Which card do you prefer?
 

PSA one will tap back, that's not the issue. Both back clean.

SGC - color pops in that holder and registration looks better. PSA (as usual) just looks sloppy

If the scans are representative, the color does look better on the SGC one. That would be my preference. Does it have a surface wrinkle?

Negative.

Or they are just scanned by the companies at slightly different settings. Color of cards in hand is the same.

Is it just my eyes or does the SGC look trimmed?

It is smaller...

No, the scan size is smaller.

I'll take SGC's undergraded version any day of the week
Especially since it would go at a fraction of the "9" price

SGC: It actually supports the card.

Someone's gotta say it. This really seems to be a very 'purposeful' thread that's meant to prove some sort of point. Am I correct?

We are all 'supposed' to pick the SGC 4 to prove we look beyond the number (or for some other reason), yes? And those who opt for the PSA 9 will be smirked at?
The early returns certainly follow that line of thinking.

I prefer the 9. The 4 got a 4 for a reason. Just because I can't see it from this front scan doesn't mean it isn't there.

Are they the same card? Minus the color they look strikingly similar in centering and corners.

SGC looks better in my opinion.

I agree with the poster above, at first they do look like the same card. I'm assuming they are not.

Yep. Well done. SGC only missed by 5 grades. The highlight of a distinguished 30 card or thereabouts sub where every card was undergraded, most by around 2 grades.

Great pickup congrats!

I still haven't been able to figure out if either the SGC or PSA card depict a Prewar baseball player.

Brian (prewar cards sometimes look like this E101 below)

Hah, good catch.

I had a feeling it had something to do with SGC's strange grading standards of overseas and odd stock cards.

What's that, like a $700-$800 price difference? A couple years ago or so, it would have been much more.

You have waaaay more confidence in TPG than me. If I didn't know better, I might think it's a scam. :rolleyes:

If it's for my collection, I'd go with the SGC only because I despise those PSA slabs that don't set the card correctly. If the PSA slab was sized right I would go with that one but only barely.

Not arguing, but I cannot for the life of me understand why someone would prefer a 4 to a 9 because of the slab's appearance.

When a card slides around inside the slab like that one would it just drives me nuts. I've taken cards out of those PSA slabs and sent them to SGC knowing that they would get a lower grade (which they did) and I'm still happier with them now.

In 99 percent of cases you just tap it back to vertical and centered and it will stay in place unless you really subject it to a lot of movement.

Serious question...what is keeping the card in aligned position once you tap it back into vertical and centered? The holder doesn't fit the card.

This comment is from someone who has never submitted a card for grading and only has less than 20 graded 1950s cards. :)

Its an auto racing card and I have absolutely no interest in either. Given that lack of interest, I'd take the one that would realize more when sold so I'd prefer the PSA 9.

Interestingly, I had three copies of the same card graded in 2022, and they used a tighter holder with borders on the inside to fit these cards. I wonder why a card graded now is still floating around in the holder, when they had proper fitting holders two years ago?

If keeping for my collection, the SGC slab for sure as it looks horrible in that PSA monstrosity.

If free to sell of course the PSA slab because it would bring more money.

If buying to resell the SGC because it will be way cheaper. Then I could play the Please Submit Again game. Hopefully I could also get the same 9 from PSA but I highly doubt if it was cracked out again and sent to PSA it would receive the same 9 grade.

This has not been my experience. Simply picking the card up and putting it back down will send it in all sorts of directions.

Again, and maybe I'm wrong, but on the PSA holder I see no designed area in the holder that is supposed to keep the card secure. Am I missing something?
I don't see how knocking it back into position is going to keep it in that position:confused:

It's in an internal sleeve, which usually will keep it relatively stable. There is also pressure from the two halves of the slab. Beckett cards don't go all the way out to the edge of the slats but they mostly look OK.

But it's still subject to move around, and undeniably FUGLY. :eek:

It's a holder. Big deal. If SGC hadn't graded it FIVE grades low I wouldn't even have submitted it. Amazing to me the focus of this thread has become the PSA slab, not the fact that SGC has no clue and gave me a 4 on a mint card.

It's almost always going to be the other way. The lower grade is usually the more accurate one and the higher one missed something. SGC didn't pull a number out of a hat. The grader clearly saw something. Whether what they saw justifies the grade is up for debate. But unfortunately, we don't get to find out what they saw. We have to guess, look at scans, or take your word for it. Ultimately, we don't have enough information to know which company is clueless.

Grading has always been an opinion no?

Sure, but I'd expect people who call themselves professionals to be within spitting distance of the same grade when looking at the same card and using written standards for each grade level.

In this case, it's clear that one of the companies simply got it very, very wrong.

Isn't that one of the problems that these graders are self appointed experts or professionals whatever they want to call themselves? Lol

As another responded, I would prefer the SGC for the looks of the card as it sits and the PSA if I was selling for maximized profits. I would sell as the card doesn't interest me.

As I have said they graded the whole sub wrong, 2 grades in most cases, some more. There was nothing to see here. Just incompetence, likely the grader was some kid used to perfect out of the pack shiny. On this particular sub, they were clueless. It was not worth the money to regrade most of the cards, the only other card I did went from a 6 to an 8.

We all prefer the opinion of the company that puts higher numbers on our labels. Their opinion is definitely more accurate than the company that puts lower numbers on our labels.

I've been doing this for decades and it's my card which I have examined very closely multiple times. Is there some reason for your skepticism other than you like to be a contrarian?

That would be my guess also as Peter has talked smack about PSA way too many times to count over the years.:D:D:D

I've been doing it for decades as well. Appealing to your own authority isn't compelling to me. I've seen many discrepancies in grades like this. When one is a 4 and the other a 9, it is ALWAYS a hidden surface wrinkle that the company that gave it a 9 missed. They don't just give out 4s for no reason. Even if incompetence. It's not like a close call between a 7 and an 8. It's an otherwise mint card that gets a 4. There is something there. I guarantee it.

You can make it personal and call me contrarian all you want. I just call it like I see it.

You know best I am sure. As does SGC.

You think what you want and I'll do the same. But if you think PSA knows best, you are sadly mistaken.

As an overall matter, I don't think that, and never said so. Straw man. In this case, I do for sure, having thoroughly examined the card and seeing that the entire sub was misgraded, pretty obviously by some kid who doesn't understand anything non ultra modern.

Peter, I wonder if PSA is now controlling SGC's grading, even though they announced several times that they would treat SGC as an independent entity. That grade is a travesty to the whole system.

Not sure, but the SGC grade was pre transaction.

+1

In this case, I'm guessing PSA looked at the card for 7 seconds, and SGC gave it a full minute. Otherwise I'm with Peter... my last SGC submission was about 2 grades off on all the key cards I submitted.

Same card :)....That's great. I think it's about 50/50 who's wrong ....And I am not sure it matters as it's usually last holder standing, wins.

.

Can you give us your opinion or guess as to why SGC would have assigned that grade? I tend to agree with others that to be that far off on what appears to a high-graded card usually means the grader saw or thought he saw some flaw that lowers the technical grade regardless of eye appeal. Put differently, it seems unlikely the grader just randomly thought this card graded less than excellent given its appearance in the scan.

I've answered this, but again, my assumption is some kid used to grading shiny stuff is not familiar with vintage and mistook some tiny thing that should not be marked down for at all, like a print speck, or something that's a normal feature of the paper stock, as a major problem. If it was one card, I could see your point. It was the whole sub as I have said many times but people just ignore. Like I missed something on 30 consecutive cards? Sorry, no.