[QUOTE=salthill;14741092]Except that’s clearly not what happened with his 3/3 black label submission.[/QUOTE]

Please either don’t respond or respond to the specific question. This reply is not useful in having a productive conversation.

[QUOTE=jewcer2k5;14741060]Let me ask a question.

Say someone opens up a few cases of a basic product like topps and they generally try to pick out cards that will achieve a 9.5 or better but don’t specifically look for only the best cards.

What would you expect the breakdown of BL’s —> Dimes —> Gems —> 9 or worse to be? Again we are talking about ONLY looking for 9.5 or better and pack pulled —> penny sleeve —> top loader —> bgs.[/QUOTE]

In your experience, what percentage of BL do your submitters receive on these products? 1-2%?

[QUOTE=dfresh559;14741101]In your experience, what percentage of BL do your submitters receive on these products? 1-2%?[/QUOTE]

Second and last time I will reply to non replies. Please either answer my question or don’t reply. Trying to stay on a topic.

If it's your average submitter, not a rookie and not someone who has graded thousands:

10% 9s
79% 9.5s
10% 10s
1% black label

[QUOTE=jewcer2k5;14741107]Second and last time I will reply to non replies. Please either answer my question or don’t reply. Trying to stay on a topic.[/QUOTE]

I would wager that you are a more experienced grader than most of us. I was looking forward to your input.

From what I have seen personally, 1-2% BL is a fair assessment.

[QUOTE=jewcer2k5;14741094]Thanks for the input. I wanna see what other folks say.[/QUOTE]

NP. Just throwing this out there. I went 32/33 PSA 10's in my two submissions with you so far. This was my first time ever picking out cards and sending them in to be submitted. I've never done it myself.

It's not that hard to look at a card and determine whether it will grade GEM, even for a "rookie"

BL were supposed to be unicorns I thought.

I'd like to look at the pop reports for a semi-recent product like 2018 Topps Update to help influence my decision, but I know Joe has graded cards from these sets. How many of the black labels and 10s are his? Probably a lot. Surely most of those cards were penny sleeved and shipped off for grading immediately.

Pop report for 2018 Topps Update:
11% - 10 BL
14% - 10
73% - 9.5
2% - 9 and under

After taking a guess on how many of those BLs and 10s are Joe's, I'd be comfortable with something like this:
1% - 10 BL
8% - 10
75% - 9.5
16% - 9 and under

[QUOTE=dfresh559;14741123]I would wager that you are a more experienced grader than most of us. I was looking forward to your input.

From what I have seen personally, 1-2% BL is a fair assessment.[/QUOTE]

Ill be giving my input later today and also sharing some results.

Remember this is someone NOT looking for black labels. Basically following the process I outline in grading 101.

Under 1% black label is the norm IMO.

[QUOTE=jewcer2k5;14741060]Let me ask a question.

Say someone opens up a few cases of a basic product like topps and they generally try to pick out cards that will achieve a 9.5 or better but don’t specifically look for only the best cards.

What would you expect the breakdown of BL’s —> Dimes —> Gems —> 9 or worse to be? Again we are talking about ONLY looking for 9.5 or better and pack pulled —> penny sleeve —> top loader —> bgs.[/QUOTE]
I’ll use Topps Chrome as that is a popular one.

Black label: 1-3%
Pristine: 10-20%
9.5: 75-85%
9 or worse: 1-3%

I would consider myself a rookie, but i would say:

10% BL
15% Dime
60% Gem
15% 9 or less


*Edited 6/6 @ 1:57 as i misread only selecting the best cards part.

[QUOTE=jr24ai3;14741114]If it's your average submitter, not a rookie and not someone who has graded thousands:

10% 9s
79% 9.5s
10% 10s
1% black label[/QUOTE]

My numbers are based on regular Topps. The numbers would change if we were talking chrome.

[QUOTE=jewcer2k5;14741094]Thanks for the input. I wanna see what other folks say.[/QUOTE]

I don't thnk we need to add speculation and clog the thread with estimates of what percentages people think.

Overall, through Terapeak data the ratio of Black Labels/10s/9.5s sold in the past year is approximately 0.8%/15%/84%. Will post screenshots at some point.

Even one on Joes preferred "easy to grade" sets like 2018 Topps Chrome Update, the ratio in the pop report is 3%/18%/73%. And that's with Joe's ridiculous results included. So those are two data points to consider for an expected baseline.

And from what we know from even the partial information about his submission results that Joe wanted SuperDan to share, his numbers still blow everyone else way as if he ran a 90 second mile.

Just trying to help us stay tethered to facts.

[QUOTE=kyaa;14741161]I don't thnk we need to add speculation and clog the thread with estimates of what percentages people think.

Overall, through Terapeak data the ratio of Black Labels/10s/9.5s sold in the past year is approximately 0.8%/15%/84%. Will post screenshots at some point.

Even one on Joes preferred "easy to grade" sets like 2018 Topps Chrome Update, the ratio in the pop report is 3%/18%/73%. And that's with Joe's ridiculous results included. So those are two data points to consider for an expected baseline.

And from what we know from even the partial information about his submission results that Joe wanted SuperDan to share, his numbers still blow everyone else way as if he ran a 90 second mile.

Just trying to help us stay tethered to facts.[/QUOTE]

C'mon Kyaa. Post #1 was 90% speculation. I'm interested to hear Jewcers input.

[QUOTE=kyaa;14741161]I don't thnk we need to add speculation and clog the thread with estimates of what percentages people think.

Overall, through Terapeak data the ratio of Black Labels/10s/9.5s sold in the past year is approximately 0.8%/15%/84%. Will post screenshots at some point.

