The illusion of an objective standard psa, sgc, bvg
 

I joined the psa collectors club last year to make use of the specials to submit about 150 vintage cards that I own (mostly 1952 topps). I submitted cards that I thought were about 5 or better and for the most part it was as expected. I did receive a couple 3.5s and about 25 4s and the rest 5 and 6 with a couple 7s. Nothing authentic/altered/minimum size etc.

I still had my 15 free submissions. I decided to use my 15 submissions on crossovers to see if they crossed. I submitted 7 sgc, 3 bvg, 3 gai and 2 sports collectors digest. I set the minimum grade for crossing the sgc and bvg as identical and gai and scd as acceptable down a grade. I think the results are a bit interesting. The GAI (one crossed 1961 Aaron went from a gai 8.5 to a psa 8. one came back as evidence of trim and one did not meet the minimum grade)

For scd one crossed ( 1967 Clemente from scd 8.5 to psa 8 ) and one 1955 Mantle failed to reach minimum grade.

For sgc 3 crossed with the same grade, 1934 Goudey Appling psa 7, 1967 Carew psa 7 and 1968 Mantle psa 7.5. Three others did not cross because of minimum grade and one did not cross because of minimum size requirements.

BVG was a total washout as 2 did not meet the minimum grade and one did not meet the minimum size requirement.

My point is that I got more variation in outcomes for cards that had already been submitted to an "expert" once than I did with my own 30 second eye test with the raw cards. Even throwing out the gai graded cards, it casts some doubt on the expertise involved in the grading process. The fact that 3 of 15 (20%) went from a high grade 7+ to possibly authentic is really mind boggling especially since it was not just one company (one bvg, one sgc and one gai). So much for objectivity and expertise.

It's all opinion basied. When it's rendering a opinion there is no liabilty on their behalf.

Is your argument based on theorizing that PSA was correct in all instances?

These companies look at a card for mere seconds, it is completely imperfect.

Also submitting for crossover has long been noted for it's lack of objectivity. Unless it is a key card and helps the standing of the company to have it's name attached, it is a bigger gain to reject or lower the card grade in order to show superiority and build a false sense of brand loyalty.

When I submit cards to any TPG, I always request the lowest grade possible so that I can develop brand loyalty.:confused::confused::confused::cool:

As in, "next time I will buy only PSA cards because the others I submit for crossover always are over graded or trimmed"... And thus the PWCC PSA price continues.

Yes, brand loyalty.

And we all know what they say about opinions.

...that opinions are fine as long as they are mine?

Brian

My father collected coins for over 60 years. When I showed him a number of my PSA graded cards, I asked him why almost all of his coins were ungraded. He told me a story of how Q David Bowers, a premier authority on coin collecting submitted a particular coin and the grade was significantly lower than Bowers expected. He told me "if Bowers with a loupe says a coin is a particular grade, should I trust him, or some $10 per hour guy working at the coin place?"... And, he had a point. If I took the 25 most knowledgeable collectors on this board, I would trust their opinions over ANY grading company.

My argument certainly is not that psa was correct in each instance. I presume that if I sent sgc 15 psa cards, some may come up short. And if you sent a card to psa 3 times you may get 3 different grades. Rather, it is the false sense of security associated with the grading process. Some of those trimmed cards are only a bad factory cut and some of the psa, sgc or bvg "9"s are altered as hell. I am amusing myself with the irony that after 40 years of collecting, I may be submitting my stuff to a 23 year old to tell me if it is "legit" and then taking his word as gospel.

I will agree will this entire statement. :)

I agree!

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

My 2 cents
 

I have not seen a 23 year old grader at PSA, all the ones i know are in their late 40's to early 50's. Because customer service may have some younger guys in it doesn't mean the graders are young. SGC has no young graders either not sure where this information comes from. Second PSA BVG and SGC are three different companies the fact that they would not all grade the card the exact same grade is completely irrelevant. Is grading an exact science NO WAY but it is far less random than many of the criticisms want to pretend. Third point I was 23 in 1995 and more than qualified to be a grader so if there is someone grading at PSA that is 23 I wouldn't just automatically dismiss them as unqualified. Some of the most respected people as far as knowledge on this board have missed wrinkles and or modifications to cards. Having a great knowledge of a set may help greatly in knowing rarities and would obviously help in identifying counterfeits but it is not necessarily much help in detecting alterations or technical grade which are some of the key components and most important areas of grading.

I think the issue of expertise is less significant than the inherent subjectivity in grading. That said, I think TPG is a positive resource, especially with regard to issues of authenticity and alterations. What escapes me, given the subjectivity in grading, is the large disparity in values especially at the high end (8 v. 8.5 v. 9 for example).

"I am amusing myself with the irony that after 40 years of collecting, I may be submitting my stuff to a 23 year old to tell me if it is "legit" and then taking his word as gospel."

I don't think Roberts statement says that he knows a 23 year old is grading his cards. He's stating it's subjective and maybe somewhat reliable at best. Until the subjectivity and human element is removed, it's just a tool and nothing more. There is very little science involved, especially with the time committed by the grader.

I posted this in its own thread but I had the opposite experience. My crossovers did better with PSA! Mind you they were old BVG ones and they
had a reputation early on of being far to harsh on grades. The KSA was a big surprise too (I thought it was a 4 or 4.5).

C46 Parent PSA 5 (KSA 5)
T209 Bourquise PSA 3.5 (BVG 1)
T209 McGeehan PSA 4 (BVG 2)
T209 Hoffman PSA1 (BVG 1)
T209 Pope PSA 5 (BVG 3)
T209 Stubbe PSA 3 (BVG 2.5)
T209 Walsh PSA 3 (BVG 2.5)

No, that you are entitled to your opinion...but you are also entitled to my opinion.

