how are your recent sgc grades?

[mightyq]

hey guys, been a long while since i have posted . how has your recent sgc submits come back? seeing as i have not sent a card in to sgc or psa, in about 2 years. i have some head scratching on them, i have some lots in the recent REA auction,recent sgc grades. please look at lot # 404, j. robinson, 405 r. campy....and 418, 56 mantle......the 52 jackie?? oh my god!!! this card i thought would go nm/mt maybe nm/mt+ all 4 corners are sharp pointed, centering is killer, color is eye popping, registry, etc its all there, a 6 ???!!!! really, REA is baffled ...now the 52 campy is a solid nm, the back centering is o/c, but i have seen plenty of sgc cards in the past with o/c backs not get bumped down so low.ex+ for this....again REA is in agrement....the 56 mick i thought lock 8, not even an issue, a 1993 alan rosen mint condition purchase at the time. wich in real world years later comes to a nm/mt card, nope.nm at worse.. another 6??? i went over these tooth and comb. and found not a hint of hidden problems... so did REA...?? i can almost live wit a few of them, but the 52 jackie really is bothering me....lot #398 is also mine, what do you think on the mick? i figured an 80 ex/nm.....has 2 nm to nm/mt corners, 1 ex/nm, 1 ex... been over it with a fine tooth comb, REA also really gave it a good look....and absolutely love the card.....a 70 isnt bad, but such a high profile card, and dollar wise, the difference could be substantial....

[KCRfan1]

Since you asked, here's my 2 cents worth. The '52 Mick has 2 corners that are rounding. Centering is nice and the color looks good and strong. I just don't see a 6 or an 80 for that card. The Robinson card has sharp corners, and I am a corners guy so I love the card. The color pops, however IMO what holds the card back is the tilt at the top of the card. I do not see a diamond cut, but the card seems to present an optical illusion that there may be a diamond cut. Both sides and the bottom appear to be uniform without tilt though. There also appears to be some off colorization at the top right corner on the white border.

Nice cards, good luck with the auction!

[vthobby]

I just got back 2 1968 Topps cards that I thought would grade a bit higher but they came in at SGC 60 and 70. Both were hit hard on centering.

the funny part about it is that PSA had rejected one of the cards for size issues. The card was fine as it measured exactly to my other 1968s. SGC agreed but the 2 grades were lower than I was hoping, thanks Mike

[mightyq]

Originally Posted by KCRfan1

Since you asked, here's my 2 cents worth. The '52 Mick has 2 corners that are rounding. Centering is nice and the color looks good and strong. I just don't see a 6 or an 80 for that card. The Robinson card has sharp corners, and I am a corners guy so I love the card. The color pops, however IMO what holds the card back is the tilt at the top of the card. I do not see a diamond cut, but the card seems to present an optical illusion that there may be a diamond cut. Both sides and the bottom appear to be uniform without tilt though. There also appears to be some off colorization at the top right corner on the white border.

Nice cards, good luck with the auction!

Thanks for the input, but this is sgc's nm 7 grading scale....70/30 or better centering. Slight wear on some corners, minor scratching, some print spots or speckling, and print lines and refractor lines are acceptable. Card may exhibit a slight skewed diamond cut. ...........

Ok, if the card has what you say it still falls easily in the nm range, matter of fact if you read the nm+ or nm/mt scale it can fall there also, same with campy.....this is why grading is so far apart, the card isn't diamond cut, it's skewed, I see cards from the 70's that are skewed. So this doesn't have an optical illusion, even with these 2 imperfections it should not be a 5.5 my opinion, but you think the 2 imperfections might be enough to knock it down, that's your opinion, wich in all honesty both of use aren't wrong, just differ on the punishment for the card. Wich is perfectly fine. Astute collectors will either pay for a 5.5 or pay more for the eye appeal of a 7, or something close, I'll know in a few weeks,,,,either way it is what it is as they say....

[mooch]

I switched to sgc this summer, and I have been very happy with approx 100 submissions. I am a small time collector who rarely sells, so I buy holders to enjoy aesthetically today, ensure that my ebay and card show purchases are authentic and unaltered, and facilitate a sale in the future.

The SGC grades have been averaging exactly where I anticipated. I feel the grades on 90% of my cards were within one point + or - of where my friend and I thought; we recorded the grades beforehand to test. The remaining cards came back with mostly lower grades, but I could see how I underestimated most of those cards' shortcomings. I had hopes that some were 8's, but I got only one. I just don't have a strong enough eye to find those gems in vintage. I have cracked three other TPG cards and submitted for a +2, +2.5, and same grade. Of course there is a selection problem in attributing that SGC was somehow "easier", for I had only cracked what I thought was undergraded elsewhere. I submitted two other cards for regrade, where one got a +.5 and the other held steady. The grader kindly noted the card's subtle flaw so I didn't feel burned.

Overall, as a small time hobby and nonexpert collector, I've been pleased with my SGC grades. I don't feel that they lower my grades because I am not submitting large numbers for grading.

[Leon]

For the earlier vintage SGC seems to be lenient on rounding corners. Sometimes you have to scratch your heads with all of the TPGs. Unless it is a registry card most will sell for their aesthetics anyway. If it is a registry card then it's all about the number on the flip.

[Exhibitman]

I am at the point where I send in cards not so much for the grades as for protection, presentation or resale.

I am currently on a bit of a protection kick since I accidentally creased a salesman sample Koufax card I had in a card saver.

I have been playing a lot of grade roulette lately with PSA, for postwar cards that are sellable. I've been surprised pleasantly at many of the results, which were higher grades than I expected. Even picked up some 10s in modern boxing, which were a nice surprise.

I'd say my recent SGC submissions have been technically accurate. I've also had a number of cards I sent in that I really could not figure out how to grade for certain defects and I think SGC did well with those too.

[Stampsfan]

I was looking at your lot (405) before I read this post. When I look at your lot (SGC 60 - 5 Ex), and I look at lot 401 (PSA 5), there is no comparison on the one I am most interested in... it is lot 405. I believe you'll see your lot will have a significantly higher final bid than lot 401.

You mentioned that REA submitted the cards? And their description on the Robinson says it was indeed submitted by REA. Did they submit all your lots? If so, does that help address the question on large auction houses getting more favorable grades than Joe Average collector (like me)?