FLIP CHANGE? 1 1

[Jee Su Chang]

I am curious with the new scale, when you reholder existing 9.5s, will they become 10s automatically since that is now Gem mint?

Edited March 25, 2022 by Jee Su Chang

[PunsRTonsOfFun]

On 3/25/2022 at 12:18 PM, Jee Su Chang said:

I am curious with the new scale, when you reholder existing 9.5s, will they become 10s automatically since that is now Gem mint?

I posted this question in the Ask CSG forum. Waiting for them to review it and post a response here.

[jsrva]

“A green label Gem Mint 9.5 will cross to a new black label Gem Mint 10.”

[micky 8]

On 3/25/2022 at 1:18 PM, Jee Su Chang said:

I am curious with the new scale, when you reholder existing 9.5s, will they become 10s automatically since that is now Gem mint?

good question!!! a gem mint is a gem mint i would assume all 9.5's will be gem 10's 

[Jee Su Chang]

On 3/25/2022 at 2:10 PM, micky 8 said:

good question!!! a gem mint is a gem mint i would assume all 9.5's will be gem 10's 

They answered elsewhere that it would.

[micky 8]

I like the new label excited about it wit the csg slab dissapponted about the subgrades but I heard a perfect 10 is gonna have subgrades of 10's across, i like the scale change too, However probably a good time to crack a few old csg slabs 😂

[brentpearson]

Not a big fan of these changes, especially since I have my first order into CSG now and was looking forward to the green and sub-grades. But, the bright side is that I will be getting a refund on those sub-grades and love those clear acrylic holders.  Honestly, for me, that is the #1 feature of CSG. 

 

Regarding their grading standards, I can understand people being hesitant to send their cards to a company that is too strict. It doesn't matter if you're an investor or a collector, nobody wants the lower number on their cards.  I do, however, enjoy purchasing CSG cards knowing that I am likely getting a card graded at the highest end of its number.  

[micky 8]

On 3/25/2022 at 3:12 PM, Jee Su Chang said:

They answered elsewhere that it would.

thats great I think thats gonna make alot of people happy seeing there 9.5's turn to 10's!  worth the 5$, so will a 9 be a 9.5 mint plus? 🤔 ha who cares a little curious tho 

[PunsRTonsOfFun]

On 3/25/2022 at 2:17 PM, micky 8 said:

thats great I think thats gonna make alot of people happy seeing there 9.5's turn to 10's!  worth the 5$, so will a 9 be a 9.5 mint plus? 🤔 ha who cares a little curious tho 

This is a great question. If 9.5 Mint+ are green 9s with two 9.5s subgrades and two 9s subgrades, I'd send them in for the reholder boost too.

[JohnBurke]

On 3/25/2022 at 3:19 PM, PunsRTonsOfFun said:

This is a great question. If 9.5 Mint+ are green 9s with two 9.5s subgrades and two 9s subgrades, I'd send them in for the reholder boost too.

This would make sense.. although I guess if you don’t have sub grades on a current green 9 then there would be no way to tell what it would get. And if they don’t even do sub grades now.. how would they even know? Come to think of it, how is eliminating sub grades going to speed up times, when you have to look at all 4 aspects anyway when grading it to arrive at the final grade? More confusing the more I think about it 

[PunsRTonsOfFun]

On 3/25/2022 at 2:46 PM, JohnBurke said:

This would make sense.. although I guess if you don’t have sub grades on a current green 9 then there would be no way to tell what it would get. 

Correct...I guess you could consider it a benefit for people who ponied up for subgrades.

[micky 8]

On 3/25/2022 at 3:46 PM, JohnBurke said:

This would make sense.. although I guess if you don’t have sub grades on a current green 9 then there would be no way to tell what it would get. And if they don’t even do sub grades now.. how would they even know? Come to think of it, how is eliminating sub grades going to speed up times, when you have to look at all 4 aspects anyway when grading it to arrive at the final grade? More confusing the more I think about it 

dont really need subgrades to determine, if a 9.5 is gem mint and they used the .5 grading scale before then technically all csg grades should move up .5, but it might stop at the 9 because they did call it a mint 9 and not a mint 9+,  i been saying this since csg came out that there 9 should be called a mint plus if there 9.5 is a gem, but id be happy with the 10 and the rest water under the bridge 

[Scottish Punk]

On 3/25/2022 at 3:46 PM, JohnBurke said:

This would make sense.. although I guess if you don’t have sub grades on a current green 9 then there would be no way to tell what it would get. And if they don’t even do sub grades now.. how would they even know? Come to think of it, how is eliminating sub grades going to speed up times, when you have to look at all 4 aspects anyway when grading it to arrive at the final grade? More confusing the more I think about it 

My take with the subs.  They slow the process down in two ways.  One is just simply the transcribing of the data entry throughout the process.  The other and more time consuming part which is the grading.  I think people are mistaken in that they grade the same way with our without subs.  WIth subs, they are grading the four parts individually and than coming up with the grade as you describe.  I think the current way and without subs is that they look for flaws and just kind of deduct from gem from there.  You don't need to be as precise with his component.  Card looks great outside of soft corner and slightly off center.  Give it a 9.  Don't need to worry about scoring 10,9.5,9,9 or whatever.

