Heres a perfect example of BGS lack of quality

lawnmowerman

Now, I know they gave this a 9 for cenetring but should this really have been given a 9.5? NOPE.
Also can you say dealer friendly service? I can

OC

Heres another from the same seller.

OC

This is disgusting! This may as well be GEM graded.

matt

digicat

Well.....
PSAs grading standards say that a PSA 10 card can have 60/40 centering. These cards are around 58/42. If 9.5 is Beckett's version of a PSA 10, then it seems right on.

lawnmowerman

<< <i>Well.....
PSAs grading standards say that a PSA 10 card can have 60/40 centering. These cards are around 58/42. If 9.5 is Beckett's version of a PSA 10, then it seems right on. >>


Yeah.....
I dont know about that. Take a better look at the Aikman. I am refering to the Barry Sanders card and the Troy Aikman, not necessarily the Emmitt Smith card.

Matt

ldferg

isn't the seller 4sc? i thought making_the_grade was 4sc as well.

Stingray

Yes, one in the same. They have also been selling BCCG cards too.


Stingray

1960toppsguy

both look fine to me . . . where is the problem?

Stone193

Take a look at the Emmitt Smith card from the first link.

They gave the card centering a 9.5 - I don't agree with that.

mike

lawnmowerman

<< <i>Take a look at the Emmitt Smith card from the first link.

They gave the card centering a 9.5 - I don't agree with that.

mike >>

Yes, I agree Mike. That card does not look good either. This was just the point I was trying to make. BGS quality really stinks. Very ,Very inconsistent. I dont know if its the new ownership thing but something is effecting the overall quality of the company.

Matt

onefasttalon

This guy sends in about 5 ka-gillion cards a month to be graded. I'm sure that has NOTHING to do with these sweet grades. I send in 10 a year to BGS and get reemed.... (hence, why I stopped doing business with them.)

digicat

Ok. Taking the photos, zooming in on them with Photoshop, here is the exact centering of each (as can be determined by the scan)...
PSA 10 = better than 60/40 centering.

1989 Topps Barry Sanders
L/R = 58/42; T/B = 52/48

1990 Score Emmit Smith
L/R = 44/56; T/B (measuring from the top of the "SCORE logo" and the bottom of the pink border)= 52/48

1989 Topps Troy Aikman
L/R = 58/42; T/B = 48/52

At least according to PSA's standards, these cards could all be 10s.

lawnmowerman

<< <i>Ok. Taking the photos, zooming in on them with Photoshop, here is the exact centering of each (as can be determined by the scan)...
PSA 10 = better than 60/40 centering.

1989 Topps Barry Sanders
L/R = 58/42; T/B = 52/48

1990 Score Emmit Smith
L/R = 44/56; T/B (measuring from the top of the "SCORE logo" and the bottom of the pink border)= 52/48

1989 Topps Troy Aikman
L/R = 58/42; T/B = 48/52

At least according to PSA's standards, these cards could all be 10s. >>



digicat, no disrespect intended, I am sure you are right with all the numbers you crunched but those cards are ugly. I think eye appeal should be taken more into consideration when it comes to cards such as these. I know I wouldnt want to be stuck looking at them.

Matt

digicat

This is, of course, the part of card grades where you want to buy the card, not the slip.

I agree that the eye-appeal isn't that great. If I had them in the raw, I'd probably have passed over them on the first glance if I were getting a submission ready.

lawnmowerman

<< <i>This is, of course, the part of card grades where you want to buy the card, not the slip.

I agree that the eye-appeal isn't that great. If I had them in the raw, I'd probably have passed over them on the first glance if I were getting a submission ready. >>

I agree 100%

Matt

Stone193

On the 90S Supplemental Smith

I'll have to disagree with the measuring points - there is way too much border on the top and almost none on the bottom - it's an odd card but IMO - the card is OC T/B.

mike

digicat

It's kinda hard to see where the border ends with the scan, given the dark card and the black background. I'm having to zoom in a lot to figure it out. At which point should one start measuring a 1990 Score football card to determine centerdness?

I'd imagine you'd start with the Score logo at the top... would you measure from the start of the lower purple border on the bottom? If that's the case, the top measures 140, and the bottom measures 110. That gives you 56/44. A little worse than my previous estimate, but still within the 60/40 wall.

ctsoxfan

I think you are reading too much into it by counting the pixels - those are two ugly OC cards. BGS is a crock, but they should be ashamed at giving those cards "9's" for centering.

DaBigHurt

This is what you get when you buy from BGS. With PSA, you NEVER had to worry about overgrading or cards that are off-centered if they're in 9 or 10 holders.

What's the old saying? you mess with the bull, you wind up giving birth to a calf?

That's why I make mine PSA!!!

lawnmowerman

<< <i> those are two ugly OC cards. BGS is a crock, but they should be ashamed at giving those cards "9's" for centering. >>



WORD MY BROTHER!

Matt

jmbkb4

<< <i>On the 90S Supplemental Smith

I'll have to disagree with the measuring points - there is way too much border on the top and almost none on the bottom - it's an odd card but IMO - the card is OC T/B.

mike >>


I got 65/35 T/B on the Smith card. This is not Gem Mint centering in anybody's reality, even PRO.

themetalsign

60/40 on a GEM MINT is a joke. Gem Mint means perfect in all aspects and centering should be 50/50. At least to me it does. I have some PSA 10's that should be 8's and I have 9's that for the life of me I can't figure out how they could not be 10's. I should be grading for these companies. I know grading is subjective but MINT IS MINT.