BVG accuracy on lower-mid vintage...?

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by swarmee

When I was at Cooperstown last year, they had some vintage cards that had large obvious heavy creases that were graded PSA 4 for sale. So if PSA was consistent, you might have a point. I would guess that card would easily grade a 4, and might get the half point bump.

Interesting, thanks. And...after all that - I did find where Beckett as recently as 2012 had listed the "official" grading criteria on their site (via Wayback Machine) and for a 4; it states thusly:

Very Good/Excellent - 4
Centering: 80/20 both ways or better on front. 100/0 or better on back. Moderate diamond cutting is allowed.
Corners: Slight notching or layering, or moderate dings are allowed.
Edges: Readily chipped or notched and/or slightly layered.
Surface: Heavy print spots. Hairline creases. Moderate color or focus imperfections. Moderate border discoloration. Moderate wax stains. Very light ink mark or tape stain. A good deal of gloss lost from surface. Very minor scuffing or an extremely subtle tear in the form of a touch of broken surface paper.

I would say my Mantle falls easily within this category, with many attributes better, and actually - given the way I learned to grade in the 80's and early 90's - I think the Beckett standard is more precise and accurate than PSA's current description - which mentions nothing even about wrinkles or creases at all (kind of important for the grade??), but simply says "Surface wear is noticeable but modest." I think that is their way of being intentionally vague to be able to defend a range of opinions on that grade.

Beckett above says hairline "creaseS" -implying there can be more than one. I think I'm good to go...this card may not be a 4 by PSA standards, but at least for Beckett it seems they graded the card accurately by theirs.

[mintacular]

I think Beckett grading vintage has NO CLUE what they are doing, they are VERY inconsistent. They will take a well centered sharp card with a mega crease for example and they add all the numbers and crunch them and come up with a "4" whereas PSA would take said crease and the max is 2.5+ or 3 no matter what the other qualities are, as it should be. As a result Beckett vintage grades are a total hodgepodge blender method of grading whereas PSA/SGC has baselines like "if this issue exists you won't go higher than X" and from there you can judge eye appeal issues accordingly.....

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by mintacular

I think Beckett grading vintage has NO CLUE what they are doing, they are VERY inconsistent. They will take a well centered sharp card with a mega crease for example and they add all the numbers and crunch them and come up with a "4" whereas PSA would take said crease and the max is 2.5+ or 3 no matter what the other qualities are, as it should be. As a result Beckett vintage grades are a total hodgepodge blender method of grading whereas PSA/SGC has baselines like "if this issue exists you won't go higher than X" and from there you can judge eye appeal issues accordingly.....

You have a point to a degree, but in Beckett's "number crunching" of subgrades, the biggest negative factor usually weighs very heavily. I've also seen PSA grade a card that was otherwise NM a 3 because of a wrinkle that was like a quarter of a centimeter long which you might be able to see after a minute of twisting in bright light. That isn't right either. As far as inconsistency goes, I think PSA could see and raise BVG. Look at a vintage 5 that was graded 15 or 20 years ago vs. one graded last week in a lighthouse holder. Their consistency is all over the place as well. Honestly I don't have enough Beckett graded cards to judge, but my belief is that neither PSA or Beckett has been as consistent since the 1990's as SGC.

Oh, and have we mentioned...PSA has recently encapsulated a blue ton of altered cards in numbered slabs.

[toledo_mudhen]

Originally Posted by mintacular

I think Beckett grading vintage has NO CLUE what they are doing, they are VERY inconsistent. They will take a well centered sharp card with a mega crease for example and they add all the numbers and crunch them and come up with a "4" whereas PSA would take said crease and the max is 2.5+ or 3 no matter what the other qualities are, as it should be. As a result Beckett vintage grades are a total hodgepodge blender method of grading whereas PSA/SGC has baselines like "if this issue exists you won't go higher than X" and from there you can judge eye appeal issues accordingly.....

I stopped buying Beckett Graded Cards (Vintage) long ago as my personal crossover rate on them has been miserable (maybe 20%)

[Rascal1010]

My personal experience with BVG on vintage cards is they are generally a grade higher than PSA on Mid-grade cards. Not on all cards, but as a rule of thumb that is about where they land, and that is roughly what they are going to sell for. The best example of this would be a BVG 1971 Rod Carew graded a 9 by BVG that I took as part of a trade about a year ago. I roughly figured it at PSA 8 price in the trade, it sold for roughly PSA 8.5 price at auction. I considered myself very lucky, I did not however feel lucky enough to submit the card to PSA for regrading, as I do not think it would have come back in a 9 holder from PSA.

On Pre-war cards I have had in BVG holders, they are all over the place on grading. I think a lot of this has to do with when they were graded. You will run into this issue of when they were graded with all of the big 3, reinforces the adage "buy the card not the holder"! At the end of the dat I probably have the least confidence buying/trading BVG cards than I do SGC or PSA slabbed cards. Even GAI "1st Graded" examples seem to be more accurately graded than most BVG cards that I have owned, and I have definitely had a much better success rate crossing these to PSA holders to market than I have had with BVG cards.

Just my 2 cents, but your Mantle is a beautiful VG-EX card.

[Leon]

Personally, except for a bit of overgrading on a few cards, I think BVG is the best grading company in vintage today. But then again, I only collect vintage. There is no doubt in my mind they can spot alterations better than the others as well as fakes, at least with what I have seen recently. The biggest issue with them is they don't market their vintage grading. But that isn't the graders fault. My grader of choice is still SGC for a variety of reasons. Probably the best is to hold value.