A years worth of vintage crossovers

Griffins

Thought I would share with anyone who is interested the results of the last years worth of crossovers. Before the flaming starts the reason for cracking and sending these to PSA is not due to any stronger belief in one grading companies abilities over anothers (except in the case of the 1 PRO I cracked, why do the shadiest grading companies have the toughest slabs?) but rather a desire to have at least a consistancy of display. As I find many many more PSA graded cards available for the sets I collect I have chosen to put any that I did acquire in other slabs into PSA. Also please note with the exception of the t200's in every case I cracked the card out and submitted raw. I did have an invoice (not included here) of about 15 '48 Leafs that were sent in for crossover in their SGC holders and after that experience decided not to submit any more cards in other companies holders.
Finally, you'll note the vast majority of cracked slabs here are SGC's. I think SGC provides a quality product, with basically the same grading criteria (based on the PSA regrades) as PSA. Their holders look better too- but there aren't nearly enough graded out there to come close to building a set. Strong competition is good for the collector and I think SGC and GAI provide that, but for the bulk of my collection PSA is the way I've chosen to go.
I have included the 1-10 grade on the newer SGC slabs that were graded with it, the 1-100 grade on the ones that were older.

N29
Getzin SGC 3 to PSA 2. Sent as crossover 1st, didn't cross to PSA 2, then cracked and graded as PSA 2.
T206
Kelley SGC 4 to PSA 4
T200
Brooklyn SG 80 did not cross to PSA 6
Chicago AL SG 80 did not cross to PSA 6 (T200's are brutal, and neither of these suprised me)

’14 CJ
#4 SGC 4 to PSA 5
#13 SGC 4 to PSA 3
#14 SGC 70 to PSA 5
#15 SGC 4 to PSA 5, 1st time evid of trim, holdered 2nd time
#21 SGC 4 to PSA 4
#32 SGC 5 to PSA 4
#50 SGC 4 to PSA 4
#51 SGC 3 to PSA 1 have no idea what happened here, but it was ugly
#56 SGC 3 to PSA 4
#71 SGC 3 to PSA 4
#78 SGC 4 to PSA 4
#117 SGC 3 to PSA 3
#107 SGC 4 to PSA 4
#134 SGC 4 to PSA 4

’15 CJ
#8 SGC 5.5 to PSA 5
29 SGC 40 to PSA 4
69 SGC 60 to PSA 5
82 SGC 60 to PSA 5
#83 SGC 6 to PSA 6
#114 SGC 5 to PSA 5
#132 SGC 5.5 to PSA 6
#137 SGC 5 to PSA 5
#142 SGC 5.5 to PSA 6
#154 SGC 3 to PSA 3

’16 Tango Eggs
Collins SG 84 to PSA 5- this hurt. Centering brought the grade way down
Jennings CSA 8 to PSA 7 1st time evid of trim, holdered 2nd time
Bescher SGC 84 to PSA6 Centering killed it
Bescher SGC 84 to PSA 6 Centering again

’41 Play Ball
#10 SGC 86 to PSA 6
#59 Pro 7 to PSA 6 A modern miracle, an untrimmed PRO card!

’48 Leaf
27 SGC 5.5 to PSA 6
54 SGC 5 to PSA 5


54 Red Heart
Musial BGS 6 to PSA 7

’54 Wilson Franks
Schoendienst BGS 6.5 to PSA 5 this really should've gone higher
Groth BGS 5 to PSA 5
Slaughter SGC 50 to PSA 4

’58 Bell Brand
Zimmer SGC 6 to PSA 5

overall about half stayed the same, proving to me that grading is pretty consistant over time and companies. A few went up, a few more went down, but overall its a wash. In most cases where the SGC grades were higher they appeared to be more lax on centering. I never request no qualifiers on my invoices, so I wasn't graded down due to that.
This was not 1 invoice, but rather about a dozen over at least a year.

Buckwheat

Very interesting post. thanks for the info.

It convinces me that when I go to send in my non PSA cards, I will have to crack them out first.

aro13

Great information, thanks for posting!

norty

Those are really interesting results. Given the likely number of graders involved for all the cards I am surprised that the differences weren't more pronounced. I am by no means a statistics whiz but I wonder how the grading differences relate to typical statistical deviations wherein an exact same grade would be the norm.

Thanks for sharing this with us.

Vargha

I would definitely agree with the sentiment that sending a card in to PSA in another company's holder predisposes the grader to certain prejudices, whether he is aware of them or not. Cracking the card out is the only way to play the crossover game IMO.

murcerfan

Crack me up

yawie99

aro or murcer, or anyone else for that matter, have either of you cracked a card out of the newer ksa holders with the sgc-like black inserts? the old ksa holders were incredibly easy to get apart, but i'm not yet sure how to go about cracking the two i have: an 8.5 '53 teeder kennedy and a 9.0 '53 warren godfrey, which has at least a shot at a psa 9, i think. actually, i'm not even sure if i'm going to crack them or submit them on the crossover service with an sgc 88 '53 red kelley.

murcerfan

i have not.
when in doubt use a table saw and cut the entire top of the holder off.
then pry the remaining holder apart with a buck knife.

or smash each corner with a hammer on an anvil and pry the holder apart.

murcerfan

Steve,
let me kinow how it goes, cause i have a Clancy '36 opc coming in a new ksa holder (despite being run up by board favorite Yriza aka usa!usa! et.al.) I do like the KSA new design alot, but my set will be psa all the way in the end.
when i see these guys using their slabbing machine as a coat rack at shows, I tend to think the long term is not so good .....eh? I wonder if they have tightened up at all on the grades, cause they have been embarrasing in most cases......downright "Hager-esque".