The few CGC10s I have are pretty sharp to he honest.
5 Likes
A 10 base 1st that’s showing off lol. Its as clean an example as you get lovely card.
1 Like
If you zoom in using PWCC’s high res imaging, you can see whitening on the top right and top left and some of the sides. It’s absolutely nothing major, but a “perfect” card with all 10 subgrades should have absolutely no whitening at all.
It’s a great card, but not “black label” or “CGC Perfect” in my opinion.
1 Like
Much of what you’re referring to is just a product of PWCC’s lighting. I’ve noticed the same thing with lots of my PWCC scans vs how the card actually appears in person. Here’s the scan of the Gyarados from CGC’s website (on the top) vs PWCC’s (on the bottom):
CGC scans are more reflective of how cards appear in person under normal lighting conditions, in my experience.
Sorry, I still see the whitening in both images.
Are you referring to the tips of the corners? I’m curious what you’re referring to. Because this, for instance, is not whitening – it’s just how cards from that era appear when scanned:
1 Like
I’ve found both CGC and PWCC scans to be accurate when it comes to whitening. Whether that corner knick is whitening is up for debate, but both of those corners have whitening.
You have to have a real eye for all the nuances that arise. I’ve got super good at it. We can see what you are pointing out @dyl.
The leftmost thing you’re pointing out is not whitening. The corner tip ones are, though. In my view, though, the corner tips are fair game on 10s because they are incredibly mild. For comparison, here are the 9.5 corners on my Gyarados:
Both the PWCC one and mine are pack fresh, but mine has the common Skyridge white corner dots. The PWCC one has comparatively muted ones that, IMO, fall within the 10 parameters. But it’s subjective.
Here’s back of the first PSA 10 Gyarados I’m seeing from online – as you’ll notice from looking at Skyridge cards, the corner dots on two opposite corners is incredibly common.
1 Like
I don’t think a CGC 10 will ever come as close to “dodgy” as that one psa 10 
years back
1 Like
Have you got a pic not sure if I’ve seen what you are referring to or not thanks. I’m really wanting to see something like a 9.5 that looks like an 8 or a 10 that looks 8.5 something a bit distinct.
It’s a bit odd to label a card as perfect with visible imperfections. That’s why PSA 10 exists - it’s Gem Mint, but not perfect. BGS Black Labels and CGC Perfects should be as “perfect” as they claim to be. 
And to be clear, I own CGC cards and am grading with them as we speak. I want CGC Perfects and BGS Black Labels to be what they say they are, but sometimes (often?) they are not.
1 Like
Thanks hadn’t seen that.
You have to draw a line somewhere and anything that can cross it is in the perfect slot.
That’s why it’s so flawed. If you’re going to advertise CGC Perfect, then make sure the card is actually perfect. It’s a near-impossible task, which is why those types of grades and associated premiums are goofy in my opinion.
1 Like
If psa didn’t have their gem mint 10 with so much wriggle room this wouldn’t have been an option at all. Gem mint that isn’t gem mint and perfect that isn’t perfect.
I think the difference here is that I’m not sure I’d refer to those as imperfections – more just something that is present on every card from that era. CGC has been very public about the fact that they grade cards relative to other cards from the same set. Within that framework, I think the Gyarados grade is fair. If instead that was the back of a Neo Genesis card, then I’d agree with you – because many Neo Genesis cards have flawless corners. But as far as Skyridge goes, that Gyarados is top notch.
1 Like
Exactly this. You would be hard pressed to find better examples than that perfect 10.
1 Like
I don’t think we’ll see eye-to-eye on this one, but I appreciate your thoughts on the topic
2 Likes