`
Connect With Us!
IOS Store
Share Thread:
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
grading psa vs bgs
#1

grading psa vs bgs
First lemme ask what you guys prefer and why. Also how would you compare the two as far as value? for example would a psa 10 be worth as much as a bgs 10 or would you say more like a 9.5? Just curious as I usally stick with bgs but have been debating psa. Thoughts on this would be welcome. Also I know its really a personal choice but just looking for opinions. Thanks.
[Image: Ry9TZ.png]
Photobucket: http://s1252.photobucket.com/user/german...n/library/
Current Projects:
2013 Bowman Inception Prospect set 46/47
2013 Tribute Base
Reply
#2

RE: grading psa vs bgs
I'm sure there are much more knowledgeable people than myself on this topic, but let me give you my understanding of it and I'll learn along with you...

From my understanding a PSA 10 = BGS 9.5... So you basically reduce everything by .5 in comparison... I.e. a PSA 9 would = a BGS 8.5... A BGS 10 is absolutely flawless, or darn near it...

From a buying perspective for modern cards I personally prefer BGS due to extra detail given during the grading and individual ratings of each factor. I've only bought a few recent graded RC's, but it makes more sense to me than just simply throwing out a number without explanation that PSA does... I am unsure if PSA provides more detail if you look up the registry # etc...

All-in-all, having that true 10, exquisite card possibility from BGS gives them the nod IMO... Looking forward to other more educated responses though.
PC Players: Alex Bregman and Christian Yelich. Looking for any and every I don't have.
Other Players: Luis Ortiz Jr., Rowdy Tellez, Touki Toussaint


Reply
#3

RE: grading psa vs bgs
ya I have heard the story of psa grade is a small step below the beckett. just boggles me that a psa 10 is really that much different from a bgs 10. I just would love to know how beckett is that much more stringent of a grader. Both these companies seem to own the market on grading over others.
[Image: Ry9TZ.png]
Photobucket: http://s1252.photobucket.com/user/german...n/library/
Current Projects:
2013 Bowman Inception Prospect set 46/47
2013 Tribute Base
Reply
#4

RE: grading psa vs bgs
In my experience if PSA doesn't have a reason to knock a grade down, then they don't. If the card looks like a perfect 10, then that's what it gets from PSA. BGS will look for a problem on a molecular level just to avoid giving out 10's.

That's not a slight against either company, but since there's virtually no difference between a 10 and a 9.5 I'd go with PSA.
Alex Gordon collector and author of http://viewfromtheskybox.blogspot.com/

[Image: W2WNKId.png]
Reply
#5

RE: grading psa vs bgs
Keep in mind to look at what grade the number is designated as. A PSA 10 and a BGS 10 are two completely different grades. PSA 10=Gem Mint while BGS 10=Pristine. PSA 10 and BGS 9.5 are both designated as Gem Mint.

Then you have both BGS 9 and PSA 9 being mint, BGS 8 and PSA 8 being NM/MT, BGS 7 and PSA 7 being NM, etc etc etc. There are also half point grades mixed in as well (5.5, 6.5, etc).

Reply
#6

RE: grading psa vs bgs
can we get some kinda stickied thread for this question? "what are the +/- of grading with BGS, PSA, SGC" "would you grade with anyone else?" "why would you grade with one rather than another"?"

the question pops up at least a few times monthly and I feel like if there was one thread for discussing that sort of thing with a nice collection of a couple peoples in depth responses - perhaps it would be useful? I imagine with beckett having a hand and being a player in the grading game they wouldn't want to have something like that stickied - but man it pops up a lot!

to answer: depends on what you are grading case by case with different cards / different ERAs and with different intents as to why you are grading would factor into the choice I'd make personally.... overall for modern cards I prefer BGS myself because I think the slabs simply look a lot nicer than PSA. pre-war vintage SGC all the way. and as for vintage - I like PSA although once again depends on the card/set/etc

same with rarer 90s inserts - depends on the card/player/set

Jonny Venters - Super Collector
Overall Collection (113/157 72% Complete)
base/parallels (85/85 100%)
1/1's (28/72 39%)

always looking for venters 1/1's and 2008/2010 low numbered refractors
Reply
#7

RE: grading psa vs bgs
A good thing to keep in mind, PSA=80% vintage, BGS=99% modern Smile
Collecting: Crede, Luck, Tannehill, Osweiler, Cobb

Revolving signature
Reply
#8

RE: grading psa vs bgs
My understanding is BGS 9.5 = PSA 10. BGS Pristine 10's are few and far between and like a poster above said BGS searches on the molecular level for a defect to avoid handing out a 10.
As for the companies, I like both and SGC also. They all 3 grade well at times not all the time. They all 3 make mistakes but not all the time. Difference between the 3 grading is on the molecular level and hard to see :-)
Reply
#9

RE: grading psa vs bgs
appreciate the feedback guys and yes I too think it should be stickied.
[Image: Ry9TZ.png]
Photobucket: http://s1252.photobucket.com/user/german...n/library/
Current Projects:
2013 Bowman Inception Prospect set 46/47
2013 Tribute Base
Reply
#10

RE: grading psa vs bgs
I'm not sure what to search for offhand to give the best results but if you search this forum for grading PSA BGS and skim through a few titles you will probably find some good information posted up also. this question comes up fairly regularly and I know I've seen/read some pretty good advice.

but yeah! a lot of it is personal preference and what you intend to do with the cards/get from the grading. between those three companies (PSA/BGS/SGC) you really can't go "wrong" any better or worse with one from the other. depending on the era of the card though - a lot of people do prefer different ones over others then.
Jonny Venters - Super Collector
Overall Collection (113/157 72% Complete)
base/parallels (85/85 100%)
1/1's (28/72 39%)

always looking for venters 1/1's and 2008/2010 low numbered refractors
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)