Question about grading scale 0

[Mark Schlosberg]

Looking at the grading scale, what is the difference between a miscut and a near miscut? What do you call it when there is virtually no border on one side of the card, but it doesn't include part of the adjoining card, such that centering is something like 95-5 or 98-2 or whatnot? Could such a card get a 3 (VG) assuming everything else is in excellent condition or would it's cap be a 1.5 (Fair). 

[Mark Schlosberg]

bump

[CollectorBB]

I don't know how they'd handle it, but a substantially bad variable will bring the whole card down substantially to its level. 

[Mark Schlosberg]

Totally get that. This card would otherwise easily be a 6, but it's clearly not since it's way off center. Just trying to see how CSG defines miscut as opposed to near miscut, which are the descriptors they use in their grading scale. 

[CardHero]

Post a picture of the card if you can.  Not sure we can decode csg's rules but looking at a specific card would be helpful.

[C. Yeager]

I may be totally wrong here, and I'm curious to hear directly from CSG too, but it appears their grading scale is basically the same as BGS. And my understanding is, the overall grade can only be .5 higher than the lowest subgrade on the card. I had a terribly off-center 1986 Fleer Barkley, but the card was fairly NM overall. So I assume the centering was a 6, meaning the highest overall grade possible would be a 6.5. (Assuming the centering is the lowest subgrade for the card.) I've attached some images of the card for comparison. 

[RKgant]

Yeah.... with the OC a 6.5 seems reasonable.

[ItismeH]

On 5/11/2021 at 9:56 AM, Charles Yeager said:

I may be totally wrong here, and I'm curious to hear directly from CSG too, but it appears their grading scale is basically the same as BGS. And my understanding is, the overall grade can only be .5 higher than the lowest subgrade on the card. I had a terribly off-center 1986 Fleer Barkley, but the card was fairly NM overall. So I assume the centering was a 6, meaning the highest overall grade possible would be a 6.5. (Assuming the centering is the lowest subgrade for the card.) I've attached some images of the card for comparison. 

Actually the left to right centering is very severe... their grading scale states that the final grade cannot be more than 1 point higher than the lowest subgrade, which might have even been a 5.5 in your case. This is where subgrades would have definitely come in handy. Personally I get them all the time, the label looks so much cleaner. Until they format it differently in the future, subgrades is the way for me. 

[C. Yeager]

13 hours ago, ItismeH said:

Actually the left to right centering is very severe... their grading scale states that the final grade cannot be more than 1 point higher than the lowest subgrade, which might have even been a 5.5 in your case. This is where subgrades would have definitely come in handy. Personally I get them all the time, the label looks so much cleaner. Until they format it differently in the future, subgrades is the way for me. 

Cool, that is good to know about the lowest subgrade! Yeah, I agree on the label subgrades too. This card was in my first group subbed, and is a PC card, so I'll likely submit it back to CSG to get the sub grades added in a year or two.

[WallyWest]

I always get sub grades.  The one interesting thing with these CSG grades is how low across the board the Surface sub-grades are.  Even cards that are brand new going from pack to sleeve.  Even the ones on Ebay and myslab seem to have the same issue.  Wonder how they arrive at that grade and if there isn't something that is breaking down in the analysis.