Yes, condition standards for Pokemon cards have become measurably stricter over the past five years, and this shift is fundamentally reshaping how collectors grade, value, and trade their cards. What qualified as a near-mint card in 2019 would likely receive a lower grade today from the major grading companies, particularly for cards with subtle wear that previously went unnoticed.
A first-edition Charizard that received a PSA 8 in 2020 might only achieve a PSA 7 if graded today under the same company’s current standards, even without any additional damage occurring. This tightening reflects a convergence of factors: increased competition among grading services, rising market values that demand more rigorous assessment, and evolving expectations from collectors who are investing thousands of dollars in slabbed cards. The financial stakes are simply higher now, which means graders operate with less tolerance for interpretation and more precision in identifying imperfections like centering issues, surface wear, and printing defects.
Table of Contents
- How Have Grading Standards Shifted More Stringent?
- Why Are Standards Becoming More Demanding?
- Specific Examples of Stricter Centering Requirements
- What Should Collectors Do About Stricter Standards?
- Consistency Issues and Hidden Risks
- Population Reports and Rarity Inflation
- The Future of Grading Standards
- Conclusion
- Frequently Asked Questions
How Have Grading Standards Shifted More Stringent?
The most visible shift has been in centering tolerance. cards that were routinely slabbed as 8s and 9s in earlier years now face deductions for what graders call “off-center” printing, where the border on one side is visibly wider than the opposite side. This became increasingly strict because high-value cards require pixel-perfect assessment, and centering is one of the easiest-to-measure variables.
A 1999 Base Set Blastoise that received a PSA 8 five years ago had perhaps 60/40 centering (acceptable then), but those same proportions today would likely result in a PSA 7 or even a 6, depending on severity. Surface and printing defects also receive harsher scrutiny. Minor print spots, light scratches that don’t affect the image, and slight creasing on reverse corners—issues that graders might have overlooked or minimized before—now count more heavily against a grade. This is partly because better scanning technology and magnification tools allow graders to identify issues that were simply harder to spot before, but it’s also because the market expects consistency and precision when paying premium prices.
Why Are Standards Becoming More Demanding?
The financial inflation in the Pokemon card market has directly caused this enforcement shift. When a PSA 10 Shadowless Charizard sells for $100,000+, every detail matters. Grading companies face reputation damage and financial liability if they issue grades that prove inconsistent or if a high-grade card shows wear that contradicts its assigned number. This pressure trickles down to mid-tier and lower-value cards, because a grading company cannot afford to maintain loose standards at one price point and strict standards at another.
A significant limitation of this stricter approach is that it disadvantages vintage card collectors with older slabs. Many cards graded in 2018-2019 are now technically “overgraded” by current standards, yet these vintage slabs command a small premium because collectors understand the historical context. However, this creates a two-tier market where the same card in an older slab might be worth slightly more than the same card in a newer slab with an identical label, simply because of the era in which it was assessed. This inconsistency frustrates newer collectors who lack the historical perspective and incorrectly assume all PSA 8s are equivalent.
Specific Examples of Stricter Centering Requirements
A practical example appears in modern reprints and special sets. The Evolutions set (2016) featured reprinted Base Set cards that had notably better centering than original Base Set cards from 1999-2000, yet many still received mediocre grades due to centering deductions. A card that achieved a 7 or 8 in the Evolutions set likely has better overall condition than a true Base Set card receiving the same grade, but you cannot easily determine this from the grade alone.
The Crown Jewels subset from Vivid Voltage (2020) provides another example. These special illustration rares often had slight centering issues due to the printing process, and graders now consistently deduct for even minor horizontal or vertical misalignment. A card from this set receiving a PSA 7 today might have been a PSA 8 candidate in 2021, despite being handled identically and stored in identical conditions.
What Should Collectors Do About Stricter Standards?
