Trimmed Card Crossover

[bobbyw8469]

David James is a bored little man who has nothing better to do than start crud with me every time he turns around. I REFUSE to stoop to his level.
SGC only saves the most recent invoices, unlike PSA that saves every single one. I have submitted cards to SGC since 2007/2008. If they would save every invoice I would have no problem. I refuse to post just the last 6 invoices. By your constant name calling and belittling, you are showing what calibre of man you really are.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

SGC only saves the most recent invoices, unlike PSA that saves every single one.

Bobby, that's simply not true. I can view all my invoices back to 2009. I can't go back any further becasue I submitted under a different customer number and I can't remember that username and password for that account, but I can go back at least two years. I KNEW you didn't have cohones!

[alanu]

I've had a few cards that were viewed trimmed by PSA and then were slabbed by SGC, all but one were diamond stars.

[vintagecpa]

Originally Posted by alanu

I've had a few cards that were viewed trimmed by PSA and then were slabbed by SGC, all but one were diamond stars.

Getting back to the topic. In your opinion, who was correct? If one grading company states a card is trimmed, but another slabs it, in most cases, who is correct? Or is there that much of a gray area?

Basically, my question would be is it more likely for a TPG to determine a clean card is trimmed, or is it more likely that a TPG slab a trimmed card as clean? In my particular case, I was almost positive a card I returned was trimmed. Thanks.

[glchen]

Originally Posted by vintagecpa

Getting back to the topic. In your opinion, who was correct? If one grading company states a card is trimmed, but another slabs it, in most cases, who is correct? Or is there that much of a gray area?

Basically, my question would be is it more likely for a TPG to determine a clean card is trimmed, or is it more likely that a TPG slab a trimmed card as clean? In my particular case, I was almost positive a card I returned was trimmed. Thanks.

I'm going to give an un-PC answer, but what is my personal belief. I think it is more likely that either TPG (SGC or PSA) will slab a trimmed card if the value isn't worth much (i.e., submitted at a lower service level). I personally think at lower service levels, graders zip through the cards faster, and therefore some cards get missed. At higher service levels, graders are a lot more cautious, and will move the benefit of the doubt to trimmed. For example, for the attached Cracker Jack Joe Jackson, why is this card Authentic with the Unaltered comment? If a card isn't altered, if if it doesn't meet Minimum Size Requirements, shouldn't it get a number grade, a la diamond cut cards. More to the point, have you ever seen an Unaltered comment on the flip for a card with a value under $500? Again, I think PSA would slab this card as Authentic also because of minimum size requirement even if they didn't detect any trimming.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by glchen

I'm going to give an un-PC answer, but what is my personal belief. I think it is more likely that either TPG (SGC or PSA) will slab a trimmed card if the value isn't worth much (i.e., submitted at a lower service level). I personally think at lower service levels, graders zip through the cards faster, and therefore some cards get missed. At higher service levels, graders are a lot more cautious, and will move the benefit of the doubt to trimmed. For example, for the attached Cracker Jack Joe Jackson, why is this card Authentic with the Unaltered comment? If a card isn't altered, if if it doesn't meet Minimum Size Requirements, shouldn't it get a number grade, a la diamond cut cards. More to the point, have you ever seen an Unaltered comment on the flip for a card with a value under $500? Again, I think PSA would slab this card as Authentic also because of minimum size requirement even if they didn't detect any trimming.

I don't know if they'd have added unaltered, but my two rejected cards from SGC could both have qualified - One min size, the other "miscut" very rough cut, but still factory and within the size. I checked off to have rejects not slabbed since I know none were trimmed or altered.

I haven't sent any in to PSA, and only about 15 to SGC. I do see a lot of variance in the mid grades, even in my small sampling. One I think was given a grade too high, another 3-4 I thought were undergraded, one by quite a bit.

Steve B

[glchen]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

Bobby, that's simply not true. I can view all my invoices back to 2009. I can't go back any further becasue I submitted under a different customer number and I can't remember that username and password for that account, but I can go back at least two years. I KNEW you didn't have cohones!

David,

What Bobby says is true. I don't know how you're able to view your old invoices unless you know those invoices #'s like I said in my last post. If you see my attached screenshot, I can only see my Recent Invoices to the beginning of 2011.

[vintagetoppsguy]

I see all of mine.

[glchen]

David,

I see in your screenshot, you still have the scrollbar at approximately the same size as mine. It could be that SGC only shows the last 5 invoices regardless of year. That is, I only see my most 5 recent invoices. Do you have more than 5?

[ullmandds]

mike...I don't think your question can be answered...as has been displayed...it's not that cut and dry! I have seen instances of both SGC and PSA misgrading cards...and I can't see any pattern...or rhyme or reason to certain sets...or types of cards this occurs with!

I HAVE seen many more errors from PSA...but this is most likely due to the fact that they have graded so many more cards than SGC.

Personally...I trust SGC much much more than PSA when it comes to accurate...consistent grading of my vintage cards...but as stated...they both make mistakes...and if you don't like the decision...resubmit!

[glchen]

Originally Posted by bobbyw8469

David James is a bored little man who has nothing better to do than start crud with me every time he turns around. I REFUSE to stoop to his level.
SGC only saves the most recent invoices, unlike PSA that saves every single one. I have submitted cards to SGC since 2007/2008. If they would save every invoice I would have no problem. I refuse to post just the last 6 invoices. By your constant name calling and belittling, you are showing what calibre of man you really are.

On an off-topic, not saving all invoices is a pretty annoying thing at SGC. Saying that I've sorta found a way around it if you remember your old invoice #'s. And again, if you don't quite remember them, SGC uses the invoice numbers on the flip before the dash, so if you have a card from that invoice (or a scan of the card), you can get the invoice number from there. So if your flip is 123456789-987, then your invoice # for that flip is 123456789.

What you do is to log into SGC, and then click the "Track Invoice" tab at the top. From there, you enter your old invoice # that is no longer appearing, and search for it, and it will appear. I've attached screenshots of the Track Invoice tab, and an old invoice I searched for which you can see is no longer a part of the Recent Invoices.

Again, among my pet peeves for SGC is for them to fix this and show all invoices. Another peeve is for them to fix their Population Reports. PSA shows every year for each sport that they have a graded set in. For SGC, you have to search for the year. You would think that this is normally pretty easy, but SGC uses circa years a lot (e.g., things like c.1915 or c.1930s) so it's tough to get the search criteria exactly right if you're not completely sure what you're looking for. In addition, when you do a player search in the pop report, it doesn't default show the results by year. You can still sort by year by clicking on the Year in the column header in the pop report. You can see my 3rd picture for that. However, SGC still doesn't show the circa years sorted correctly. If you go to the last page, you can see some of the circa years, but not all of them. (Another pet peeve is that SGC should allow you to see all of the pop report for a player or set on one page instead of having to go through 9 pages.) In the last picture, I show a c.1915 Ruth that doesn't appear on the pop report when I search for all cards for Ruth, but if I enter the c.1915 for the year, then the card appears.

Anyway, I'm sure the argument will be that SGC spends its resources on what really counts, i.e., the grading, which is fine. Still it'd be nice if they make a few things easier to use.