Quote:
Originally Posted by BobC
Why should it be a problem? Why can't you still have consistent standards, but different accepted sets of standards for different eras, based on the technology, methods, precision, and materials used to produce cards in those different eras? Say Pre-War (through 1941) is one era, Post-War Vintage (1942-1980) is another era, and Modern (1981-today) is the most recent era. Or break it up into whatever eras everyone ultimately gets together to agree on.
But there's the problem, getting everyone in the hobby together to agree on something, and then force the TPGs somehow to do what we all want. And because we can't seem to ever get together to agree on anything, the TPGs decide what they want to do and tell us all how it's going to be, instead of the other way around, like it should be.
|
Seems so straightforward and therefore so easy but then the part of getting everyone to agree. LOL. If the assessors of our cards could simply agree two days in a row within a given co, it would be a victory.
I know that CSG and PSA are relying more heavily on AI to assess cards (or at least to pre-screen them) and pretty sure that SGC has their own form of AI, maybe not used as consistently. As that becomes more the norm or is relied on more often, the results of grading will continue to dismay. The AI is simply not up to the task of assessing vintage accurately. Once it points out a flaw, which may or may not be accurate, it is game over.