Graders rejoice

[Icerat]

https://youtu.be/wD7n8kHvySs?si=K8SGn4Z3sulQ2U8y


#raw4life

[goodole13]

I love when episodes like this are created.
I've only cracked and cross-overed 1 card, and it was last year (2025).

Cracked a BGS 9 and it came back a PSA 10.
The sub-grades were three 9s and one 9.5.

And I'm sure I have other PSA 9s that would come back as PSA 10s if I resubmit.... Or PSA 8s. Or whatever the graders feel like that day.

I primarily grade for PC protection, but also do it for the future when I sell.

[Scottish Punk]

That Griffey is all over the place. Really proves that grading is just one person's opinion on that day. All grades are subject to 1-3 grade swings. As well as grading standards evolve over time. Sadly, I don't think the investor side of the hobby is able to give up the number chasing. Creates more artificial scarcity.

[Gary]

I wish i could act surprised by this..but im not and i doubt anyone else is either.what will surprise me is if PSA/SGC/BGS doesn't ban his submission acct.with all 3 owned by collectors now id be shocked if he hasn't received a nasty gram from nat already.

[rfgilles]

Not sure how TAG came up with Griffey being oversized. That makes no sense.

[Scottish Punk]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

Not sure how TAG came up with Griffey being oversized. That makes no sense.

I don't think the Griffey is "oversized". My guess is the TAG slab is measured for TCG cards and has a low tolerance for anything bigger. CGC had a few of these in the early days as well. They just said, did not holder or something like that.

That card got just about every grade in the book.

[bub838]

Breaking News Alert:
Card grading by humans is subjective because... cards are graded by humans.

The only mildly interesting thing was the TAG not grading.

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by Scottish Punk

I don't think the Griffey is "oversized". My guess is the TAG slab is measured for TCG cards and has a low tolerance for anything bigger. CGC had a few of these in the early days as well. They just said, did not holder or something like that.

That card got just about every grade in the book.

That is the answer, but CGC (CSG then) did slab them. CGC had to use sleeves for a lot of cards before they made a slightly larger slab to accommodate sports cards that vary more in size.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by Scottish Punk

I don't think the Griffey is "oversized". My guess is the TAG slab is measured for TCG cards and has a low tolerance for anything bigger. CGC had a few of these in the early days as well. They just said, did not holder or something like that.

That card got just about every grade in the book.

TAG has graded other 89 Upper Decks, that fit in the TAG slab. When they started out, they were focused on sports cards.

[collective]

"Experts" lol

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by bub838

Breaking News Alert:
Card grading by humans is subjective because... cards are graded by humans.

The only mildly interesting thing was the TAG not grading.

PSA was very consistent about 4 years ago. I was hardly shocked by grades. Now they have 20 times the graders and it is getting ridiculous. The same 80's card will now grade between a 5 to 10 if they want to grade it at all. I sent in hundreds of 80 to 90's cards 4 to 5 years ago and could count on my fingers the grades less than 8. Grading is more of a roulette game now.

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

TAG has graded other 89 Upper Decks, that fit in the TAG slab.

Sports cards vary in size much more than Pokemon. I can't believe I am defending TAG against the TAG shill.

[uminnesota]

Cracking PSA 9s to Get PSA 10s? I Tested It
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UXwLCsbaSHQ

I RE-GRADED 200 OF MY PSA 9 POKEMON CARDS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMV0ki2GZwU

Changes to PSA Grading, Part 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAIZf42GkCo


All three of these videos show grades changing after resubmission.
That’s not one isolated example. That’s three separate creators, three separate submissions, and grade movement in all of them.

[rfgilles]

Originally Posted by discodanman45

Sports cards vary in size much more than Pokemon. I can't believe I am defending TAG against the TAG shill.

You aren't defending them by stating they are oversized. The card should have been graded.

[discodanman45]

Originally Posted by rfgilles

You aren't defending them by stating they are oversized. The card should have been graded.

If it doesn't fit in their slab, how could they grade it? CGC had the same issue, which is why I have dozens of sports cards in crimped sleeves instead of the old CSG holders. CGG had to make new slabs to hold more sports cards because they run large quite a bit.

