Blowout Cards Forums - BGS Black Labels, Joe Clemons (eBay ID: wjc75056), and Illegitimate Grading

Blowout Cards Forums (https://www.blowoutforums.com/index.php)

- BASEBALL (https://www.blowoutforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=8)

- - BGS Black Labels, Joe Clemons (eBay ID: wjc75056), and Illegitimate Grading (https://www.blowoutforums.com/showthread.php?t=1297069)

[QUOTE=DaRitz;14737849]Post 2400 is rapidly approaching... Are we any closer to figuring out what shady thing is going on, and who is responsible?

Joe has been burned at the stake. Now we just need to find out if he did something nefarious, and if so, what.

Maybe the next 2400 posts will tell us. If not, hopefully we can at least satisfy the masses and find another person we can crucify while we search.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Maverik;14737861]This is such a great point! Perhaps he did something...but what? Maybe he knows somebody? Maybe he's hacked the mainframe? Maybe he's grading them himself? Speculation is there, but what did he do?[/QUOTE]

I don't believe we will ever get enough evidence in this thread to support any wrongdoing by any party. All evidences so far are circumstantial and statistical.

Personally, I do believe there is something unusual going on. However, I also believe the primary culprit is BGS, not Joe. BGS gave out the grades, not Joe.

[QUOTE=DaRitz;14737849]Post 2400 is rapidly approaching... Are we any closer to figuring out what shady thing is going on, and who is responsible?
[/QUOTE]

This is just off the top of my head...

- former beckett employee (now LEAF) that has admitted he still knows graders there - obviously very, very connected
- the fact his shady boss LEAF is going so hard to bat for him with no evidence whatsoever (is his boss in on some kind of grading scam?)
- extremely high % of BL's & BGS 10 grades
- released the BL information on his BGS account but refused to release the BGS 10 information (very, very telling)
- many BL's he has been shown to have received were not on his Beckett account information he released
- admitted he had a 3/3 Tiger Woods BL sub (the only ones iirc and they weren't on his BGS account info that was released)
- on on-site same-day gradings he went 17/22 on BL
- claimed to one member he never did raw card review and claimed to another his 17/22 was due to raw card review grades he brought in to get slabbed
- he is paying to grade extremely low end cards (how is this profitable unless there is some special "deal" in place?)
- the extreme statistical improbability that it is only he that is somehow acquiring all these raw cards that will grade Black Label
- his explanation that it is all because of his eagle eye and knowing what grades well (for gem mint cards sure - but pristine/BL's? - highly, highly subjective)

I'm sure others can add more to this.

[QUOTE=MIRRABB;14737536]What are you even talking about?

No one cares about the OP's motivation for creating this thread. People are focused on what is, at best, an extremely sketchy situation. There is no rigged ball game here. If he was innocent, he could have easily shut down this thread 90 pages ago. But he didn't, instead he typed a lot of meaningless paragraphs Eric Bitz style and arrogantly spouted nonsense about how he has better eyes for cards than 100% of people here. Then he allowed an unbiased third party to access his information, but it was clearly incomplete information that specifically omitted important data, which did nothing to make him seem innocent.

The only people who look like tools here are the people twisting themselves into pretzels trying to explain how it's totally legit that this former BGS employee is getting black labels at a FAR higher rate than literally anyone else in this hobby.[/QUOTE]

Show me in my post where I say it's "totally legit". It's easy to argue when youre arguing against the words you put in my mouth. I stand by my conclusion that the OP has failed to make a compelling case. He's failed to prove that this is *definitely not legit.* When your argument boils down to where there's smoke, there's fire, and it quacks like a duck, you have a mob scene, not anything that approaches integrity.

Remember when we questioned why all of the Black Labels were consecutively serial numbered and some on here said they group those cards in batches after they are graded.

Here is Beckett's words on how the process works.

"It is the verification department where some important things happen.

Once the bin is received in verification, the expert verifiers ensure each card is identified properly. When you filled out your submission form, were you not 100% sure what year a particular card was from? No problem! That is one of the jobs of our verification team.

[B]Once each card is properly identified, a unique sticker is produced for that card. That sticker contains the unique submission number, a unique serial number for that card, a barcode, the due date and a place for graders to assign grades.[/B]

This is where any personal identification information is removed from the order. This ensures the graders are receiving an anonymous bin of cards to grade. All those rumors of graders knowing whose cards they are grading are eliminated with this step. The bins are now returned to the vault to sit with hundreds of other bins that share the same due date. Next, it is on to the graders!

Each morning, the vault is opened and a secured transport cabinet is filled with the orders that are next in line for grading.

