is BGS following their own stated grading criteria?

[morgoth]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

PSA also won't take variations not documented in a catalog or on Becketts list and put them in registries most of the time. So its frustrating to build a player set of cards that they grade but won't put into their player registries.

 

[JoshHamilton]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

PSA also won't take variations not documented in a catalog or on Becketts list and put them in registries most of the time. So its frustrating to build a player set of cards that they grade but won't put into their player registries.

It's fun emailing Carol asking her to add a card to a player Master set, and she says PSA doesn't grade that card. Then you respond with a scan of said card, graded by PSA, with a cert that matches their database.

Then she avoids your emails for the next 6 months

 

[mudflap02]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

CAROL!

 

[morgoth]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

PSA also won't take variations not documented in a catalog or on Becketts list and put them in registries most of the time. So its frustrating to build a player set of cards that they grade but won't put into their player registries.

It's fun emailing Carol asking her to add a card to a player Master set, and she says PSA doesn't grade that card. Then you respond with a scan of said card, graded by PSA, with a cert that matches their database.

Then she avoids your emails for the next 6 months

Or bans you from the site

 

[morgoth]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

CAROL!

Watch it someone might screen shot this over to Carol and adios PSA account :lol:

 

[mudflap02]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

CAROL!

Watch it someone might screen shot this over to Carol and adios PSA account :lol:

I took care of that myself a long time ago. Don't know why she would be upset - I took that from her facebook page.

 

[cgilmo]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

and if you have 3 10's and an 8? it comes back an 8.5?

Yes 99% of the time barring a dumb grader, is this the first graded card you seen? Its been like this for years, its not on an average as you think.

And as for the "free" comment I know someone who subs probably some of the most cards in the country and the least they can get is 25 cents per. Now you are just making stuff up to make it look like you know what you are talking about.

25 cents is exactly what I said, that it was a processing fee more than a grading fee. Look back at my posts. I don't need to make stuff up about grading, I have been in this thing long enough. WIWAG was my first big screw job. I doubt many have been around grading longer than me.

No what you said was "All bulk submitters submit on the Min Grade system where if they don't get a certain grade for the card they don't pay anything for it. " Thats a broad statement and very false at bgs.

I've said it before, there is no system that I know of that allows you to not pay for cards that do not meet minimum grade. That would just be goofy. There is a fee for everything in most businesses.

 

[spahnandsain]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

yes they all mess up. how do you miss grading this card properly? what this is, is very obvious unless you do not know cards or players.if such is the case these people should not be grading cards!

P.S. i should have stated. how do you miss identifying this card properly?

What am I missing here? That seems ok to me.

Mislabeled. Flip says Juan Gonzalez; Should say PING!

Oh how I've missed the PING! jokes. :lol: * not sarcasm

I like saying it around the house to annoy the wife or scare the dog.

 

[morgoth]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

and if you have 3 10's and an 8? it comes back an 8.5?

Yes 99% of the time barring a dumb grader, is this the first graded card you seen? Its been like this for years, its not on an average as you think.

And as for the "free" comment I know someone who subs probably some of the most cards in the country and the least they can get is 25 cents per. Now you are just making stuff up to make it look like you know what you are talking about.

25 cents is exactly what I said, that it was a processing fee more than a grading fee. Look back at my posts. I don't need to make stuff up about grading, I have been in this thing long enough. WIWAG was my first big screw job. I doubt many have been around grading longer than me.

No what you said was "All bulk submitters submit on the Min Grade system where if they don't get a certain grade for the card they don't pay anything for it. " Thats a broad statement and very false at bgs.

I've said it before, there is no system that I know of that allows you to not pay for cards that do not meet minimum grade. That would just be goofy. There is a fee for everything in most businesses.

Technically you don't pay for the grade you pay for the processing since nothing was actually graded. I corrected myself later when I added the processing fee that you pay for cards not meeting min grade.

I agree you have to pay to have the cards reviewed but its much much cheaper for the high volume bulk guys to do it than everyone else. Why do you think 4SC grades 81 topps cards?

 

[ThoseBackPages]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

Why do you think 4SC grades 81 topps cards?

Hey! lol

 

[bmp1971]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

Yucky. Although I am starting to feel really good about the chances of this ending up a 9.5 now

can you post a scan of the back of that one? I mean, according to their own criteria, it need only be 70/30 on the back, one way, to grade out mint/9 for centering. I think you should write to BGS and show them the card and since it appears to be a glaring error, they should re-slab it for free-- IMO.

If these companies are going to bend the rules depending upon the card being graded and the submitter of the card, then they are all a joke. Every card needs to be objectively addressed and if the grader needs glasses and a cup of coffee, get him/her such before he/she sits down to do it all by eye, not by "science"...as was stated.

