellers aren’t putting misprint, miscut, oc, error, & any other random search word I can think of … or you’re really good at finding stuff.
Congrats on the multiple rare finds recently… should of kept the Dark Blastoise (or maybe you still have it)
@cullers, you’re much more intelligent than what you’ve written. How can you not want to say anything about consistency when so clearly you are saying that it isn’t ridiculous.
It’s one or the other mate, not both.
I’m not so sure there’s ever been a 6oc Pokemon card.
I’m sure, in over 40,000 graded, there’s never been a base one though.