Edit: look at how tightly Pokemon cards fit in their slabs. Cards slightly oversized have no chance of fitting inside. TAG gave the exact measurement to justify it, which is completely acceptable. If TAG was a serious sports card grader, they would need to have a separate slab for cards like this.

[DynaEtch]

So ridiculous but also so much expected. I think people know it’s basically a scam.

What irks me is here I am ultra-analyzing cards to send in to PSA, trying to pick the 8-9s from 10s apart…..when it’s just a crap shoot anyway on their end, with laughable 2-3 point swings.

Apparently the question of the grade in relation to condition means little to the hobby, otherwise grading would go by the wayside after the many videos like this expose it. May as well remove the condition question entirely, it’s just buying the designation, not for condition.

[Beavers98]

Not surprised at all....Sucks when the hobby takes these opinions as gospel. You're talking hundreds, thousands, and even in some cases hundreds of thousands of dollars swing by these inaccurate/non-consistent grades.

[schmerik]

IMO I think this shows that there is a good opportunity to buy non-serialized cards from sets that have a high gem % (GemRate / PSA pop report) in PSA 9 to crack and resub, provided there are no glaring issues in the photos. For example, say a color blast has a 75% gem rate and there’s been enough grading volume, odds are that a grader might lean to make it a 10

[inaka]

Originally Posted by DynaEtch

So ridiculous but also so much expected. I think people know it’s basically a scam.

Yup. All of us who know about grading are not surprised, sadly.
Ironically, the only thing that will change when people see this video is likely more people will consider crackout submissions, rather than walking away from grading in the first place.

Must be nice to be in an industry that is put on blast and clearly shown time and time again for having no consistency and questionable legitimacy, and yet somehow they make even more money, and get even more submissions.

It's also crazy seeing all the people watching this one specific video and commenting that TAG is the best or the future because TAG removes the human element and is more consistent, etc. I guess those people didn't see this video about TAG grading from about 7 months ago:

Is TAG Grading As Consistent As They Claim?
https://youtu.be/LC1Vr2Y4j94?si=n-NUJXPYA8jJG8Gg
(Spoiler alert: the answer is: heck no.)

Grading from any company is all a roulette wheel and not surprising, sadly.

[MJGOAT23]

Wild journey for the Griffey, but the fact that 3 different grading companies side-eyed it is the most telling piece of information for me. Something has to be up with that copy. TAG said it was oversized but SGC then BGS said altered. It could have just been oversized from the pack and someone tried to trim it to perfect size and failed.

[rnocards]

[rnocards]

Maybe there should be a company that takes in subs and posts the cards online... and then let the world decide what the consensus grade is. After the 1 millionth random person grades it... average everything out, put the grade on the slab, and send it back.

No better or worse than these joke of a grader companies...

[MJGOAT23]

With the exception of centering, none of the major grading scales have quantifiable and measurable amounts of wear, paint loss, degrees of corner rounding, or length or depth of scratches or any other form of card wear or damage that can be applied to the grade level.

They use vague terms like minor or slight that are inherently subjective.

Maybe this is what TAG is doing with the 1000 point scale but overall it's vague, general descriptions of card wear and that leaves a range of outcomes.

[Scottish Punk]

Originally Posted by MJGOAT23

With the exception of centering, none of the major grading scales have quantifiable and measurable amounts of wear, paint loss, degrees of corner rounding, or length or depth of scratches or any other form of card wear or damage that can be applied to the grade level.

They use vague terms like minor or slight that are inherently subjective.

Maybe this is what TAG is doing with the 1000 point scale but overall it's vague, general descriptions of card wear and that leaves a range of outcomes.

In the end TAG is still doing the same thing. The DIG report is nice to see all the flaws and getting exact centering measurements is a great step forward. It is still humans assigning how much a dimple changes a grade or if a scratch is scored against the total or whatever. TAG software (and not any "AI" from what i gather) can handle cards with different textures for surface or fish eyes for vintage.

[collective]

Cards don't have to be graded, and 90% of the stuff being graded today shouldn't be graded in the first place.

The hobby side of cards is dying and quickly being replaced by folks looking to make a quick buck. From the top, all the way down