What’s going on with TAG?

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

Probably just inflating the POP report......

It is the fulfillment of a big order. This is what happens with CGC as well. Do you think they now have the capacity to grade 2 to 3 times the cards?

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by discodanman45

It is the fulfillment of a big order. This is what happens with CGC as well. Do you think they now have the capacity to grade 2 to 3 times the cards?

It was a joke, keep up.

[pumpkinescobar]

Last week TAG graded 6,359 cards. This is down from 20,362 the week before.

[discodanman45]

Every month I go to card shows, which are heavy in Pokémon, I see more and more slabs. My daughter stays away from slabs and just goes through binders, but I fear that in a year from now that less dealers will bother with sub $20 cards.

Definitely seeing an uptick in TAG graded slabs. By far, a strong third.

[pumpkinescobar]

Last week TAG graded 5,475 cards. This is down from 6,359 the week before.

[pumpkinescobar]

Last week TAG graded 15,808 cards. This is up from 5,475 the week before.

[rfgilles]

TAG now included in GemRate monthly reports. Graded more cards than SGC.

https://mailchi.mp/gemrate/october-2...p?e=1a39af32ca

[The_Reverend]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

TAG now included in GemRate monthly reports. Graded more cards than SGC.

https://mailchi.mp/gemrate/october-2...p?e=1a39af32ca

It will be interesting to see. Now it is all out in the open. Yesterday their numbers were below SGC.

And 10% of CGC for last month.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by The_Reverend

It will be interesting to see. Now it is all out in the open. Yesterday their numbers were below SGC.

And 10% of CGC for last month.

What will be interesting to see and it was always out in the open if you cared to look.

[The_Reverend]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

What will be interesting to see and it was always out in the open if you cared to look.

Oh I looked and why I never graded with them. There slab is clear just like CGC, which has a bigger following and populations on cards that are not manipulated. No regrets having my PC in CGC slabs. PSA is wheee the money is at like them or not.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by The_Reverend

Oh I looked and why I never graded with them. There slab is clear just like CGC, which has a bigger following and populations on cards that are not manipulated. No regrets having my PC in CGC slabs. PSA is wheee the money is at like them or not.

How are the TAG population reports any different from CGC?

[pumpkinescobar]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

How are the TAG population reports any different from CGC?

I'm not sure if anything is different than CGC. As you know, I was an early TAG supporter, but have moved away from grading entirely in favor of top loader binders.

That being said, TAG has graded 7,347 of the below card.

https://my.taggrading.com/pop-report...n+Contest+2024

Then they also graded 3,385 of Feraligatr from the same Illustration Contest set.

I have no idea how this compares to other graders so maybe it's in line, but I wonder how much of TAG's growth is organic versus mystery pack/repackers? I don't want to be negative, but looking at the Gem Rate numbers and seeing 43% growth YoY starting with a much lower baseline than PSA/CGC/Beckett doesn't seem all that impressive.

[The_Reverend]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

How are the TAG population reports any different from CGC?

Let’s take the most iconic card of the sword and shield era for example to see how easy TAG slab price can be manipulated. There are 75 TAG 10 copies and 1975 CGC 10 copies. One could easily get a group of heavily invested TAG investors to make sure the price of a TAG copy sells for more because of limited numbers. It is much harder with CGC and would be seen easily because of the number of copies. It happens all the time on TCGPLAYER with non-graded cards. 74 copies could be manipulated easily and then COLLECTR will pick up on that sale and proclaim TAG is selling for PSA prices. They have done it often.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by The_Reverend

Let’s take the most iconic card of the sword and shield era for example to see how easy TAG slab price can be manipulated. There are 75 TAG 10 copies and 1975 CGC 10 copies. One could easily get a group of heavily invested TAG investors to make sure the price of a TAG copy sells for more because of limited numbers. It is much harder with CGC and would be seen easily because of the number of copies. It happens all the time on TCGPLAYER with non-graded cards. 74 copies could be manipulated easily and then COLLECTR will pick up on that sale and proclaim TAG is selling for PSA prices. They have done it often.

What does that have to do with the pop report?..................

That's all a hypothetical situation that you made up.

[The_Reverend]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

What does that have to do with the pop report?..................

That's all a hypothetical situation that you made up.

It has everything to do with the pop report. You just don’t want to accept the fact TAG, even with their AI grading, 99% of the grading community selects other graders over TAG. If people won’t grade with them, the likelihood is they will not buy their slabs.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by The_Reverend

It has everything to do with the pop report. You just don’t want to accept the fact TAG, even with their AI grading, 99% of the grading community selects other graders over TAG. If people won’t grade with them, the likelihood is they will not buy their slabs.

I simply noted that TAG is now being followed on GemRate.

POP report manipulation, market manipulation, not the return on investment as PSA. You got all of your greatest hits in the usual incoherent manner.

A mention of pop reports somehow means that TAG COULD manipulate the market.

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by pumpkinescobar

I'm not sure if anything is different than CGC. As you know, I was an early TAG supporter, but have moved away from grading entirely in favor of top loader binders.

This is the way!

[SLGSports]

This new video debunks the myth that TAG grading is consistent. 7 cards resubmitted to TAG and got wildly different grades (and identified issues).

