Its a fool's folly to think that two subjective, arbitrary, constantly-evolving grading scales developed by independent, competing companies would line up when grading cards. There should be no expectation that a PSA 6 should line up with an SGC 6, condition wise and/or price wise.
Add to that, the subjectivity of the individual graders and even the non-repeatability of a given grader over time, it's no wonder that the data is all over the place.
It does seem like SGC gives a bit more weight to 'eye appeal' than does PSA, sometimes giving a bump for better centered cards. To me, that is preferable.
__________________
Working Sets:
Baseball-
T206 SLers - Virginia League (-2)
1952 Topps - low numbers (-1)
1954 Bowman (-5)
1964 Topps Giants auto'd (-2)
|