The illusion of an objective standard psa, sgc, bvg

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by glynparson

I have not seen a 23 year old grader at PSA, all the ones i know are in their late 40's to early 50's. Because customer service may have some younger guys in it doesn't mean the graders are young. SGC has no young graders either not sure where this information comes from. Second PSA BVG and SGC are three different companies the fact that they would not all grade the card the exact same grade is completely irrelevant. Is grading an exact science NO WAY but it is far less random than many of the criticisms want to pretend. Third point I was 23 in 1995 and more than qualified to be a grader so if there is someone grading at PSA that is 23 I wouldn't just automatically dismiss them as unqualified. Some of the most respected people as far as knowledge on this board have missed wrinkles and or modifications to cards. Having a great knowledge of a set may help greatly in knowing rarities and would obviously help in identifying counterfeits but it is not necessarily much help in detecting alterations or technical grade which are some of the key components and most important areas of grading.

"I am amusing myself with the irony that after 40 years of collecting, I may be submitting my stuff to a 23 year old to tell me if it is "legit" and then taking his word as gospel."

I don't think Roberts statement says that he knows a 23 year old is grading his cards. He's stating it's subjective and maybe somewhat reliable at best. Until the subjectivity and human element is removed, it's just a tool and nothing more. There is very little science involved, especially with the time committed by the grader.

[Jersey City Giants]

I posted this in its own thread but I had the opposite experience. My crossovers did better with PSA! Mind you they were old BVG ones and they
had a reputation early on of being far to harsh on grades. The KSA was a big surprise too (I thought it was a 4 or 4.5).

C46 Parent PSA 5 (KSA 5)
T209 Bourquise PSA 3.5 (BVG 1)
T209 McGeehan PSA 4 (BVG 2)
T209 Hoffman PSA1 (BVG 1)
T209 Pope PSA 5 (BVG 3)
T209 Stubbe PSA 3 (BVG 2.5)
T209 Walsh PSA 3 (BVG 2.5)

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by JustinD

"I am amusing myself with the irony that after 40 years of collecting, I may be submitting my stuff to a 23 year old to tell me if it is "legit" and then taking his word as gospel."

I don't think Roberts statement says that he knows a 23 year old is grading his cards. He's stating it's subjective and maybe somewhat reliable at best. Until the subjectivity and human element is removed, it's just a tool and nothing more. There is very little science involved, especially with the time committed by the grader.

Justin, I tend to agree with your initial statement and the general spirit of what you have said here. To each his own, however. It makes me zero difference how or what someone else collects. I am currently vacationing in Ireland, and it strikes me what a small niche we ball card collectors in America (and Canada) really are. Most people would say we are all off a bit! Have fun, and collect how/what makes you happy.



Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk