[ricelynnevans75]

It was graded by SGC, but I don't remember the grade. A red thread fell off of the card.

A red "thread"?

---

We have all heard about the 86-87 Fleer MJ RC PSA 10 crossing over to a BGS 10 (I believe this is how the first MJ RC BGS 10 was established), so anything is possible I would think the graders try to be as objective as possible and the only criteria involved in the crossover grade is the condition of the card itself.

The first PSA 10 Gem Mint that crossed over to a BGS 10 was back around the 2006 time frame I believe. According to the BGS population report, there are now 4 graded as a BGS 10 Pristine and over 200 are graded a BGS 9.5 Gem Mint out of about 5000+ submissions of the card.

With that said and from what I've seen on the boards though, I don't know how up to date the population report is.

[nolan5000]

A red "thread"?

---

With that said and from what I've seen on the boards though, I don't know how up to date the population report is.

Yes, a red thread!!

The Beckett Pop. Report hasn't Updated since Dec. 13th, 2011. So, it was 2 months ago today.

[ricelynnevans75]

Yes, a red thread!!

The Beckett Pop. Report hasn't Updated since Dec. 13th, 2011. So, it was 2 months ago today.

So a card graded Gem Mint (or whatever grade) crossed over to Pristine after a "red thread" fell off of it?

[nolan5000]

So a card graded Gem Mint (or whatever grade) crossed over to Pristine after a "red thread" fell off of it?

Yes, I'm surprised that you didn't hear about it.

[ricelynnevans75]

Well, when did it happen?

[nolan5000]

Well, when did it happen?

I don't remember, but it must have been discussed on these boards at some point.

[ricelynnevans75]

I don't remember, but it must have been discussed on these boards at some point.

Probably was but if it was in the basketball forums, before this grading board opened up, I wouldn't have seen it. I remember an article about the first BGS 10 Jordan RC back in the day (noted above) and various sales here and there but the majority of the ins and outs I only follow baseball.

I did find one thread on another forum (CU I think?) from about two years ago last night discussing one that was sent from BGS to SGC but I couldn't find anything about one going from SGC to BGS.

There are A LOT of BGS 9.5 Jordan RCs 200+ but I've always been curious to know how many Gem Mints are duplicates from people breaking a slab and resubmitting.

[rusty222]

Probably was but if it was in the basketball forums, before this grading board opened up, I wouldn't have seen it. I remember an article about the first BGS 10 Jordan RC back in the day (noted above) and various sales here and there but the majority of the ins and outs I only follow baseball.

I did find one thread on another forum (CU I think?) from about two years ago last night discussing one that was sent from BGS to SGC but I couldn't find anything about one going from SGC to BGS.

There are A LOT of BGS 9.5 Jordan RCs 200+ but I've always been curious to know how many Gem Mints are duplicates from people breaking a slab and resubmitting.

Yep, that's the thing about the population report. Its overstated but how much nobody really knows. My guess somewhere about 10-20% of BGS 9.5 cards in population report have been graded more than once .

I have card .5 away from pristine. I will probably break it out and resubmit it to BGS and hope it comes back graded pristine. If not I have no problem to break it out again and send it to PSA and I am fairly positive it will grade a PSA 10.

[Grigsby3]

If I have BGS 9 with .10? Or is the chance of that happening slim to none?

Has anyone ever sent a BGS 9 to PSA and received a PSA 10 before?

THanks!

I have pondered this question a great deal but so far have not put my money where my mouth is. One thing is certain and that is the stated grading standards are tougher for BGS than PSA. A PSA 9 needs 65/35 centering on the front and 90/10 centering on the reverse. A BGS 9 needs 55/45 on the front and 70/30 on the reverse. One could intuit that a BGS 9 (and certainly a BGS 9.5) should have a good chance of crossing over to a PSA 10 and in theory be worth more money since it appears that SGC and BGS trade at a discount to PSA.

So why doesn't everybody do this? My suspicion is that most people believe PSA will never put a 10 on a competitor's card thereby confirming that the competitor has tougher standards. There are also enough "stories" out there that the cards come back from PSA with a lower grade because PSA determined it was altered, trimmed, or worse, they damaged it when they removed the card from the other slab.

[ricelynnevans75]

I have pondered this question a great deal but so far have not put my money where my mouth is. One thing is certain and that is the stated grading standards are tougher for BGS than PSA. A PSA 9 needs 65/35 centering on the front and 90/10 centering on the reverse. A BGS 9 needs 55/45 on the front and 70/30 on the reverse. One could intuit that a BGS 9 (and certainly a BGS 9.5) should have a good chance of crossing over to a PSA 10 and in theory be worth more money since it appears that SGC and BGS trade at a discount to PSA.

So why doesn't everybody do this? My suspicion is that most people believe PSA will never put a 10 on a competitor's card thereby confirming that the competitor has tougher standards. There are also enough "stories" out there that the cards come back from PSA with a lower grade because PSA determined it was altered, trimmed, or worse, they damaged it when they removed the card from the other slab.

I wouldn't place that burden solely on PSA. These are all businesses we're talking about here and I would bet that ANY of the "big three" would immediately have a bias as soon as they receive a card in another companies slab and would want to appear "harder" or "more strict". These are humans we are talking about here, not machines. I always recommend busting out of the slab if crossing over, thus taking away the bias.

Additionally, though I agree that the "stated" (key word right there) definitions are more difficult, application is a different story entirely. I'm sure companies like PRO grading said that they were top notch as well too. It's all in the application of the standards, and more importantly IMO, the knowledge that the grader has in whatever issue they are looking at. Nobody should ever take a grading company at 100% accuracy. I purchase certain cards graded online as it does up my chance that the card is not altered, though it's still not 100%. One should know what it is they are buying. Don't purchase blind just because it's in a slab. I recently learned this lesson the hard way with a BGS 9.5 Roberto Alomar RC.

I've also heard the stories about cards coming back from one company damaged/altered/trimmed/etc with each of the big three. PSA has done it, SGC has done it, and BGS has done it. A counter point to your comment about cards coming back as a lower grade, couldn't that also mean that maybe, just maybe, PSA applied their standards more strictly or noticed a flaw with the card that the other didn't? Or is that out of the realm of possibility? Take my advice, when you see Mr. Joe Internet claiming that he submitted a card graded XX by company XXX to company YYY and it came back lower, ask for some scans, cert number, or what the card was. Any time I've done that, I never get a legitimate answer. Why? Because people are going to try and pimp their favorite company while trying to knock the other with zero proof and/or evidence. Sad, petty, and dishonest but a sad truth in this hobby. People apparently feel like they have to legitimize their collection to other people instead of just going with and enjoying what they've got.

Your question about why more people don't cross over to try and get higher PSA scores? (Not sure that could ever really be proven as to how often it actually does/doesn't happen and is hypothetical in nature to discuss) It could very well be what I said similarly before. That one company, BGS in your case, is NOT more strict in their grading and the full confidence is not there in the application of their grading standards. Stated definitions are one thing. Human beings applying those definitions are a whole other ballgame. I don't understand how people do not grasp the human factor in all of this personally.