If you read their grading criteria just regarding "edges" from a 10 through an 8, you'll see it's actually designed to be a subjective assessment in many ways.

I'd also like to add that while I have seen many apparent mistakes like this Taillon gold ref au, I do think BGS is generally accurate, from the graded cards I've measured against their subs. But if something is 20% off, like this one, it just seems ridiculous to me. The problem is that the opposite also occurs-- they give lower grades when higher grades are due. It's maddening, because in the end it could make a huge difference, financially.

What to do??

Does anyone have a good experience re writing in to BGS for a regrade on an apparent mistake? Just wondering...

 

[AKA Coastal]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

BGS has always been a little lenient when it comes to centering grades.

 

[burke23]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

Yucky. Although I am starting to feel really good about the chances of this ending up a 9.5 now

can you post a scan of the back of that one? I mean, according to their own criteria, it need only be 70/30 on the back, one way, to grade out mint/9 for centering. I think you should write to BGS and show them the card and since it appears to be a glaring error, they should re-slab it for free-- IMO.
...

Too lazy to scan the back, but it is no worse than 30/70 both directions. I think I will just crack and resub as part of the February group sub vs sending as some review. Although there is something to getting them to acknowledge it was not graded according to their standards.

 

[bouwob]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

Once again, this is why grading should be automated. Its a win win for everyone but the buddies of the graders. With the high def photographic cameras that are out there you could hire an expert to write a system to automatically grade the cards. Everything would be based off of the same criteria and you wouldnt have to worry about the mood of the computer.

Further more, although expensive startup to get the software written and bring in the hard ware to do so, you could pay 30 people $7 an hour to just place cards. Beckett could have a staff of 2 people and the turn around time would be 10 times a s fast as it would take 3 seconds to analyze the card and pass it off to the casing department.

 

[AKA Coastal]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

I bought a Andrew Jones Autograph BGS 9.5 back in the day. The paper in the corner was split on the bottom left side. Dunno how it snuck through. Another time I busted a A-Rod bgs 8.5 Phenoms RC and sent it back to BGS for regrading and it came back trimmed..lol

 

[aaron41984]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

Once again, this is why grading should be automated. Its a win win for everyone but the buddies of the graders. With the high def photographic cameras that are out there you could hire an expert to write a system to automatically grade the cards. Everything would be based off of the same criteria and you wouldnt have to worry about the mood of the computer.

Further more, although expensive startup to get the software written and bring in the hard ware to do so, you could pay 30 people $7 an hour to just place cards. Beckett could have a staff of 2 people and the turn around time would be 10 times a s fast as it would take 3 seconds to analyze the card and pass it off to the casing department.

I would think that such a system would induce more damaged cards. I know people are not perfect and there have been accidents by graders but if you were to pass the card through a machine or allow one of your $7/hr employees to handle each card as it is photographed or scanned, I would think that the number of damged cards would shoot through the roof.

 

[bmp1971]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

I bought a Andrew Jones Autograph BGS 9.5 back in the day. The paper in the corner was split on the bottom left side. Dunno how it snuck through. Another time I busted a A-Rod bgs 8.5 Phenoms RC and sent it back to BGS for regrading and it came back trimmed..lol

are you saying that BGS trimmed it? noooooooooooo, please

 

[cgilmo]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

I bought a Andrew Jones Autograph BGS 9.5 back in the day. The paper in the corner was split on the bottom left side. Dunno how it snuck through. Another time I busted a A-Rod bgs 8.5 Phenoms RC and sent it back to BGS for regrading and it came back trimmed..lol

are you saying that BGS trimmed it? noooooooooooo, please

That isn't what he said at all.


The first guy probably just didn't catch it.

 

[James52411]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

BGS has always been a little lenient when it comes to centering grades.

This is exactly right and why I don't really care about their overall grades. The companies are pretty accurate on corners and surface, a bit inconsistent on edges, and completely lenient and a joke on centering. The only good thing about that is it is the easiest thing to pick up on an eBay scan. Myself, I consider a 2:1 L/R or T/B border to be the equivalent of a dinged corner. A card simply cannot be mint if it looks like that, I don't care how nice it is otherwise. It is really infuriating when I can look at a card and see it is off center yet it gets graded Gem Mint. A gem mint should be perfect, so if I can see a minor flaw from 20 feet away, it automatically isn't Gem.

 

[nosterbor]

Re: PROOF BGS FAILS TO EVEN ADHERE TO THEIR OWN STANDARDS

yes they all mess up. how do you miss grading this card properly? what this is, is very obvious unless you do not know cards or players.if such is the case these people should not be grading cards!

P.S. i should have stated. how do you miss identifying this card properly?

What am I missing here? That seems ok to me.

Mislabeled. Flip says Juan Gonzalez; Should say PING!

thats getting old! come up with something new.