BGS/BVG vs PSA

lapremidi · December 19, 2002 4:24AM

Just curious about opinions / differences in grading preferences. I prefer BGS/BVG, but it seems as most others do not, why? The holders are more secure, the details of the grade are on the holder, and the consistency is much better. What is up with the PSA graded cards that start with "0" ? They seem as though they are all over graded by at least 2 points, 9's look like 7's of current graded material. It seems as though when you purchase a BVG/BGS graded card, the serial # or date of grade has no reflection on the quality of the card. Opinions?

Philabuster · December 19, 2002 4:29AM

What was that phrase P.T. Barnum once made ????????????

Cyphilissb · December 19, 2002 4:55AM

do a search for previous threads. this topic has been beaten to death with the ugly stick many times already.
Try searching keywords like "bvg" "bccg" "bgs" combined with vs or versus you should be able to find several lengthy threads

BobS · December 19, 2002 5:17AM

PSA stands behind every card they grade with a buy-back policy. To my knowledge, BGS does not.

PSA has graders which are trained to spot alterations to cards, such as trimming, and will not slab such cards. To my knowledge, BGS slabs these cards.

For my money, I'd rather have an un-altered card that is worthy of the grade or worth the buy-back amount than a "more secure holder". Just my preference, of coarse.

zardoz51 · December 19, 2002 5:23AM

Lapremidi

First: Let me welcome you to the boards

Second: You are fortunate in having found this board where you will be exposed to the elite of both the dealing, and collecting world.
Read these boards for six months and you will accumulate 20 years of REAL card knowledge. Within those six months, meaning no disrespect, you will discover the folly of your statement.

Yzerman19C · December 19, 2002 5:26AM

The number 1 reason i do not use BGS or buy cards graded by them is the fact that they allow cards cut from sheets and other altered cards to be graded. As for their holders i agree they have PSA 's beat by a long shot.

Randy

Butcher · December 19, 2002 5:28AM

I would have to agree with you lapremidi. I have been collecting graded cards for a couple of years and at first I thought PSA was the way to go but after purchasing vintage PSA I found that some of their standards didn't meet mine. I try to stick with 8's and 9's unless you're talking about pre-war stuff. I would purchase PSA 8's on Ebay that had dinged corners and PSA 9's that were way off center only because the scans were poor but I thought I could count on PSA. Don't get me wrong, I know there are plenty of quality PSA cards out there I just don't think there consistency is up to my standards. For the past year I have used BVG/BGS and have been very pleased. Not only is their holder much nicer but they are much more consistent and I really like the break down they give for each card. People on this board are always bashing BVG for being to soft when compared to BGS but the only difference in the standards of the 2 is edges and surface. They eased up on edges because of the rough cuts from the 50's and the surface for the minor surface imperfections you find common in older cards. I have seen multiple PSA 9's with rough cuts and if these were crossed over to the old BGS grading standards wouldn't get any higher than a BGS 7. I have a good example of how tough BVG still is, I purchased a 1956 Topps Joe Schmidt in PSA 8 awhile back and had it crossed over to BVG just to see what grade it would get. The card had the typical rough cut for the 56's and here is the subs I got: 8.5 - Centering, 6.5 Corners, 6.5 Edges and 8.5 for surface for a final grade of 6.5. Anyways, I will still purchase PSA graded cards if I get to see them in person (unless its a National Chicle with a good scan) but as for Ebay purchases I will only purchase BGS/BVG. This is only my opinion and preference and am not here to point out all the negatives with both companys because both have more positives than negatives.

Butcher · December 19, 2002 5:37AM

Another comment about BVG slabbing trimmed cards. When I used to submit to PSA I accumulated a few trimmed cards and just put them aside not wanting them in my collection or wanting to sell them. Well, with my last submission to BGS/BVG in November I included these cards just to see if they would catch all of them and they did. I'm not saying that BGS/BVG hasn't let these slip through in the past but they must be getting better. I'm sure PSA has slipped a few trimmed cards out also.

wolfbear · December 19, 2002 6:41AM

Quite frequently,
I purchase SGC, GAI or SCD graded cards to cross over to PSA,
and have generally had pretty good results.

