Grade the graders
 

I am curious as to how we would grade the grading companies here. 10 being perfect and 1 being the worst. Of course the "a" for they are there but don't really count. Please feel free to elaborate or add others.

Here are my grades:

PSA 7
SGC 8.5
BGS 5
GAI 4

PSA N-4 Questionable Authenticity
SGC 9
BGS 5
GAI 1

graders
 

When I first started collecting graded cards, Beckett was the choice, but as I got more experienced, I noticed most people were all about PSA and SGC when it came to pre-war. Although I came to like PSA, they are starting to majorly disappoint recently. A lot of cards with paper loss (and I mean massive loss) that are being graded B=VG to VG-EX...pathetic. So here are my opinions.

SGC=9
BGS/BVG=7
PSA=6

Because these are primarily the only grading companies I deal with, I will not grade the others...Beckett should get some props!

PSA 2
SGC 3
BGS 0
GAI 0


At first I had Beckett a 1. But then I remembered that if they're doing all of their publishing and selling then they shouldn't be grading. I think they have a conflict of interest there, so I docked them 1 point for that... down to GAI's low level.

Sgc-92

psa -6

bgs/bvg-6

gai - 2

thats a tough one because i feel all the major grading companies are a little more (keener) in certain areas than the others. for example i wouldnt have Sgc grade a 1989 ud griffey jr. rc or BGS grade anything pre-war just my preference. i had a yearly subsription once with PSA and for all that it is worth i would rather use VCP and grade elsewhere. here are my grades gai will get a DNQ (did not qualify) from me.

SGC (pre-war) 8
PSA (pre-war) 7
BGS (pre-war) 5

SGC (post war) 6
PSA (post war) 7.5
BGS (post war) 7

SGC (modern) 4
PSA (modern) 7
BGS (modern) 8.5

SGC (autographs) n/a
PSA (autographs) 7
BGS/JSA (autographs) 7.5

Sgc - 3
psa - 3
bvg - 2
gai - 0

sgc - 7
bvg - 7 (liked their grading better when they had 4 sub categories, but i think they are doing better with authenticity now)
psa - 3
gai - 0 (might as well be raw from an untrusted source)

GAI gets no love so far.

SGC = 7
PSA = 5


bgs/bvg = 2.5
gai = 1

PSA - 7.5
SGC - 5
BVG/BGS - 4 (Unless a Jordan rookie for BGS - then a 9)
GAI - 0
ISA - QUESTIONABLE?

Sgc-88
psa 6
bgs 8
bvg 5
gai 1

Psa 8
sgc 8
bgs 6
gai 0

That's the funniest thing I've read all day, classic! :D

Based on some SGC goofs, the same thing could be said about them!

Psa 8
sgc 1
bvg 7
gai 1

I'm not biased one way or the other. I stick to postwar stuff so it's almost all PSA graded. I just thought it was a funny comment no matter what grading company it was aimed at. Just sayin'.

My opinion
 

here are my grades for an average off the street collector having submitted the cards.
SGC 86 (with Derek 88/92)
PSA 6.5
BVG/BGS 3
GAI 1

An important quallification....

Asa-9
cta-9
pro-9
snaggletooth(actually exists)-7.3

Derek was specifically put on this earth to grade sports cards. In all seriousness, SGC has lately taken the "harsh grading is better" model. I don't want my cards harshly graded, I want them accurately graded.

Just based off of my limited experience, and what I've seen...........

SGC- 9

BVG-8

PSA-4.5

GAI- 3 ( I've only had a few and they are all crossed to equal SGC grade or bumped up a grade)

The others........what others?:rolleyes:

I'll use Danny's categories and this is based on how I use them

SGC (pre-war) 10
PSA (pre-war) 9
BGS (pre-war) 3

SGC (post war) 8
PSA (post war) 9
BGS (post war) 3

SGC (modern) 5
PSA (modern) 10
BGS (modern) 10

Oversized items (largely based on cost)
SGC 6
PSA 3
BGS 7
GAI is a don't use in all categories

grading the graders
 

:D

Grades
 

I always get a laugh out of the occasional eBay listing that has some card slabbed by a company you never or have rarely heard of, and then if per say it's graded a 6 by them - the seller has a " = PSA 6" in the title. One guy actually adds a grade, IE: "SGC40 = PSA4" :confused:

Mine...

