Crossing 52' Monte Irvin from BVG to SGC, no bueno....
 

SO, this became this. Why? I know it's impossible to tell from a pic but if you had to speculate:

https://i.imgur.com/u4Jpmn3.png

oh, and I cracked out and submitted to SGC.. didn't try to do an "official" cross...

Altered stock victim from a screwdown?

You can't be legit surprised. The card may appear nice, but Beckett is not within shouting distance of the same page in terms of standards employed by either PSA or SGC. BVG slabs, even if nice cards, are not ideal crossover candidates with other recognized TPG's. They simply don't notice things, often times large things. Or they do notice them, and throw up a softball anyway. It's been this way for years.

Sorry that happened to you, but looks to be a nice card regardless. Maybe SGC had an issue with the measurements. That would be my guess.

They will normally have some indication on the receipt that comes back with the slabbed cards, like where it lists the grade results...can say A "evidence trim" or something similar. Did you look there?

I would take the SGC "A" with a grain of salt. I know someone who has gotten number grades out of SGC "A" cards. Opinions are like....errrr.....ahhhh....nevermind.

True that's a problem with all of them. Youtube and the online forums are full of cards that are A's that were once PSA 7's and vice versa. Or cards that were once in numbered slabs but then sent back PSA "Min Size". That in particular with them has become a farce.

I will still buy graded cards, but I don't send anything in anymore. It's too much of a joke.

I mean, I buy a BVG 6 I don't exactly expect it to come back an SGC A, but I hear you.. I'm not shocked either.

I haven't gotten the card but I'll check the receipt when I get it!

Maybe I'll send it to CSG, waste more money, :p

Yes, that would be wasting more money. :D

Beckett is terrible with vintage cards, would rather have raw.

Beautiful card, by the way. :)

Just based on the eye test, the borders look a little narrow for a 1952 Topps. And SGC has lately been calling those AUTHENTIC, rather than sending them back ungraded as minimum size not met. That would be my guess. The pressed from a screwdown was always a PSA thing. Usually those that failed the test were sent to SGC/BGS and got slabbed. Haven't heard that SGC tightened up on those, but it's possible they have.

Take any A with a huge grain of salt. I heard a story recently of a family find of untouched '52s that the Mick and campy came back as As. Absolutely unaltered.

I've also had a friend submit a Ted Williams Liebig come back an A. Resubmit it and it came back a 7.

The kids working at these grading companies need a ton more experience. And the "Veteran" graders need to take a closer look at "A" cards in the final steps of the review process.

Right side looks suspect at first glance

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=5159550440808879
SGC talks about giving undefined A grades in this facebook video from today.

Yes, now your "Authentic" will be spelled out, and they will be including reasoning on the flip itself. Examples I saw were Altered, Color Added, and Evidence of Trimming.

While this makes sense in the vein of providing more information, the visual to me on the new flips themselves looked pretty bad. Many in the comments were saying leave the "A" on the front of the flip, and put the reasoning on the back. Problem is, you cannot see the back on a current SGC flip. There is a post over on the main board where some pictures are included, I believe.

Here are the labels, posted by member VintageBen...

Attachment 524154

Here is the video Lucas was talking about
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Ef_1ZyPVvG8&feature=share

Would trust a raw card before anything vintage from Beckett, that said there are a lot of As being given out.