Thoughts on grading

[ptowncoug3012]

As most of you know, I am new to this forum. I have seen much talk about cracking a slabbed card and resubmitting to another company. Has anyone heard of a slabbed card being cracked and re-submitted to the same company? I would think you might have a shot of getting one additional grade bump.

I wonder if there is a way to prevent this. Would it offend all notions of card collecting if a grading company put an invisible stamp (one that could only be seen under flourscent light) on the back of the card with an identification number? The card would then go into the registry and therefore when we look at the POP reports, everyone knows that card no. 0000001 of T206 Cobb has been graded by SGC a 6, etc. and that it hasn't been cracked and re-slabbed as a PSA 8. Or does placing any type of ink on the back of the card simply too much to expect a collector to be okay with?

Thoughts are appreciated.

[dennis]

Would it offend all notions of card collecting if a grading company put an invisible stamp (one that could only be seen under flourscent light) on the back of the card with an identification number? The card would then go into the registry and therefore when we look at the POP reports, everyone knows that card no. 0000001 of T206 Cobb has been graded by SGC a 6, etc. and that it hasn't been cracked and re-slabbed as a PSA 8. Or does placing any type of ink on the back of the card simply too much to expect a collector to be okay with?

Thoughts are appreciated.[/QUOTE]

stop it your killing me!

[M's_Fan]

You can resubmit a card for additional consideration, but in my experience a grading company will not change their mind.

I wouldn't want a grading company putting any stamp, even if totally invisible, on a baseball card. Who knows if decades from now the stamp would be visible. And even if it remained invisible, it is just wrong for a grading company to be altering cards, they should just grade, thats it.

[Robextend]

I personally haven't done it, but I have heard many success stories regarding cracking out and resubmitting to the same TPG. I'd even say in some cases it would seem to make sense. I think it would be easier sometimes to get a bump with the same TPG if they did not know the original grade they gave.

Edited to add: I agree that any kind of marking on the actual card is a really bad idea.

[bcbgcbrcb]

"Invisible" stamping has been done recently in the autograph grading industry and didn't seem to go over real well there.

[Jim VB]

Yes. It would offend me if the company I trusted to grade my cards did something to them that actually degraded them.

That idea is a non-starter.

[barrysloate]

You can always resubmit a card if you think it was misgraded (obviously if it was undergraded). You can break it out and send it raw, or just resubmit the slab and ask them to give it another look. Usually if you do the latter the grader will have a bit of a bias; if you wait awhile and send it back raw he may not even remember it. It's done all the time, for better or worse.

But I don't think collectors would like the idea of having invisible ink put on the back of their cards. That just wouldn't go over well.

[tiger8mush]

There have been many stories of graded cards getting resubmitted and receiving a new grade. I bet a good portion of grading companies' income comes from cards that were previously graded. Thats the problem with grading ... its so subjective.

I believe there was a member who posted a story on here a year or two ago about a card that he submitted MANY times (like 15 or 20 times) to the same grading company, and almost every time it came back a different grade. He posted the results and everything, and the grades ranged from Authentic to EX/MT or something.

The grading companies must love it when you spend $x to submit a card, get it back and feel it was graded too low, then send it back in along with another $x to get it REGRADED. As long as they 'bump' a certain small % of the resubmitted cards, it'll give collectors hope that their cards will get a bump, so they will do it.

A grade of "2" can mean so many things. Maybe it has a teeny tiny amount of paperloss in an inconspicuous area? Maybe the card has a tiny tear? Maybe its very dirty, or multiple creases, maybe grossly OC? I think BVG had the right idea years ago when it put 4 subgrades on the card, for centering, surface, corners, and edges. The overall grade didn't mean much, but at least with the subgrades you could get a better understanding WHY it received the overall grade. The overall grade means so little unless you can state WHY it received that grade. I think thats one way the grading companies could improve. Of course, we can all submit our graded cards and pay another $x to have each one graded when that system comes out, and we'll still have the same cards we started with except less money

Rob

[ptowncoug3012]

I figured the stamp idea wouldn't fly.
I guess there is a opportunity to create a system that somehow uniquely identifies a card preventing it from being re-graded without sticking some sort of ink on it, huh?
I would love to be able to trust the POP reports. Only safe assumption as to the POP reports is that there is less cards graded than the POP reports reflect because there are PSA and SGC cracked slabs that get crossed over to the other company or cracked and resubmitted raw to the same company.

[Section103]

I'd be against the stamping idea, but what I would like to see is owners being able to send in grading labels to the original companies so that they could alter their population databases accordingly. In the end, it's probably not a big deal and there's not much in it for the TPG, but if better information is always possible, then Im for it.

[old-baseball]

I personally haven't tried breaking a card out of a slab and resubmitting it but I have one that I'm tempted to try with. One of the thing that I have done is send in larger groups of cards from the same set and typically I try to pick the cards so that there is not a huge swing in grades - for example I'd send in cards from the same set that I thought were a few VG ot VGEX, a bunch of EX cards and some EX+ or better. In this case, because the majority of cards are in nice shape the VG might go to VGEX and the VGEX might bump to EX. I had just the opposite happen recently where I sent in 30 lower grade cards from the same set, knowing there were a couple Fair, some Good, some VG and some VGEX. I look at some of these and wonder if I had sent them in with all the nicer cards if they would have graded higher. Has anybody else noticed this?

[M's_Fan]

Originally Posted by old-baseball

I personally haven't tried breaking a card out of a slab and resubmitting it but I have one that I'm tempted to try with. One of the thing that I have done is send in larger groups of cards from the same set and typically I try to pick the cards so that there is not a huge swing in grades - for example I'd send in cards from the same set that I thought were a few VG ot VGEX, a bunch of EX cards and some EX+ or better. In this case, because the majority of cards are in nice shape the VG might go to VGEX and the VGEX might bump to EX. I had just the opposite happen recently where I sent in 30 lower grade cards from the same set, knowing there were a couple Fair, some Good, some VG and some VGEX. I look at some of these and wonder if I had sent them in with all the nicer cards if they would have graded higher. Has anybody else noticed this?

I've submitted cards that earned an SGC 70 along with cards that earned SGC 20 and 10. I don't think submitting cards in like groups makes a difference, but that's just my experience.