Home Trading Cards & Memorabilia Forum

mass crossover result

well, I was looking at the beckett registries (don't ask me why...) and I found a post that was interesting: http://www.beckett.com/iforum/view.asp?mode=viewtopic&topicID=1134899&forumID=69&catID=15&forumPageNo=1

Here is what the post said:


I sent two separate orders containing a total of 440 PSA 9 cards to Beckett for cross-grading.

Here are the results:
1 (0.2%) was a BVG 9.5
112 (25.5%) were BVG 9's
241 (54.8%) were BVG 8.5's
69 (15.7%) were BVG 8's
7 (1.6%) were BVG 7.5's
8 (1.8%) were BVG 7's
1 (0.2%) had evidence of a shaved edge
1 (0.2%) did not meet the measurement tolerance (width)

The average grade of the 438 gradable cards is 8.508. Only 25.7% of the PSA 9 cards came back BVG 9 or better, which means 74.3% came back BVG 8.5 or worse. All 440 PSA 9 cards were removed from their holders before the cards were submitted. Therefore, Beckett had no idea these cards were originally PSA 9's. None of the 440 PSA 9 cards had qualifiers. All 440 cards are Topps football from the mid-1970's.
Collecting
HOF SIGNED FOOTBALL RCS

Comments

  • zef204zef204 Posts: 4,742 ✭✭
    I won't believe it unless I see the submission results.
    EAMUS CATULI!

    My Auctions
  • AhmanfanAhmanfan Posts: 4,353 ✭✭✭✭
    Any interest in this Jordan? I figured it was right up your alley.

    image

    thanks
    John

    Collecting
    HOF SIGNED FOOTBALL RCS
  • storm888storm888 Posts: 11,701 ✭✭✭
    I need an explanation of the relative merits
    of BVG 9 and BVG 8.5 vs PSA 8/9/10.

    I just got back 11 cards from BGS, and it seemed
    to me that they were VERY stingey with their
    high grades. The holders are beautiful, I think.
    (Never had tried Beckett b4, but PSA does not
    grade the cards I sent to BGS.)

    storm
    Folks Who Bite Get Bitten. Folks Who Don't Bite Get Eaten.
  • This is what stands out the most to me:



    1 (0.2%) had evidence of a shaved edge
    1 (0.2%) did not meet the measurement tolerance (width)

  • Carew29Carew29 Posts: 4,026 ✭✭

    I just realized while reading this post..that... I don't care.
  • Stone193Stone193 Posts: 24,351 ✭✭✭✭✭


    << <i>This is what stands out the most to me:



    1 (0.2%) had evidence of a shaved edge
    1 (0.2%) did not meet the measurement tolerance (width) >>


    Why does .2% stand out to you?

    That's actually a very small margin of error.

    I would guess that .2% would get by Beckett also?

    No?

    mike

    edit: the only thing that may stand out for me? If the submission is legit - that it would appear Beckett could be more strict than PSA?
    Mike
Sign In or Register to comment.