Grading Co. Experiment [Archive] - Net54baseball.com Forums

View Full Version : Grading Co. Experiment

Archive

07-12-2005, 11:29 AM

Posted By: RobertA few months back I bought 2 1933 Goudy HOF cards(Hubbell & Grove) from a big EBAY dealer and they where both slabbed 6.5 by GAI. I thought in my opinion that the Hubbell was graded to high and the Grove was deserving better. TEST 1: Cracked them open and sent them to PSA, the Hubbell came back as a 6 and the Grove they stated was evidence of trim. TEST 2: Cracked them open and submitted to GAI, both cards came back as 5.5's TEST 3: Sent them to SGC (First time ever suibmitting to them), Hubbell graded 5.5 and Grove a 7 Conclusion: GAI shows favortism towards their clients, there is no way that both of these cards should of come back 1 full grade lower then what they originally stated, to inconsistent. PSA is clueless and if it were not for the fact that for some reason the cards they grade bring in more money I would never use them. Lastly, SGC in my opinion got the grades right. To answer some questions posted, I found no evidence of trimming on the Grove and is backed up by GAI grading it twice and SGC as well especially since reading in these forums how they have become extra sensitive in their grading. I do not have a place to post the scans if someone is willing to house them and post them I will gladly send it to them.

Archive

07-12-2005, 11:31 AM

Posted By: Josh K.Robert - can you post scans. I also take it from your comments that you personally found no evidence of the grove being trimmed. Is that correct?

Archive

07-12-2005, 11:32 AM

Posted By: David VarghaMost interesting conclusions based on an extremely large sample size. (typo) DavidVargha@hotmail.com

Archive

07-12-2005, 11:53 AM

Posted By: Hal LewisAlthough PSA apparently got it "wrong" when it said that the Grove card was "trimmed"... at least they erred in the PROPER direction. If there is ever ANY doubt... even if it is due to grader stupidity... I would much rather see a grading company NOT SLAB a legit card... than slab an illegitimate one. Right? I have no idea why PSA thought the card was trimmed... but at least they are being "picky" and not slabbing everything.

Archive

07-12-2005, 12:59 PM

Posted By: Judge Dred Do you know what would be great? Showing scans of the cards in all of the different holders. We would probably all gawk and make our comments but in the end it would be kind of fun.

Archive

07-12-2005, 01:05 PM

Posted By: warshawlawwhat you really need to to to get the Grove slabbed by PSA is knock off the Goudey ad at the bottom; seems to work for Mayos and Old Judge cards <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

Archive

07-12-2005, 01:08 PM

Posted By: identify7I have to wonder what would happen if you repeated the entire experiment. But what would be the point?

Archive

07-12-2005, 01:33 PM

Posted By: dan mckeeIf you repeated the entire experiment, you will receive 6 different grades and or other trims or coloring added. Or maybe both returned as counterfeits. But I think grading is wonderful.

Archive

07-12-2005, 01:44 PM

Posted By: Hal LewisGood one, Adam! <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> I agree that the grades themselves are subjective as hell... but I just hope that ALL of the "legit" grading companies (SGC, PSA, GAI) continue to get HARDER and HARDER on things like trimming and coloring, etc. When in doubt as to whether a card has been trimmed... they should ALL just slab it as "authentic" and send it back.

Archive

07-12-2005, 02:07 PM

Posted By: T206CollectorSGC wins again, eh? They're the most consistent in my mind, and I know it's not a huge sample (or even anything larger than a small sample), but I had two T206 cards returned to me for evidence of "cleaning/soaking." Now the cards looked nice, but I wasn't sure how they knew it was cleaned or soaked, so I sent those cards back in with a lot of about 40 other T206 cards, and, wouldn't you know it, those two came back unslabbed as "cleaning/soaking" again. I'm not wasting my money on a third time. But I've sent water soaked cards (you know, to get glue off the backs) into SGC before with no problems. What are people cleaining/soaking cards with to get them brighter? And how does SGC know how to detect it? (I guess, I also want to know why they care?)

Archive

07-12-2005, 02:13 PM

Posted By: Josh K.T206, I dont know for sure, but my guess is they are using bleach - which would be detectable if you smell the card.

Archive

07-12-2005, 02:46 PM

Posted By: JimBI have to agree with David's subtle comment on this one. No conclusion with any real meaning can be drawn by this sample of two. We don't even get the benefit of looking at the cards ourselves. It is just as logical to conclude that SGC and GAI don't know how to identify a trimmed card as it is to conclude that PSA is "clueless". That GAI was inconsitent in this instance does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that they favor certain submitters. I am not arguing that any of these presumptions are not the case. I am just saying that the evidence presented does not necessarily support these conclusions. Like political polls, the media and politicians spin them so that they lead to the conclusions they hope will be drawn. I certainly like the idea of doing this and would love to see more of this done in a more controlled experiment with a larger sample. JimB