Also, I've had pretty good luck with vintage cards graded by the old BGS standard.

The last few BVG graded 7 through 8 cards I've gotten off eBay, however,
will have to be broken out and sold raw, as I doubt PSA would even give them a 6.

No more BVG for me unless I can closely inspect the card in person.

VoodooChile · December 19, 2002 7:38AM

I have never owned a bgs/bvg card, so I can't really comment on their grading of cards that have not been "trimmed or cut from sheets. What I don't understand is why they grade sheet cuts.They have to know that it is a sheet cut and they choose to slab these cards. I personally feel that these are not "authentic" examples of the varying issues of cards.Alot of the high end sheet cut cards in their slabs routinely go for big dollars ( ex. 1971 bvg 9 Rose 4,000)so there must be people out there that either don't care about authenticity, or don't know any better.

KING KELLOGG · December 19, 2002 8:39AM

Zardoz...

Well said....Time will certainly season this issue.

lapremidi...
Please ask yourself this question.....

How can Mr. Beckett own and operate a "true third party" grading company, own and operate a subjective "pricing publication", be the ex-owner and operator of a sports card hobby shop (First Base Sportscards/Dallas TX), exchange employees from one of his companys to another(ie: Dan Hitt and others), and still not have the questions and issues of "conflicts of intrest"???

The major reason I choose not to use BGS or BVG.

Philabuster...

That's right...."One every minute"!

wolfbear...

You don't see too many folks running to BGS with their breakout's from a PSA holder do you??........Hmmmmmm....

Larry

braves72078 · December 19, 2002 9:08AM

<< <i>
lapremidi...
Please ask yourself this question.....

How can Mr. Beckett own and operate a "true third party" grading company, own and operate a subjective "pricing publication", be the ex-owner and operator of a sports card hobby shop (First Base Sportscards/Dallas TX), exchange employees from one of his companys to another(ie: Dan Hitt and others), and still not have the questions and issues of "conflicts of intrest"???

The major reason I choose not to use BGS or BVG.

Larry >>

Larry, I agree 1000000% The whole Beckett operation is a scam. I think I will start selling peanuts, then I will print a price guide, then if all goes well I will start grading them......Sorry but I have no respect for Beckett.

Not to mention there "guides" are so out of touch with the true market anyway.

In my opinion the best price guide on the market is the EBAY search feature.

Happy Holidays to all,
Bill

mikeschmidt · December 19, 2002 12:19PM

My two main complaints:

A) Grading of trimmed cards and, especially, cards (recently) cut from sheets.

Three grading tiers with three different scales. A 9 should be a 9 should be a 9. I do not really approve of any system that essentially grades by saying "Oh -- this card is over 20 years old, so we will give it a higher grade than we otherwise would." And that is all BVG really is.

Marc

robstar · December 19, 2002 12:34PM

Marc.

I feel the same way about the grading tiers within one grading company. Certainly strains my confidence
when a company has to resort to these tactics to increase submissions.

Rob...

Buckwheat · December 19, 2002 12:40PM

<< <i>I would have to agree with you lapremidi. I have been collecting graded cards for a couple of years and at first I thought PSA was the way to go but after purchasing vintage PSA I found that some of their standards didn't meet mine. I try to stick with 8's and 9's unless you're talking about pre-war stuff. I would purchase PSA 8's on Ebay that had dinged corners and PSA 9's that were way off center only because the scans were poor but I thought I could count on PSA. >>

Hey Butch,

Could you post a scan of one of these "way off center" PSA 9's? somehow, I bet you don';t have one.

Guys,

Should we welcome back Ms good Advice?

acowa · December 19, 2002 12:49PM

I can't believe that you guys are taking the bait...AGAIN! How many times do you need to be pulled out of the pond? You guys are smarter than that! Well...at least some of you are smarter than that.

