SGC to PSA Crossover

trex

Okay, I got such good response on the first one, I'll try another one. I have about 30 or so SGC graded cards, mostly '62's all at least the equivalent of PSA 7 and higher. I have accumulated these cards over the years, have never sent any to SGC for grading. Does it make any sense to send them to PSA for "crossovers"? I'm not out a whole lot of money with initial outlay on the cards and they vary from commons to stars. Thoughts.

Sean1125

Do you want them in the PSA holders for any certain reason?

ddfamf

SGC is a fine company....why cross?

70ToppsFanatic

<< <i>Okay, I got such good response on the first one, I'll try another one. I have about 30 or so SGC graded cards, mostly '62's all at least the equivalent of PSA 7 and higher. I have accumulated these cards over the years, have never sent any to SGC for grading. Does it make any sense to send them to PSA for "crossovers"? I'm not out a whole lot of money with initial outlay on the cards and they vary from commons to stars. Thoughts. >>



I have not had much luck with sending in 1962 Topps slabbed by SGC and getting equal crossovers. I sent in a bunch of 84s, 88s and 92s and with the exeception of one 84 they rest came
back either MIN GRADE or MIN SIZ REQ (the 92 Bob Gibson #530). The one 84 that did cross was a 7.

thedutymon

Afternoon,

Depending on the Era of your SGC's they can be slightly problematic to downright WTF on centering. I have 1962 Football Cards that are slabbed by SGC with almost no border on one side or the top or bottom that are SGC MINT 9's that wouldn't cross to a PSA 5 because of this. Be very aware of the centering issue. I wouldn't crack or cross if you really don't have any experience without showing them here first.

Just my 2cents

Neil

Probstein123

post some scans and we can help you decide...focus on the well centered cards with limited PD issues...

trex

I dunno, that's why I asked. Maybe have all "under one roof"? I don't have a problem with SGC, it's just that I have more PSA's. Is there more monetary advantage to having them graded by PSA vs. SGC ? I dunno. Any insight?

trex

SGC and PSA are from everything I've read, supposed to have the same centering criteria. IE NM 30/70. So why the variance?

Blackie

unless your building the set in the registry why cross over........SGC is a top notch grader and the 62's look great in a SGC Holder

Scottiec2288

I agree with Blackie..SGC holders look way nicer then Psa for that year

Scottiec2288

If you really want them in PSA, I suggest you learn how to crack out of case then send in raw Crossovers do NOT work in your behalf you'll be lucky to get same grade but most times worse..

trex

I am building multiple sets in the registry, so is it worth more having sets in the registry? Or is it an anal thing ?....and I'm anal. Also, FYI did you know that's a green tint version of that card? Not that it makes any difference, same value, according to Beckett...for what that's worth.

trex

I agree with Blackie and Scottiec2288, they do look better in that holder.

ddfamf

If you're working on a registry set then by all means cross em. But many guys have holders from both PSA and SGC in their collection. They're both fine graders.

70ToppsFanatic

<< <i>If you're working on a registry set then by all means cross em. But many guys have holders from both PSA and SGC in their collection. They're both fine graders. >>



That being said, they can often be at extreme difference with each other. A few years back I submitted almost 40 1955 Topps stars and commons to PSA (that I had
99% certainty of based on the source) and 75% of them came back as "Evidence of Trimming". I re-submitted 1/2 of the returned cards to PSA and to my surprise
some of them came back slabbed (6s, 7s and 8s).

Two that PSA found to be trimmed twice were the Koufax RC and Ted Williams. I sent these to SGC to see if they would see things differently on any of them. Surprise,
both came back slabbed as SGC 80s.

Obviously PSA or SGC was wrong in this case. It's one thing to get differences in grade level, but for the top 2 TPGs to either find trimming when none is there or miss trimming
that is there basically confirms that to some degree it all depends on the experience level of the actual grader that gets your cards. There are major gaps between some graders
and others, and until the TPGs can better mechanize the process such that grading standards can be consistently applied all of the time for all submissions there will always be
an element of hit and miss involved.

Downtown1974

+1 for NGC slabs. I love the way they look.

trex

70ToppsFanatic....interesting. So, is all this .....lets say political. I mean, I know grading is for the most part subjective, but trimmed is trimmed, just as 30/70 centering is 30/70 centering. If a corner is not razor sharp....16x magnification will show yay or nay.

JoeBanzai

Having in PSA will definitely be a monetary advantage, if you achieve the same grade. SGC seems to be a lot more lenient on centering issues AND PSA just kills the '62 set on grading. I know what you are saying about grading, but if you ask me, PSA is much tougher on the dark bordered cards, 62, 71 and 75.

I am also very anal when it comes to cards and have chosen to go with PSA simply because I sell my extra's and the cards that come out of my set when I upgrade, and want the best return for the money.

You could try to send in some of your cards for "crossovers" and crack out a few as well and see how you do. You can specify a minimum grade on the crossovers.

To me, if money wasn't an issue, I would go with SGC as their holders present much better IMO.

Good luck with whatever you decide.

Joe

70ToppsFanatic

<< <i>70ToppsFanatic....interesting. So, is all this .....lets say political. I mean, I know grading is for the most part subjective, but trimmed is trimmed, just as 30/70 centering is 30/70 centering. If a corner is not razor sharp....16x magnification will show yay or nay. >>



It's not a matter of politics. It's a matter of individual competency. It should be next to impossible for the two top TPGs to be at odds on whether a 1955 Topps card is trimmed or not. However, the experience of individual graders at each TPG is beyond the control of the TPGs. That subject remains a major mystery to the vast majority of the grading community. The TPGs do not have a "standardized" test that we know of that allows them to compare one grader relative to another. Perhaps they do have something we are not aware of, but given the inconsistency seen in grading with all of the re-submissions and crack outs that come back a second or third time with a different grade it seems like it remains much more of an art than a science.

If it were me, I would us a high magnification scanner and program a computer to measure corner wear, centering, focus/registration, print defects, surface defects, etc. and record all of the machine findings with the flip number for all to see (would cut down on fakes too if they did). Then I'd have teams of human graders (teams of 3) review the machine findings, and only if a majority felt the machine missed something would I allow a human review. You would get a hell of a lot more consistency that way.

trex

That's a great idea Joe. Can you even imagine the scenario's. I'm sitting here LMAO. at the possibilities.

vladguerrero

If you just want to do a Registry and like the SGC holders do a SGC Registry and save the grading fee's on those cards. If you want better resale and ease of finding cards to add to your set crack and sub what you have. Unless it's a $100+ card always crack and sub IMO.

bking

I'd echo what a few other posters said - check the card EXTRA carefully for centering. For whatever reason, PSA is harsher on centering than SGC. An SGC card could be 70/30, for example, and end up in an SGC 88 holder a lot more often than it would end up in a PSA 8 holder.

Bear48

I've had a lot of success cracking cards out of SGC holders and submitting to PSA. Usually I receive the same grade, but I have had them come back one grade higher. Good luck!