Yup imo Beckett is pretty stupid for not just doing the reholder. They would rather admit to misgrading the card the first time and have no gurantee or backing for the customer.
Atleast psa lies and upholds there misgrades to pretend to grade accurately.
My thoughts exactly, iāve been noticing lately they seem to have become a little harsher with grading so I wonder if thatās why it didnāt reslab. I agree though, they should have accepted it for what it is and reslabbed 
I was looking for some of the low pop XY Evolutions holos and saw this: Pokemon Chansey XY Evolutions Holo Rare #70 PSA 10 Gem Mint POP 17 | eBay
How does a card like that grade a 10? It looks to me like 3 of the back 4 corners (all but the top left) have some type of whitening or wear either on the edge/corner or in the blue border on the back face of the card. Front top right corner is also reflecting light, but that might just be the angle the picture was taken from. If this is a 10, then why is pop so low?
That looks like a PSA 7, if being generous
PSA is simply not consistent
Alright so Iām not crazy, and those are obvious marks.
Sure, then some of the 2000 9s should have inconsistently been graded 10s, but that didnāt happenā¦
Actually checking the cert number now to see what PSAās scans of that card look like. Maybe their picture is just bad and the case is all dusty + scuffed up.
Mmm for whatever reason this one doesnāt come up with a scan, just says that the number is for a chansey. https://www.psacard.com/cert/61873484/psa
Psa only relatively recently started going scans for everyone, it used to only be for higher tier
submissions!
That was my understanding originally, but when a random $50 card had scans on eBay I thought I must have bad info. This makes sense though, any idea about what cert numbers they switched to scanning all submissions?
Itās only been since beginning of 2023 if I recall correctly so Iād assume late 6x or early 7x but not sure sorry.
Has anyone submitted to CGC by sending to the CGC UK office before? Just wanting to check all is smooth before submitting
I sent a reslab order for the 9.5 to 10 upgrade. It went okay. A bit slow.
The issue was the return. Order was ready, I paid via bank transfer as thatās what they told me to do. Then waited. And waited. 2 weeks later I phoned the UK office for an update.
Apparently the two offices donāt communicate for the bank transfers but it was visible on my account so they sent it quickly after that.
The guy on the phone said had I paid via the website itās have gone faster.
I have had very good results using The Sub Center so i recommend checking them out as a middleman.
Thank you so much for the detailed response!
Thatās great to know. If I go ahead with my submission Iāll be sure to try pay online and expect a little wait.
Ah yes! I use the subcenter for all my PSA submissions and they have always been superb, canāt recommend them enough! Unfortunately they only do bulk tier with CGC as they do not get enough volume anymore. I asked and they have no plans to reopen the upper CGC tiers at the moment.
When did PSA change their label to the new lighthouse label? I thought it was only 2cert that had the old style label. I see a 418XXXXX cert with the old label and thought it was odd.
Correct, it changed in 2017 around the time of 27x cert numbers. Do you have a pic of the label you saw?
There was a period in time where you could request certain label types from PSA when doing a recase. My guess is the original submitter requested the older label to match all their other PSA slabs at the time
Are these really weak PSA 10s, or am I just grading the back too hard?
Any thoughts on these? I thought Iād try to grade some of the trainer gallery sets since so many of the cards are incredibly cheap, but going through 50 of them tonight, I pulled out 3 I thought were maybe clean enough, and āwithin 60/40,ā although that is a separate issue. The ācentering toolā seems nearly impossible to measure something as worse than 60/40, at least using this one: https://www.amazon.com/Legends-Grading-Centering-Cleaning-Material/dp/B08SPZDLGV A card would have to have practically no border to not fall within 2/2, 3/3, or 2-3/3.
Lastly, are the earlier trainer gallery sets known to have been cut with extremely dull blades? Tons of cards had extremely visible edge fraying like the material itself was just coming apart, but with no actual signs of edge wear.
These are PSA 10s. Youāre being a bit critical. If you want perfect cards, search for them. But these are pretty typical. 
Thanks, I figured as much. These come from a personal submission of over 100 cards, so I had lots of 9s and 10s to compare, but it was very difficult for me to tell when a card was 9 vs 10 due to corner/edge wear (like this, maybe slightly larger), or centering.
Hereās 2 more, ungraded:
But then right next to it I have this one:
When I compare these to this card for instance, itās hard for me to understand how this one is a 9.
If you hid the PSA grades on ultramodern set cards, Iām sure that most people wouldnāt be able to reliably tell the difference between 9s and 10s.