Regards,

Alan

helionaut · December 19, 2002 12:57PM

<< <i>... Three grading tiers with three different scales. A 9 should be a 9 should be a 9. I do not really approve of any system that essentially grades by saying "Oh -- this card is over 20 years old, so we will give it a higher grade than we otherwise would." And that is all BVG really is.
>>

I'd agree with you if cards have been the same for the last 20 years. Once you get far enough back in time, say to 1980, where most sets were made using the same materials and methods, then the same standards should apply. To grade a metallic-plastic card like Topps Finest and Chrome issues, or a clean, high-quality stock card like, say, 1989 Upper Deck, on the same scale as the crude, rough cardboard that had been used for the 100 previous years is going to be unfair to one side or the other. In physical constitution and production, there's no comparison between modern and vintage. This is one of the things that makes high-grade vintage so appealing; when it's done right, it's amazing. And, of course, this cuts both ways. I'm looking at starting a PSA set from 1990's, and even with tougher standads, most anything less than a 10 I'd instantly reject because it should be somewhat easy to find something better. Easy not only because of the availability of product, but because of the quality. I'd be nuts to reject a 9 for almost any set pre-1980.

I've submitted lots of shiny new RCs to BGS because they have the highest resale value, and that is largely due to their tough standards. These standards are so tough that I'd not want to send in any vintage stuff. Print spots and bubbles, diamond cuts, and other production glitches that PSA routinely ignores, regular BGS would knock down at least a half grade overall for. Maybe BVG lets them slide, too, but I've never used them.

yawie99 · December 19, 2002 3:26PM

i'm a psa loyalist, but i think some of the criticism levied at beckett for its service tiers is a bit misguided. as much as one would like to think that psa's standards are universally applied to all cards, a tacit grading curve seems to exist. psa seems to tolerate varying degrees of a flaw - particularly factory flaws like print quality, focus and wax staining - depending on the typical characteristics of a given issue. i don't necessarily have a problem with such and actually prefer the implicit sliding scale to separate grading entities, but it's important for us to recognize that such a scale very likely exists with psa.

Alfiewt · December 19, 2002 9:47PM

There are many reasons why I avoid BGS/BVG. I have problems with their guarantee (there is none), their grading of cards cut from sheets, BCCG, and their conflict of interests/propaganda magazines.

Beckett reduces the grade of the card for typical rough cuts? Just another thing that shows their incompetence in grading vintage material.

Butcher · December 19, 2002 11:07PM

Hey Buck,
Yes I can provide a scan of a PSA 9 card that is off center and I probably have others if I dig my PSA cards out. The one that really bothers me is a 1976 Walter Payton RC that I purchased about 10 months ago off of Ebay. If I get time tonight, I will post a scan of it. I'm not trying to prove BGS/BVG is better but only saying that I prefer it when buying a card sight unseen. Even when I do see graded cards at a card show I usually prefer the BGS/BVG card. I have nothing against PSA collectors and actually prefer this board over any of the others because of the knowledge I gain and I also prefer the SMR over Beckett but when it comes to grading I usually prefer the BGS/BVG card. As far as Beckett grading trimmed cards, they past my test but I'm sure there are still a few that slip out and their percentage probably isn't any greater than PSA's. As far as sheet cuts, I haven't had much experience with them so I can't really comment. I've always believed you find out for yourself what you prefer or like and not take someone else's word for it and that is what I have done. I do not judge PSA only collectors as I am sure they have valid reasons for sticking with PSA only(PSA set registry) but for me, I prefer BGS/BVG and until Beckett does something to alter my opinion that is what I will continue to collect.

Butcher · December 19, 2002 11:13PM

On another note, just to prove I'm not a Beckett loyalist, I do think BCCG is a joke and should have never been started. BCCG's grading standards have to be on the same magnitude as PRO's!

zardoz51 · December 19, 2002 11:19PM

Well we're all happy for you Butcher. You state that you appreciate the knowledge that you find here over other boards, and we thank you for that, but that statement alone should clue you in to the fact that as BGS/BVG is not held in high esteem here, it not because of our "Brand Loyalty", but that there has to be other reasoning behind our stance.