Even one on Joes preferred "easy to grade" sets like 2018 Topps Chrome Update, the ratio in the pop report is 3%/18%/73%. And that's with Joe's ridiculous results included. So those are two data points to consider for an expected baseline.

And from what we know from even the partial information about his submission results that Joe wanted SuperDan to share, his numbers still blow everyone else way as if he ran a 90 second mile.

Just trying to help us stay tethered to facts.[/QUOTE]

Interesting the .2% of cards are graded under a bgs 9.5. That’s a way more intriguing statistic to me.

[QUOTE=jewcer2k5;14741060]Let me ask a question.

Say someone opens up a few cases of a basic product like topps and they generally try to pick out cards that will achieve a 9.5 or better [B]but don’t specifically look for only the best cards.
[/B]
What would you expect the breakdown of BL’s —> Dimes —> Gems —> 9 or worse to be? Again we are talking about ONLY looking for 9.5 or better and pack pulled —> penny sleeve —> top loader —> bgs.[/QUOTE]

I think what a lot of people missed was the fact that you would only sub cards you know can gem. How many of the cards in the pop reports get subbed just because it's a specific player or in hopes a certain flaw won't bring it down to a 9? I've subbed many cards that I knew had flaws but I was willing to risk it because of the upside.

Out of 1,000 cards I would expect:
9 - 1%
9.5 - 78%
10 - 15%
BL - 6%

[QUOTE=kyaa;14741161][B]I don't thnk we need to add speculation[/B] and clog the thread with estimates of what percentages people think.

Overall, through Terapeak data the ratio of Black Labels/10s/9.5s sold in the past year is approximately 0.8%/15%/84%. Will post screenshots at some point.

Even one on Joes preferred "easy to grade" sets like 2018 Topps Chrome Update, the ratio in the pop report is 3%/18%/73%. And that's with Joe's ridiculous results included. So those are two data points to consider for an expected baseline.

And from what we know from even the partial information about his submission results that Joe wanted SuperDan to share, his numbers still blow everyone else way as if he ran a 90 second mile.

Just trying to help us stay tethered to facts.[/QUOTE]

Isn't this whole thread speculation at this point?

[QUOTE=drstrader5;14741215]I think what a lot of people missed was the fact that you would only sub cards you know can gem. How many of the cards in the pop reports get subbed just because it's a specific player or in hopes a certain flaw won't bring it down to a 9? I've subbed many cards that I knew had flaws but I was willing to risk it because of the upside.

Out of 1,000 cards I would expect:
9 - 1%
9.5 - 78%
10 - 15%
BL - 6%[/QUOTE]

I’d guess many higher end cards get submitted for protection or PC’s but for lower end cards I’d think people focus more on gem or better for the simple fact you can always find another one raw for a few bucks at most.

[QUOTE=robert0629;14740890]If Joe gets 14% Black Labels and is submitting 100 cards, how many cards does the average person need to submit if they are to beat Joe, assuming a 5% average for Black Labels? Let's also assume that these are easy to grade cards and all from the same set.

The answer is obviously 300. But this is what I can't get past. Let's say me and Joe are at a card show, and I'm determined to beat Joe on Black Labels. I'll just grab 300 cards and send them all in regardless of what it will cost me. Joe has to sift through 300 cards though to get it down to the 100 he wishes to submit.

If we're doing this over and over again, there are going to be some batches that favor Joe just based on luck. But overall he can't possibly beat me on Black Labels if I send in let's say all 3,000 cards I buy, and he sends in just 1,000. In other words it takes time, and a lot of patience to be able to do what he claims to be doing.

I don't know. I guess I'm just having a difficult time imagining that he's sits at card shows for hours going over cards for grading.[/QUOTE]

Retweet for someone who gets it.

Having a good eye can bump your submission result percentages a bit. Lower percentage of 9s, for example.

But it can't make more "perfect" cards magically appear in your hands. Having a good eye cannot increase your QUANTITY of Black Labels. Ending up with ungraded cards that perfect is largely attributable to luck.

[QUOTE=kyaa;14741253]Retweet for someone who gets it.



Having a good eye can bump your submission result percentages a bit. Lower percentage of 9s, for example.



But it can't make more "perfect" cards magically appear in your hands. Having a good eye cannot increase your QUANTITY of Black Labels. Ending up with ungraded cards that perfect is largely attributable to luck.[/QUOTE]



Is it me or does this not make sense? I’m a little slow I know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[QUOTE=drstrader5;14741287]Is it me or does this not make sense? I’m a little slow I know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]

I think he is saying it doesn't matter how good your eye is. If there isn't a perfect card in the case you're not going to get a 10. You can look forever. But Joe keeps finding the perfect ones.

[QUOTE=jewcer2k5;14741193]Interesting the .2% of cards are graded under a bgs 9.5. That’s a way more intriguing statistic to me.[/QUOTE]

My bad...on Terapeak i only looked st BL, 10s, and 9.5s,. So I guess the actual percentages of those cards out of all BGS graded cards would be lower.

* When the situation is hopeless, there's nothing to worry about. *

[QUOTE=Onepocketj;14741302]I think he is saying it doesn't matter how good your eye is. If there isn't a perfect card in the case you're not going to get a 10. You can look forever. But Joe keeps finding the perfect ones.[/QUOTE]

Correct.

[QUOTE=kyaa;14741303]My bad...on Terapeak i only looked st BL, 10s, and 9.5s,. So I guess the actual percentages of those cards out of all BGS graded cards would be slightly lower.[/QUOTE]

That’s part of my point. Your %’s talk specifically on cards graded 9.5 or higher AND sold on eBay. It’s not a true representation if we are trying to stick to facts. When you do they it takes away from being impartial (like 312 and superdan) and makes it look as if it doesn’t matter what people say you have your mind made up. I think that’s a point that people “on the other side” are trying to make.