Archive

07-13-2005, 09:43 AM

Posted By: Gilbert PorterAs some of you know, I did a larger sample test of the major grading companies some 4 years ago.  That year, at the Sportsfest, I brought a selection of 10 carefully chosen cards - spanning from 19th century to brand new, some already slabbed and some unslabbed, all in exmt-or-better condition.  Slabs that were chosen purposely included one of each of the major four companies.  I also included a "test" - a high-grade high-value card slabbed by an ill-regarded company (but where I knew the provenance and prior PSA grade that had been assigned to the card).  Card values ranged from meaningless to over $20,000.  (Almost forgot - I also brought my son.)  PLEASE NOTE:  None of my panel consisted of "9.5"s or "10"s, since I considered the grading of such cards to be beyond my learning curve.I spent between 1-2 hours, and in a few cases more, with the head grader of each of SGC (Derek Grady at the time), GAI (Mike Baker), PSA, and BVG - plus some other companies that are no longer in the business (SCD) or are irrelevant.  In the case of PSA, I am not certain that I spoke with their chief grader since they were the only one that treated me with a lack of courtesy (but ultimately did allow me to sit with someone they claimed was senior grader).  Everyone else was extremely courteous.  My sole purpose was to discover the "truth" of grading standards and also to determine the clear "best" grading company.Unfortunately I no longer have the panel of cards to post for your review, but if people are interesed I can provide some specifics.  And the results of my survey will not take into account subjective variances that can happen with any grading company when different graders review the same card.  Also, I have to assume that there have been some changes with the different companies since then, though my experience grading with each of the major four companies since that date has been, in general, consistent with my initial impressions.  Also, I should note that there seems to some differences in my conclusions as we move to Ex-or-less grades, where understanding the aesthetic rules of the grading company is often more important than the apparent condition of the card.That said, the results were interesting, if not conclusive.  The two companies that most impressed me - in terms of logical consistency, integrity and thoughtful responses to my questions - were GAI and SGC. Summary conclusions that I reached were:SGC - Toughest grader of the bunch, but extremely consistent in application of its standards.  Grades averaged about one-half grade below my own grade determination, but were consistent in treatment.  More tolerant of centering issues than others, but tougher on other aesthetics (surface condition, corners, clarity, etc.).  While incosistent with other grading companies on trimming issues, they are internally consistent. - resubmissions since then have had identical results.. The test - off-brand slab - card was reviewed cautiously but correctly graded.GAI: - Very thoughtful and consistent - but with very specific ideas about aesthetics of the card. With vintage cards, they are less tolerant on centering issues, but more forgiving about certain other aesthetics (such as card brightness clarity) so long as the technical conditions (centering, corners, etc.) are met.   Similar to SGC on trimming issues - inconsistent with other grading companies but internally consistent.  The test - off-brand slab - card was reviewed cautiously but correctly graded.  Within a half-grade variation - both ways - SGC and GAI were remarkably consistent - the biggest variation was one full grade.PSA: - They suffered in my review because of their poorer customer service attitude.  Thus, when they seemed inconsistent in their review of my panel, they were less willing to discuss their reasons, and therefore did a poorer job of persuading me.  I was unable to determine the pattern to their grades - about half were consistent with SGC/GAI, but others were significantly lower or higher.  As to the test - off-brand slab - card, it was promptly declared as trimmed (since then the same card was reslabbed and sold to a dealer, who recently resubmitted it to PSA and received an upgrade from its original grade).BVG: - They were extremely nice and considerate, but during my seating seemed intent on proviing to me that they were the only "strict" graders in the hobby - without exception, every single card in my panel received its lowest grade of the day at BVG (in some cases tied with another grading company, but in many cases outright).  As to the test - off-brand slab - card it was reviewed cautiously and given a grade lower than GAI/SGC.Lots of words, but no clear conclusion.  Bottom line, I prefer graded cards to ungraded cards since I like the knowledge that some measure of uncertainty regarding doctored cards - and near invisible flaws - has been dealt with.  But I rarely buy any card without inspection or detailed scan to verify the aesthetics.

Archive

07-13-2005, 11:08 AM

Posted By: tbobI received a group of M116 PSA 3 and 4s in the mail yesterday and was surprised to notice the wide difference in cards even among the same grades. For instance among the PSA 3s, one looked Ex with just slight touches on the corner while another had 2 diagonal creases in the lower right area and had I submitted it, feel I would have been lucky to get a 2. So you find inconsistencies not only between the grading companies but also between cards graded by the same company. When I bought the cards, the scans were blurred so you couldn't really tell. Since all were scarce back cards I am o.k with the group but again, it is funny how different "3's" can look. The 4s were pretty homogenous. On another note, can someone definitively answer the question whether GAI, SGC and PSA are grading cards "authentic" or not? SGC was grading some in certain cases, PSA was leaving it up to the individual graders and didn't have a standard policy and GAI was, then they weren't, then they were. What's the latest? I have a gorgeous E94 violet Grant that looks like a 7 but has an almost undetectable recoloring line that I'd like to get graded authentic. Any ideas?

Archive

07-13-2005, 11:29 AM

Posted By: warshawlawI spoke with the grader at GAI at the Hollywood Park show and was told that they will slab a card as authentic if you do not want a numerical grade assigned. What you do is indicate "authenticate only" on the submittal. In terms of a card with color on it, you should call and ask them. I have one (an E103) that the dealer, with whom I am friendly and who had no reason to lie to me, said that they did authenticate after refusing to grade because of a recoloring. of course, that recoloring was so amateurish (I think it was a crayon) that it looked like a little kid did it a long time ago.

Archive

07-13-2005, 11:34 AM

Posted By: AlanBottom line: Grading is subjective I agree with others that have said that the card should be graded "authentic". Period. End of story. That way ebay buyers, mail order, etc,... could feel "fairly" safe that it's not a reprint.