The grading staff, comprising of a staff of senior graders and junior graders, receive bins of orders to grade.

The grader will take a card from the bin, carefully remove it from its holder, and begin examination. The card is examined first to determine its authenticity and that is has not been altered. Once the card has been deemed to be authentic and unaltered, the condition is assessed. If a card is deemed to be altered, the card will either be sent back to the customer with a note stating what the alteration is, or if the customer has chosen to have altered cards encapsulated, the card will be encapsulated and the label will read “Authentic- Altered.”

"It is a detailed process that takes many dedicated and passionate people to get your cards graded and encapsulated safely and securely and back to you. [B]It is a process BGS has been doing everyday since 1999[/B]."

[URL="https://www.beckett.com/news/walking-bgs-process/"]https://www.beckett.com/news/walking-bgs-process/[/URL]

[QUOTE=LVDan;14737711]I have no skin in this fight Superdan but want to thank you and commend your efforts to try and make things better for the rest of us.
Plus- [B]Dans are just good people.[/B][/QUOTE]

:)!:)!:)!

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]This is just off the top of my head...

- former beckett employee (now LEAF) that has admitted he still knows graders there[/QUOTE]

explains a deep knowledge of what they are looking for

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]- obviously very, very connected[/QUOTE]

could potentially go to prove is expertise

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]- the fact his shady boss LEAF is going so hard to bat for him with no evidence whatsoever (is his boss in on some kind of grading scam?)[/QUOTE]

Multiple people psedo-vouched for the Leaf guy before he made posts. The guy seems to be sharing only what he knows

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]- extremely high % of BL's & BGS 10 grades[/QUOTE]

Again, however unlikely, could explain his expertise. It's already well established, some are better than other at this...however implausible, he COULD just be VERY good at this

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]- released the BL information on his BGS account but refused to release the BGS 10 information (very, very telling)[/QUOTE]

Not only did he give a reputable BO member access to his account, but there also seems to be an anomaly in who's account show what...but that is irrelevant to the fact that he doesnt OWE this information to anyone

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]- many BL's he has been shown to have received were not on his Beckett account information he released[/QUOTE]

ok? What does this mean? Point is, there are limitless reasons for this, i.e. group submissions

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]- admitted he had a 3/3 Tiger Woods BL sub (the only ones iirc and they weren't on his BGS account info that was released)[/QUOTE]

ok? what conclusion are we reasonably drawing here?

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]- on on-site same-day gradings he went 17/22 on BL[/QUOTE]

again, he could be very good at this

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]- claimed to one member he never did raw card review and claimed to another his 17/22 was due to raw card review grades he brought in to get slabbed[/QUOTE]

Able to disprove this claim?

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]- he is paying to grade extremely low end cards (how is this profitable unless there is some special "deal" in place?)[/QUOTE]

Need you look further than the Mookie Better ASG? His explanation that he grades lots of cards that many people don't is certainly reasonable. Able to get these in extremely large quantities for extremely cheap. Not the craziest idea anyone ever had

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]- the extreme statistical improbability that it is only he that is somehow acquiring all these raw cards that will grade Black Label[/QUOTE]

We don't know at what rate he submits cards? What if he submits 1 million cards a year. Also difficult to determine someone's expertise with this sort of subjective grading over the next guy or gal

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]- his explanation that it is all because of his eagle eye and knowing what grades well (for gem mint cards sure - but pristine/BL's? - highly, highly subjective)[/QUOTE]

so is this opinion

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]I'm sure others can add more to this.[/QUOTE]

I dont necessarily believe all of my responses, but I do believe they are reasonable when it comes to vilifying in this way

It’s a shame that we need 97 pages to defend the FACT that it’s an inside job. Just re-read the first page and fire the crooks. I’ve always preferred PSA to BGS until the PWCC scandal. Despite what happened here, I will only purchase BGS graded cards or ungraded moving forward. Ill never consider buying with the letters PSA ever again.

Something crazy is definitely going on with some of Joe’s submissions. I’ve seen more than a few cards that didn’t deserve the grade it got. But in saying that, I’ve submitted to bgs twice. I’ve gotten two completely polarizing results. I went 8/20 on getting 10’s and 1 was a black label in my first sub. 2nd sub I went 6/8 on 9.5’s but I can say in full confidence that the 2nd subs cards were in much better condition. All 9.5 received the bare minimum gem.

Bottom line there’s absolutely no guarantee on what we send in But in Joes case he does seem to have that.

Has BGS made any sort of statement on this? Need to get Darren Rovell to tweet about this.

[QUOTE=Kuch86;14737940]This is just off the top of my head...

