Quote:
Originally Posted by mintacular
I think Beckett grading vintage has NO CLUE what they are doing, they are VERY inconsistent. They will take a well centered sharp card with a mega crease for example and they add all the numbers and crunch them and come up with a "4" whereas PSA would take said crease and the max is 2.5+ or 3 no matter what the other qualities are, as it should be. As a result Beckett vintage grades are a total hodgepodge blender method of grading whereas PSA/SGC has baselines like "if this issue exists you won't go higher than X" and from there you can judge eye appeal issues accordingly.....
|
You have a point to a degree, but in Beckett's "number crunching" of subgrades, the biggest negative factor usually weighs very heavily. I've also seen PSA grade a card that was otherwise NM a 3 because of a wrinkle that was like a quarter of a centimeter long which you might be able to see after a minute of twisting in bright light. That isn't right either. As far as inconsistency goes, I think PSA could see and raise BVG. Look at a vintage 5 that was graded 15 or 20 years ago vs. one graded last week in a lighthouse holder. Their consistency is all over the place as well. Honestly I don't have enough Beckett graded cards to judge, but my belief is that neither PSA or Beckett has been as consistent since the 1990's as SGC.
Oh, and have we mentioned...PSA has recently encapsulated a blue ton of altered cards in numbered slabs.