SGC 80
PSA 3MC
GAI 1.5
BVG 5
PRO 0

I've seen a lot of BVG's recently graded well/consistent of late, had many of the 4 and above cross-over to same or higher on SGC (when broken out)

My issues with PSA have more to do with Customer Service than the ever-growing number of cards with creases and paper-loss graded as 4's and 5's. BVG and SGC couldn't be more accommodating at the shows. PSA is like going to the Dept of Motor Vehicles - this form, in this type of sleeve, this way or get out. I asked if I could have no qualifiers on my last order w/them (aren't those the kiss of death), was told no problem at a show last year, clearly noted on my order form where they told me to put it - then get 2 back with qualifiers :mad: .. wrote 3 emails asking why and for refund/regrade, after week and a half or being ignored, then "well think about it" type of responses, I get a response that they will do one and not the other (..why, I still don't know) - and the one I had to fill out a special form, send it in separately, note this and that in triplicate - all for their mistakes to begin with!!!:mad::mad::mad:

Like someone said; "At PSA We're not Happy until You're Not Happy"

I'd grade PSA a big fat F on this one! Are you kidding me?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/T206-PIEDMON...item588fff19f7

am i missing something?
 

Cobb has the mk qualifier, dont see it as misgraded.

Glyn...are you telling me that if you take away the MK qualifier...which affects marks on both front and back...this card should grade ex?

I see at least 2-4 creases...a stain...rounded corners...I think this is enough to disqualify this card from being graded ex...or even vg?!?!

I would grade the card VG. I don't see any creases, but I do see a stain on the front (between the buttons) and the back is just "dirty."

It could have had the ST or MK qualifer, but I think the MK is the better choice since the marks are so obvious.

Hmmm...perhaps my eyes are too keen to be a grader...or just too poor...BUT...I think I see a crease to the left of Ty's forehead and what appears to be a full width horizontal crease through where his moustache would be?

SGC=9.0,BVG=8.0,I have no comment on PSA because I have no dealings with them.I have always received great service with SGC.The only thing holding me back from giving them a 10 is the fact that I have waited 5+ months for them to add a Ty Cobb player registry since my initial inquiry. I understand they are busy so its ok.

no
 

Im telling you i could easily see that as vgex based on the scan im looking at. 4 is not ex its vgex.

I was under the impression a qualifier knocked down a grade by 1...is this no longer the case? I have no vendetta here...no axe to grind...no fight to pick...to me...this card looks way overgraded...that's all...just my opinion. Carry on...nothing to see here.

That's only for set registry purposes. PSA don't knock it down on the final grade (on the flip) - meaning they didn't consider that card EX and knock it down because of the qualifier. They're saying it's a VG/EX card that happens to have a qualifier.

Also, I think they actually knock it down 2 grades for the registry.

in general
 

In general I have always thought qualifiers knocked a card down 2 grades. Without the mark I would grade the Cobby a vg...and close to vg-ex but maybe not quite. If there are any wrinkles or creases, I can't see them, and either of those 2 things would knock the grade down. regards

in another look at it, maybe it would be vg-ex if there are no creases or wrinkles, it's fairly nice (not counting the mark)

The Cobb is accurately graded.

this is where most people are mistaken
 

An mk qualifier would automatically be a 1 maybe a 1.5 if you requested no qualifiers, they sometimes wont even do a no qualifier on an mk card. the knock down 2 grades is only for weighting in the registry, it does not necessarily mean you can ask for no qualifiers and get that card in a holder with 2 grades lower on it.

...
 

also as noted previously, the number on the flip is not adjusted because of a qualifier. a qualifier just means the card would grade that specific number if not for the presence of said qualifier. meaning that psa feels the cobb is vgex if not for the writing on it.

Glyn...thanks for clarifying that for me.

pete

I just recently saw this on Ebay -- What a disgrace!
 

http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t...67davidson.jpg

Not only does it miss the centering requirements - at least 75/25 bottom-to-top on the left side and closer to 80/20 bottom-to-top on the left side, to add insult to injury, the bottom right corner doesn't look "mint" in my opinion. On top of that, the right side is miscut about 3/4 the way up. Unbelievable!


From their Grading Standards:

MINT 9: Mint

A PSA Mint 9 is a superb condition card that exhibits only one of the following minor flaws: a very slight wax stain on reverse, a minor printing imperfection or slightly off-white borders. Centering must be approximately 60/40 to 65/35 or better on the front and 90/10 or better on the reverse.

What an ugly card! I'm showing the T/B centering to be 27/73. :confused:

Interesting statement.

I read this thread (see below) several weeks ago, and I think this sums it up best. Many people don't see any point in renewing their PSA membership. The several that will renew like 'jimrad' along with several others who agreed with him are doing it for all the wrong reasons. Many people aren't happy with PSA, the service, the SMR, the membership, and the grading but since they are neck deep PSA cards, they blindly support the company and basically donate $99 every year to the company for their membership hoping the company will continue to succeed.

http://forums.collectors.com/message...39&STARTPAGE=1

There's always going to be some subjectivity to the placement of a numerical grade, but unless the card is a previously unknown issue, you should be able to identify it with 100% accuracy.

http://www.net54baseball.com/picture...pictureid=4697http://www.net54baseball.com/picture...pictureid=4698