AI models are clearly having trouble identifying surface issues and even coming up with consistent centering measurements (which is super easy tech-wise).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC1Vr2Y4j94

[mlbfan10]

Originally Posted by SLGSports

This new video debunks the myth that TAG grading is consistent. 7 cards resubmitted to TAG and got wildly different grades (and identified issues).

AI models are clearly having trouble identifying surface issues and even coming up with consistent centering measurements (which is super easy tech-wise).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC1Vr2Y4j94

Good to see people on here talking about this. All TAG fans on Instagram keep talking about data is better than a person which I get but how accurate is the data when it comes to a card being cracked and regraded.

[Ataraxia]

Originally Posted by SLGSports

This new video debunks the myth that TAG grading is consistent. 7 cards resubmitted to TAG and got wildly different grades (and identified issues).

AI models are clearly having trouble identifying surface issues and even coming up with consistent centering measurements (which is super easy tech-wise).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC1Vr2Y4j94

What people don't really understand about TAG (defenders or detractors alike) is that machine learning-based grading isn't going to be consistent. It may be more consistent than the human eye, but it doesn't mean that it's going to be "99% consistent/accurate/or any other word TAG uses in its marketing."

The other thing is that TAG defenders will always go on about is the data. The DIG Report is the definition of "obscurity through volume" — in the sense that there's so much irrelevant data that it doesn't really explain itself in any meaningful way. Is the DIG Report nice? Sure. It's a great concept and I wish that more grading companies had something similar to it. My criticism of the DIG Report is that you either have to:

1. Spend enough time reviewing multiple reports to reverse engineer the concept OR
2. Hope that you have centering issues so it's easily understood at a glance

All of the other nice numbers and details aren't really explaining "why" your card received the grade your card got — it's just giving you a bunch of meaningless data to give you the impression of value. Obfuscation through volume, at the end of the day.

As for machine learning grading, as a whole, people often don't realize even the smallest tweaks to the software or hardware can create a shift in how a card is graded. Technically, a card graded a year ago is going to have a different programmatic approach to grading than a card you send in today. TAG isn't going to advertise this, or they might even try to say it's inconsequential. But that's the "crux" of how machine learning will grade cards, as the more the algorithm(s) know (or have scanned and tested), the curve for grading will change.

That's really ignoring all of the other semi-problematic components of TAG, explicitly. Their POP Report does have some weird activity going on with it, they continue to expand their "AI Assisted" cards, and there's not much transparency at its core. Then they're going to release their "TAG Vault" and "TAG Market" platform by the end of the year (maybe). Personally, such practices are some of the reasons why I'm not too keen on PSA (and would be fairly disappointed if CGC began the same). But TAG is focused on these things since they believe it adds value to their product.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by Ataraxia

My criticism of the DIG Report is that you either have to:

1. Spend enough time reviewing multiple reports to reverse engineer the concept OR
2. Hope that you have centering issues so it's easily understood at a glance

Or just look at the DINGS.....

[Ataraxia]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

Or just look at the DINGS.....

In all fairness, even the DINGS are a comprehensive report. They’ll point out areas and, more often than not, you’re going to find areas that they highlight that isn’t explicitly noted or explained in detail. Even so, to get a “better report” at this point you have to pay $150 per card.

The reality is that the DIG and DIG+ reports are nonsensical and just as “transparent” as PSA’s “Grader’s Notes.” Sounds good in theory, but horrendous product. At best, a proof of concept that was never productized in any meaningful way. At worst, vaporware that people will die on a hill over without understanding the data at all. Lol

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by Ataraxia

The reality is that the DIG and DIG+ reports are nonsensical and just as “transparent” as PSA’s “Grader’s Notes.”

To you...

You have the DINGs and get individual grades for centering, surface, etc. Not sure what more you want or how much simpler you want it.

[Scottish Punk]

I will start that TAG is good idea and has moved the grading paradigm forward with the focus on AI. That being said, the dirty secret is that they aren't doing anything that different than CGC or PSA.

I have stated the same thing as you Ataraxia. My first though when looking at the full DIG reports from the beginning was that 20% good info, 80% overkill/junk. "obscurity through volume" is a good term for it.

The biggest issue with TAG is that collectors think that they are "AI" and therefore the numbers are set in stone/infallible/etc. Of course, TAG advertising fully embraces the AI and aren't honest about. Truth is AI technology is nowhere near what collectors are envisioning of hands off consistent computer grading. This is easily evidenced by AI can't handle anything outside of base modern chrome/paper and TCG cards.

[ogresnetttt]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

To you...

You have the DINGs and get individual grades for centering, surface, etc. Not sure what more you want or how much simpler you want it.

I think TAG's DIG report could benefit from a simple grader's summary section near the top where the reason for the grade is explained in plain English.

"Your card received an 8 because we found the front to be off-centered and there was a small nick on the back in the upper, right corner. You can find our centering measurements and the damage specified in the DIG report below."

There are numerous grade reveals where the Youtuber pulls up the DIG report and you would swear the guy was trying to decode Egyptian hieroglyphics. They just can't figure it out.

A simple grader's summary would help. It wouldn't even take that much effort to type up. Heck, they could probably use AI to do it.