Cracking out cards and resubmitting in 2022

[parkplace33]

I saw an interesting video on social media of a collector who had 10 vintage cards that were graded. He believed all were undergraded, cracked them out, and sent them back to the original grading company to grade again.

5 cards came back the same grade, 3 came back .5 lower, and 2 came back 1 grade lower. None came back at a higher grade. Obviously, the collector wasn't thrilled. He was happy none came back trimmed.

A few thoughts on this:

1. Is this worth the gamble anymore with turnaround times and prices being higher? I could see when it was $10 a card but not so much now.
2. Are grading companies using AI now to weed out resubmits? Or is that a future ambition?

[BobC]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

I saw an interesting video on social media of a collector who had 10 vintage cards that were graded. He believed all were undergraded, cracked them out, and sent them back to the original grading company to grade again.

5 cards came back the same grade, 3 came back .5 lower, and 2 came back 1 grade lower. None came back at a higher grade. Obviously, the collector wasn't thrilled. He was happy none came back trimmed.

A few thoughts on this:

1. Is this worth the gamble anymore with turnaround times and prices being higher? I could see when it was $10 a card but not so much now.
2. Are grading companies using AI now to weed out resubmits? Or is that a future ambition?

Just this one example you posted shows it is definitely not worth the risk, especially in light of higher grading costs.

As to your second point, I think not. Has been a lot of talk on the issues involved, and would think a grading company would mention such a change, to if nothing else, pat themselves on the back.

[Johnny630]

I 100% think higher end cards are being digitally scanned by TPG's and placed into a database. I don't know if you could call that AI or not but I 100% think it's being used to see if big cards have been cracked or not.

Looking up the PSA Cert # on the Cert lookup feature usually reveals if the card has been scanned or not. Many newly graded bigger cards I've noticed have been scanned, others have not so I guess it's up to them.

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by parkplace33

I saw an interesting video on social media of a collector who had 10 vintage cards that were graded. He believed all were undergraded, cracked them out, and sent them back to the original grading company to grade again.

5 cards came back the same grade, 3 came back .5 lower, and 2 came back 1 grade lower. None came back at a higher grade. Obviously, the collector wasn't thrilled. He was happy none came back trimmed.

A few thoughts on this:

1. Is this worth the gamble anymore with turnaround times and prices being higher? I could see when it was $10 a card but not so much now.
2. Are grading companies using AI now to weed out resubmits? Or is that a future ambition?

First they have to know how to make the AI work correctly which they have not done or else it would be big hobby news.

Yes it is worth the gamble to crack and resub. Buy the card, not the holder. Then know WTF you are doing. Graders get it right most of the time. Experience and a very keen eye are needed unless your just loaded enough that you can resub over and over. IMO I don't think SGC or PSA should be allowed near cards while under constant investigation from authorities and with their track records as thief's and liars. Just the articles in this board alone are ample evidence to back that claim up with 100% certainty.

[JustinD]

I would say with vintage it's now a fool's errand. They upped the standards expected well above what they were only pre-covid. Cracking vintage mid-grades will only tend to get you lower.

If you are cracking modern 9's and hoping for the rare possibility of a 10 returning, or an 8 to a 9, you may have a shot.

[ALBB]

I agree... look at the card not the grade

and yes, most times the graders get it right

[JollyElm]

We all want to see what we wanna see when looking at our own cards, so to me cracking and resubmitting is usually a fool's errand. It's like looking at your friend's god-awfully ugly kid, but listening to proud mama and papa say how beautiful he is. To the parents he's a ten, to the grader he's a 3.5 at most.

[T205 GB]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

We all want to see what we wanna see when looking at our own cards, so to me cracking and resubmitting is usually a fool's errand. It's like looking at your friend's god-awfully ugly kid, but listening to proud mama and papa say how beautiful he is. To the parents he's a ten, to the grader he's a 3.5 at most.

I love analogies! I absolutely think you nailed it spot on with yours. Bravo!

[Marslife]

SGC is taking hi res pictures of the cards you submit/they grade. if you crack and re-sub your own SGC card all they do is look at your sub history, see the prior grade, and give it the same grade as it originally had. Then they seal it up and charge you $30 :-(

[Lorewalker]

SGC and PSA having hi res scans after the cards are encapsulated is probably not the technology they rely on to identify previously submitted cards. In PSA's case they might be using the faulty genamint technology which is scanning, in the early stages of grading, attributes of the card to identify if a card was previously submitted. I don't think SGC has technology that they use in that capacity.

Since all steps of submitting rely heavily on technology I suspect it would be easy for a grader to access prior submissions to see if by chance the submitter is sending in the same card again but seems like a waste of time. PSA would be able to id the card as a previous submission based on the genamint scan much easier than SGC could.

[T205 GB]

SGC identify with a high res photo? I call BS. That would only be obtainable with adequately working AI software which they positively do not have or we all would hear they finally got it all to work. I know through a recent Minneapolis card shops submission to SGC that SGC don't know sh!t about what card is what. Third time through, Prizm Joe Burrow RC Auto #ed. Took three times to finally get the 10/10 he wanted. Should have just went with PSA for this card honestly. Now if they had an inkling of an idea of how to use advanced software, or in this case just read the #ed part, this would have been a rejection 2x's. Since it was not rejected any of the three times(9.5/10, 10/9.5, 10/10) then there is ample proof they have no AI nor the care to do simple research. How can you miss the same # three times?

Now if SGC wants to come on the board and say they do have this software and it works great then I will let the shop know and they can pursue reimbursement. If TPG's are gathering copies of the cards without the knowledge of the owners I would be a little pissed off about that. I mean if I sent it in for this type of service then great. If I never knew about it then I would be pissed. Its not part of the service or of any added value to me so do not be handling my card in additional manners that could potentially cause further deterioration from finger nails, oils, dirt's, or residues outside of the holder I sent it in and the one its going in. They don't stand behind their guarantees if the cards get damaged and try to screw the owners on replacement values when it does. Honestly why do we deal with this over and over? It all about them Benjies