Way back when I first started grading, I loved Beckett and their subs.  I come to realize the subs just aren't worth the hassle.  Instead of one subjective grade, now you get 4.  Also, it makes really focus in on the one sub that is bad instead of just seeing a "9" (if one sub is 8.5 for example).  This causes you want to upgrade or resend in a perfectly great card to try to get a bump on one sub.  The only thing the subs are good for is to give you an idea on what the issue was that kept it gem.  Like realizing CSG blasted me on surface for a lot of Chrome/Prizm that kept cards to a 9.

[PunsRTonsOfFun]

On 3/28/2022 at 10:35 AM, Scottish Punk said:

My take with the subs.  They slow the process down in two ways.  One is just simply the transcribing of the data entry throughout the process.  The other and more time consuming part which is the grading.  I think people are mistaken in that they grade the same way with our without subs.  WIth subs, they are grading the four parts individually and than coming up with the grade as you describe.  I think the current way and without subs is that they look for flaws and just kind of deduct from gem from there.  You don't need to be as precise with his component.  Card looks great outside of soft corner and slightly off center.  Give it a 9.  Don't need to worry about scoring 10,9.5,9,9 or whatever.

Way back when I first started grading, I loved Beckett and their subs.  I come to realize the subs just aren't worth the hassle.  Instead of one subjective grade, now you get 4.  Also, it makes really focus in on the one sub that is bad instead of just seeing a "9" (if one sub is 8.5 for example).  This causes you want to upgrade or resend in a perfectly great card to try to get a bump on one sub.  The only thing the subs are good for is to give you an idea on what the issue was that kept it gem.  Like realizing CSG blasted me on surface for a lot of Chrome/Prizm that kept cards to a 9.

The other problem with subgrades is this Min Gem vs True Gem malarkey. PSA and SGC were so smart to not provide subgrade transparency and keep things simple. Good riddance...

[micky 8]

On 3/28/2022 at 11:35 AM, Scottish Punk said:

My take with the subs.  They slow the process down in two ways.  One is just simply the transcribing of the data entry throughout the process.  The other and more time consuming part which is the grading.  I think people are mistaken in that they grade the same way with our without subs.  WIth subs, they are grading the four parts individually and than coming up with the grade as you describe.  I think the current way and without subs is that they look for flaws and just kind of deduct from gem from there.  You don't need to be as precise with his component.  Card looks great outside of soft corner and slightly off center.  Give it a 9.  Don't need to worry about scoring 10,9.5,9,9 or whatever.

Way back when I first started grading, I loved Beckett and their subs.  I come to realize the subs just aren't worth the hassle.  Instead of one subjective grade, now you get 4.  Also, it makes really focus in on the one sub that is bad instead of just seeing a "9" (if one sub is 8.5 for example).  This causes you want to upgrade or resend in a perfectly great card to try to get a bump on one sub.  The only thing the subs are good for is to give you an idea on what the issue was that kept it gem.  Like realizing CSG blasted me on surface for a lot of Chrome/Prizm that kept cards to a 9.

well said!!  I can see how subs could slow things at first i thought there doing it anyway whats the big deal but recently i seen a hga vid and the subs were all over and just didnt correlate, Csg's although harsh at times were on point csg werent just throwing numbers out they were meticulously grading each area and then the card as a whole, when grading a card with out subs ya start at a perfect 10 and each imperfection drops ya down accordingly sounds much faster then subgrades, I will miss subgrades tho I was learning how to screen my cards better now i wont have a clue why i got dinged, i always found the issue wit the subgrade now ill be staring at a 7 for an hour scratching my head! 😵‍💫

[micky 8]

On 3/28/2022 at 12:10 PM, PunsRTonsOfFun said:

The other problem with subgrades is this Min Gem vs True Gem malarkey. PSA and SGC were so smart to not provide subgrade transparency and keep things simple. Good riddance...

now when ya get a perfect 10 with subgrades you can say true perfect 10 🤷‍♂️