When purchasing graded cards, collectors now need to view the actual card in higher resolution photos or in hand before committing to a price, rather than relying purely on the grade number. A PSA 8 today is likely a safer bet for consistency than a PSA 8 from four years ago, but the tradeoff is that cards graded recently have smaller populations at higher grades, which can make certain cards harder to find. A collector seeking a specific card in a specific grade may have more options if they’re willing to purchase older slabs at slightly discounted prices.
For collectors considering whether to submit cards for grading, understanding the current standard helps set realistic expectations. Submitting a card expecting a 9 when the centering is slightly off-center, or when the surface has light scratches, wastes submission fees. The modern approach requires honest assessment: if you’re in doubt, the card probably won’t achieve the higher grade you’re hoping for.
Consistency Issues and Hidden Risks
One overlooked danger is that different grading companies have different internal standards. A card receiving a PSA 8 might receive a BGS 7.5 or a Sportscard Grading 8, depending on how each company weighs centering versus surface versus eye appeal. This inconsistency means comparing grades across services is unreliable, and it can lead to expensive mistakes if a collector assumes all “8” grades are equal.
Over-reliance on a single grade without understanding the company’s current philosophy is a common pitfall. Additionally, grading standards shift quietly over time without public announcement. You may not realize that standards have tightened until you submit a card, get back a lower grade than expected, and then research online to discover that others have experienced the same disappointment. Some collectors keep detailed records of their submitted cards’ grades to detect when a company’s standards have shifted noticeably.
Population Reports and Rarity Inflation
Most grading companies publish population reports showing how many copies of a specific card they’ve graded at each grade level. These reports have become crucial for understanding true rarity.
A 1999 Base Set Charizard might have 200 PSA 8 copies listed in the population report, but if standards were looser in 2019 when many of those were graded, the true equivalent number of cards meeting today’s standards might be only 100-120. This “population inflation” for older-graded cards means the rarity data is skewed if you’re trying to compare market values over time.
The Future of Grading Standards
As Pokemon card investing matures and the secondary market stabilizes, grading standards will likely remain stringent rather than relax. If anything, emerging grading services continue to position themselves as even more demanding than established companies, betting that collectors will pay premiums for ultra-conservative grades they can trust.
This suggests that standards will either stay flat or tighten further, not ease. Collectors entering the market today should assume that current standards represent the baseline, not a peak.
Conclusion
Condition standards for Pokemon cards have demonstrably become stricter, driven by higher market values and intensified demand for consistency and precision. Cards that received grades four or five years ago should not be directly compared to identically numbered cards graded today, because the criteria have shifted. The main takeaway for collectors is simple: understand the era in which a card was graded, view detailed photos before purchasing high-value cards, and maintain realistic expectations when submitting cards based on current standards, not historical norms.
If you’re building or maintaining a Pokemon card collection, recognize that “grade creep” is a permanent feature of the market. Older slabs may offer better value due to historical grading leniency, while newer slabs offer consistency and modern standards. The choice depends on whether you prioritize the condition of the card itself or the assurance of the grade applied to it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I resubmit an older-graded card to see if it grades higher today?
You can, but expect either the same grade or a lower grade, not a higher one. Resubmission costs money and rarely results in the outcome collectors hope for. The only reason to resubmit is if the card has visible defects in its slab or if you believe the original grade was substantially wrong.
Are cards graded before 2020 overgraded compared to today’s standards?
Generally yes, particularly for centering and subtle surface wear. This doesn’t mean older slabs are a bad purchase—they often cost less precisely because collectors know they’re to an older standard—but it does mean comparing a 2018-graded 8 to a 2024-graded 8 requires context.
Which grading company has the strictest standards right now?
This varies by card type and era, but PSA is generally regarded as consistent and moderately demanding, while BGS emphasizes eye appeal more heavily. Newer services like CGC have positioned themselves as conservative. Direct comparison data is limited because different companies grade different card pools.
Should I buy raw cards instead of graded cards to avoid overgraded inventory?
Raw cards offer potential savings, but you assume the risk of accurate condition assessment yourself. Unless you’re highly experienced in grading, purchasing from established sellers with positive track records is safer than attempting to grade vintage cards accurately.