Something to think about

dude · December 19, 2002 11:36PM

The MAJOR problem with Beckett Grading is they don't have a Buy Back policy if the card is misgraded. The scariest example is the 1952 Topps Mantle that PSA rejected as "evidence of trimming" and Beckett gave a "7.0". That's at least a $5,000 mistake if not a lot more. For this reason alone, I will not buy a Beckett graded card.

Butcher -- If you want more details on the Mantle story, please e-mail me through my eBay account. Have a nice day!

ydsotter · December 21, 2002 3:03PM

I lost all respect for Beckett when they started BVG. I was one of those clowns that paid wicked premiums for a high graded BGS vintage cards. As soon as BVG came about... and started contaminating the population reports... I saw the value of my vintage BGS collection sink into the toilet. Here's a great example: I paid over $300 for a BGS 7 1961 Fleer Bill Russell a few years back. It was gorgeous. Everyone said it should have earned at least a psa 8. A few months ago, I brought it to the FT WASHINGTON/PHILI show and couldn't even sell it or trade it for $120!!!!! I even offered it to reputable dealers like shoeless joe's, Kurtz Kards and others... they wouldn't touch it. Well, I cracked it open, resubmitted it to SGC and got a SGC 86. I sold it on eBay for a little over $150~ I sold off about 30 more cards from my once highly praised BGS vintage collection... I received less than 50% of my original investment. BVG sucks and it did a disservice to the people who originally supported beckett grading.

ydsotter · December 21, 2002 3:32PM

One more thought... I do not prefer PSA because they have the most attractive holders or boast the most rigorous grading standards... on the contrary, the encapsulation is fairly unattractive and they may not be the toughest graders in the business... One important thing that I have noticed in the past few years is that the majority of reputable dealers and serious collectors use PSA. They do not use Beckett. In fact, many seem to not take BGS seriously or detest them for reasons that I still do not fully grasp.
~anyway~
If you want to fully embrace the excitement of collecting graded cards and engage the most educated and vibrant community of serious collectors in the world... then you ought to prefer psa graded cards.

MrKissKissBangBang · December 21, 2002 10:51PM

Biggest Turn-Offs with Beckett for me, Start of BVG, Start of BCCG, Grading Cut Cards, Conflicts of Interest.
I got a good look at the 1970 BVG 9 Simpson RC that sold recently on eBay, the top left corner is folded, not dinged, but actually has a folded creases - wouldn't even warrant a PSA 8.

The holders are nice, but a little overkill - all PSA needs is some kind of sleeve for their holders.

KKBB

MrKissKissBangBang · December 21, 2002 10:53PM

I agree ydsotter - nice posts.
More widely accepted, absolutley! I have seen a real divide recently. Lots of us who used to collect both, have gone one way or another. Sellers and buyers.

KKBB

motocrosser · December 22, 2002 8:31AM

Hey Buck!!!!

I bet this guy has a psa 9 off center... what he's omitting is that the card has under the Mint 9 an (oc)...designation.

ZZZZ..... you're answer is the only answer to: (my grader is better than your grader)...

BTW...it sure is taking this guy quite some time to DIG OUT these cards, he must have so many graded cards that finding them is impossible!

Happy Holidays to all!!
John
_____________________
1961 topps 100%

Buckwheat · December 22, 2002 12:52PM

John

Yes, I am still waiting for Butcher to post a scan of his off center PSA 9. I guess he is busy this time of year.

toppsgun · December 22, 2002 1:09PM

Two words: RESALE PRICE.

ydsotter adds, from the school of hard knocks, a life lesson which we all should learn:

<I was one of those clowns that paid wicked premiums for high graded BGS vintage cards. As soon as BVG came about... I saw the value of my vintage BGS collection sink into the toilet. >

I have to take issue with my friend Dude, though. Beckett has not cornered the market on slip-through-trimmed cards. And if you're talking about the same '52 Mantle I'm thinking of, I examined that card carefully and saw no evidence of trimming before and after it was sent to PSA. It's in a BGS (not BVG) holder. I can't talk the owner into resubmitting it to PSA, but if he did I think it would come back 8.

BGS/BVG vs PSA

Comments