Well I got my 1971-72 Topps Orr card back from Beckett yesterday.I gotta tell you when I saw the card I thought this could be a 10 but I guess with the naked eye that is the case.The card came back a 8.0 which is Nr. MT.-MT.I am not disappointed with the grade but looking at it I still wonder is it better?I am posting the card on this thread for all to see.The centering looks perfect,corners are sharp & back & front surface are clean.Has anyone ever thought that other companies grade a bit more lenient versus others? I have heard from one shop owner who says some remove their cards & resubmit to a different grading company.Well this beauty is staying in it's holder I at one time was against grading but I think it adds a certain pizzaz as it gives you more of a challenge finding a high graded card as I could of very easily had a majority of Orr's cards already but I am not buying cards that are creased or dinged up unless it's a very scarce card like the 71-72 Bazooka.

[IMG][/IMG]

It's a very nice card. The difference between 8s and 9s are often pretty slim. As an aside what made you send it to Beckett vs PSA or SGC?

I chose Beckett because I know they are very tough on grading(Which is a good thing).I will only use Beckett & SGC for having my cards graded.

Ralph, this card is nicely centred. Do you collect this set or just have the Orr card? I own a few BVG graded Orr's and the BVG slabs (in my opinion) are superior than PSA. I like the fact that the card is mylar sleeved before it is capsulized.

I only collect Orr cards & I agree with you about the slab being more superior.I never liked PSA graded cards but I do like the way Beckett grades them very neatly centered. I do know one thing I will be careful not to scratch the holder.To me the card looks Pristine so I am buying a jewlers loupe & at card shows I can be more accurate as the good ole naked eye is something in the past. Regards,
Ralph.

If I recall from my modern card days, which I think is Beckett's main market, BGS is notoriously tough and that's why they came up with BVG - the high standards required by BGS graders were resulting in relatively few high-graded vintage cards so BVG was seen as a way to offset this, by relaxing some of the criteria to allow for the age of the card. I remember there was some debate as to why a different standard should apply to a card just because it is older.

But you won't see too Beckett graded vintage cards around here, PSA seems to be the preferred choice by a mile. I like the SGC holders better myself.

Al I never heard that mentioned before,it really does not make sense just because a card is older.Are you saying they grade easier on the vintage cards? I don't believe that but thats my opinion

That is what I've heard, easier or different standards, however you want to look at it. Beckett has various levels or categories of grading. I did submit a couple of vintage cards to them once, they are nice holders.

Maybe they put the card under blue light or something. What grade did they give the surface, Ralph?

James with the BVG they don't give you the grades for centering,surface etc.... Still a nice card.

I also heard the same criteria relaxing on PSA vintage as well. When I compare some of my 50's and 60's PSA 8's with some of the early 70's PSA 8's cards, you can see the difference especially on the corners and centering. Also, due to PSA's lack of 1/2 grades there are better PSA cards ,slabed in the same grade, than others which is why they sell for a premium.

That's odd, they used to, here is one I used to own:

Not anymore Al this one on the back of the sticker reads:The worlds most trusted source in collecting.Beckett Grading services.I thought they gave a breakdown as well but nope.

Attached is a a link to a Beckett letter that details their change from subgrades to a single grade. The letter also mentions that vintage cards are judged on their "unique characteristics" and BVG grading considers the technology of the time (printing, etc). I interpret that as follows: BVG is more lenient and follows a different set of standards than BGS (which is what Al said earlier).

http://www.beckett.com/grading/BVG_letter.pdf

I personally don't think different standards should apply, regardless of technological changes. Logic dictates that there will be fewer high grade vintage cards because they have been around for much longer and faced more risks than their "shiny" counterparts from today (remember how Parkies were collated in a cement mixer?). If a PSA 4 is the highest graded example in a particular set from the early 1900's, than shouldn't we celebrate that set as being "condition sensitive" instead of applying a different set of standards?

Ray

That's interesting Ray. I sent in a Parkie to them (BVG pre that letter) and it came back with the following subgrades: 7.5, 5.5, 8.5, 4. The overall grade was a 5 i.e. no more than 1 grade higher than the lowest sub-grade. I wonder what it would have gotten now ?

I would simply say that grading agencies fail when they
apply different standards on different cards. Centering,
bad registry (blurr image), The OPC rough cut, should
all be taken into account when grading a card. Why? Because
these cards exist without these unwanted characteristics,
although in smaller numbers.

Else you end up with a MINT graded card that looks ugly.

It is so important to see what you purchase in this hobby.

Unfortunately, most of the time, we only see too well the
grade # on the holder but not enough the card itself.