Justin, I tend to agree with your initial statement and the general spirit of what you have said here. To each his own, however. It makes me zero difference how or what someone else collects. I am currently vacationing in Ireland, and it strikes me what a small niche we ball card collectors in America (and Canada) really are. Most people would say we are all off a bit! Have fun, and collect how/what makes you happy.



Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Glyn- do you know what tools the TPG's use to detect altered cards? I know paper restorers can be extremely skilled, and are always trying to get doctored cards slabbed with numerical grades. And how successful do you think the graders are in catching and rejecting them?

The whole TPG thing raises some questions, and forgive me if they are rudimentary and/or been asked elsewhere. But I'm curious if these answers are public knowledge or not...

I've often read people noting the brief amount of time graders spend looking at a card, but do we know how long a grader averages per card? Do graders spend more time on certain sets/cards?

What would the ideal amount of time be on a card?

Do graders go over every aspect of grading (centering, corners, edges, surface, etc.), or do different graders specialize in a limited number?

At what threshold does a card merit multiple graders, or does every card get multiple looks?

I would assume that not all graders get to grade all cards, but that some graders focus on certain sports, eras or sets, is that right?

Are graders ever publicly identified (I don't think I've ever read of one being named)?

I would assume that qualifications vary, depending on how the grader would fit into the company, but is there a test for employment?

How are graders evaluated by their employers?

Just a few thoughts that run through my mind on the topic. If anybody has solid answers, I'd appreciate sharing the knowledge!

One of the main points of grading isn't that they are always correct as they are human too, but that they are an objective third party. For example, when you have dealers selling their own raw cards, they will often more likely "overgrade" their cards because they are trying to sell them for more money. I'm not saying all dealers are dishonest. There are plenty of very honest dealers who accurately self-grade their raw cards. However, they may also have different standards on what is EX, what is Near Mint and so forth. With TPG's they are all supposed to grade according to the same standards and do not take a % of the sale when the cards transact.

Sure, there are many dealers who might overgrade their cards, but shouldn't a savvy buyer be able to recognize this? If a restaurant consistently serves lousy food, their customers will go elsewhere. Likewise, a dealer who consistently overgrades might find it hard to get repeat business.

That said, a TPG can still provide a very valuable service, and that is to detect altered cards and keep them from being numerically graded. And that was the point of my question to Glyn, who has experience on the inside.

The savvy buyers purchase the card, not the flip. However, TPG's allow those who don't trust their own grading expertise to buy cards and not feel that they will get ripped off.

They are human, but my expectation is that they are completely accurate when it comes to a card being authentic - that is the primary and most important job they have to do. And that includes correctly identifying the card's basic attributes (set, etc. - that thread with the 68 Ryan labelled as a Venezuelan when it is so obviously NOT is truly embarrassing).

The grade part is opinion within the framework of the grading system the company has created. As long as they stick to that framework, I'll have an idea as to what they think the grade indicates, but that also does include some margin of error and room for disagreement.

And, of course, detecting alterations, evidence of trimming, etc. is job 1A.

They are accurate in that they provide you a guarantee. If you buy a PSA graded card, and it turns out the card inside is not authentic, PSA will reimburse you for the price you paid for the card. This is the rationale that TPG's charge higher grading fees for cards with higher declared values: they are on the hook for more if they are wrong.

They will similarly reimburse you if they are proven to have given a card a higher, incorrect grade. This point is usually much harder to prove as if you say will, this similar card that looks the same received a lower grade from you, the TPG will most likely still refuse to reimburse you. It has to be very, very obvious that the card is a misgrade. Saying all of that, I personally have gotten reimbursed before, so the system works in many cases.

You most likely will not get this kind of guarantee from a dealer or auction house that you purchase a raw card from.

Edit: if a TPG mis-labels a card like in the example above, they're not going to reimburse you for that. They will just give you a free reholder to correct the card designation on the flip. ;)

BIG, BIG +1. TPG's have eliminated a significant portion of dealers specializing in altered cards. I can think of one in my area who had virtually nothing but cards that were put through a paper press, then cut back to size, with razor sharp edges and one who advertised almost weekly in Sports Collector's Digest back in the early '90's. The cards appeared to the naked eye as NrMt-Mt, but would virtually always come back from PSA as trimmed. Upon inquiry to PSA, I learned to look at the edges of raw cards with a 16X loupe before buying (original cards should have rough edges; pressed and trimmed will have quite clean, sharp edges) The latter dealer seems to have vanished entirely from the scene and the other, while still apparently in business (and will go unnamed) appears to have cleaned up his act.

Best wishes,

Larry

I like your opinions in your book on Exhibits, Adam. Nice work!

Highest regards,

Larry

That is the correct expectation BUT all 3 big TPG's still make mistakes. So I would never blindly think something is 100% authentic because it is in one of those 3 TPG holders. That said, all of those TPGs stand behind their product fairly well. Most experienced collectors have seen fake cards in all of their holders. Not too many but it happens.

I agree with this. BVG obviously graded a fake Seaver. I was at the card show in Raleigh, and saw "The Paper Boy" selling a fake Jordan rookie in an SGC holder. Yes, that colors were that off that anyone could tell.

We're small potatoes but we do guarantee our raw cards will receive a numerical grade from SGC unless otherwise stated in the auction. After your purchase we directly submit the card to SGC if it comes back anything other than a number grade we refund your purchase price. I did this for years on Ebay as well using PSA but almost nobody took me up on it. At our auctions we submit tons of autographs and cards.