The illusion of an objective standard psa, sgc, bvg

[robkas68]

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.