- former beckett employee (now LEAF) that has admitted he still knows graders there - obviously very, very connected
- the fact his shady boss LEAF is going so hard to bat for him with no evidence whatsoever (is his boss in on some kind of grading scam?)
- extremely high % of BL's & BGS 10 grades
- released the BL information on his BGS account but refused to release the BGS 10 information (very, very telling)
- many BL's he has been shown to have received were not on his Beckett account information he released
- admitted he had a 3/3 Tiger Woods BL sub (the only ones iirc and they weren't on his BGS account info that was released)
- on on-site same-day gradings he went 17/22 on BL
- claimed to one member he never did raw card review and claimed to another his 17/22 was due to raw card review grades he brought in to get slabbed
[B]- he is paying to grade extremely low end cards (how is this profitable unless there is some special "deal" in place?)[/B]
- the extreme statistical improbability that it is only he that is somehow acquiring all these raw cards that will grade Black Label
- his explanation that it is all because of his eagle eye and knowing what grades well (for gem mint cards sure - but pristine/BL's? - highly, highly subjective)

I'm sure others can add more to this.[/QUOTE]

I'm not condemning anyone or defending anyone - just pulling this out of context for comment - I have a sub in a bulk PSA that is 90% commons and no-names at that. For some I bought lots of 50 commons of the same no name looking for 10s. My point is people grade what they grade. I'm not sure in the grand scheme that this point is damning.

The smoking gun is the fact that he is paying grading fees on $3 cards, let that sink in.

[QUOTE=fenwaykid;14738032]Has BGS made any sort of statement on this? Need to get Darren Rovell to tweet about this.[/QUOTE]

Whether you think Rovell is a real journalist or not, a real journalist would need more meat on the bone to put anything out about this situation.

[QUOTE=Maverik;14737651]Alright, I read the thread....most of it....there simply isn't enough evidence. No one would reasonably take on this case. When you start messing with people's livelihood, you better be 100% squared away (i.e. proof that a specific grader graded all the black labels.

Is it possible something fishy is going on? Yep, possible. But there is nothing here to prove that. Guilt was assumed by post #3 in this thread. That's too bad.

Good luck, Joe.[/QUOTE]

In 12 minutes, you read "most of the thread?" OK. Glad you could put on your cape and come to Joe's rescue after taking 12 minutes to read 83 pages worth of posts.

[QUOTE=dfresh559;14738044]The smoking gun is the fact that he is paying grading fees on $3 cards, let that sink in.[/QUOTE]

Not just that. They aren't for a pc - they are for resale and would need a 10 to be profitable. A 9.5 would lose money.

[QUOTE=dfresh559;14738044]The smoking gun is the fact that he is paying grading fees on $3 cards, let that sink in.[/QUOTE]

[I]I[/I] do that, though. I have the money and interest to do it, so I do it. If there is an issue, I don't think this is it.

And I pay grading fees on 25 cent cards.

[QUOTE=49erRCCollector;14738035]I'm not condemning anyone or defending anyone - just pulling this out of context for comment - I have a sub in a bulk PSA that is 90% commons and no-names at that. For some I bought lots of 50 commons of the same no name looking for 10s. My point is people grade what they grade. I'm not sure in the grand scheme that this point is damning.[/QUOTE]

11014560 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update Juan Soto RC
11014562 Baseball 2017 Bowman Chrome Draft Royce Lewis
11014563 Baseball 2018 Topps Walmart Holiday Snowflake Ronald Acuna Jr. RC
11014565 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update An International Affair Shohei Ohtani
11014567 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update Walker Buehler RC
11014568 Baseball 2013 Bowman Chrome Draft Manny Machado RC
11014570 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update Shohei Ohtani RD
11014571 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update Juan Soto RD
11014573 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update Mookie Betts
11014575 Baseball 2018 Topps Update An International Affair Shohei Ohtani
11014577 Baseball 2018 Topps Walmart Holiday Snowflake Shohei Ohtani RC
11014580 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update Mike Trout
11084358 Basketball 2018-19 Panini Prizm Prizms Silver Josh Okogie
11084370 Basketball 2018-19 Hoops Luka Doncic RC
11084378 Baseball 2018 Bowman's Best Refractors Ronald Acuna Jr.
11084380 Baseball 2018 Bowman's Best Refractors Mike Trout
11084382 Baseball 2018 Bowman's Best Mookie Betts

These are the black labels he received from same-day grading. He submitted 22 cards and received 17 black label 10s. Not sure what the other 5 cards graded.

There's a difference between paying $30-50/card for same-day grading and paying $5-8/card in a bulk order.

[QUOTE=49erRCCollector;14738072][I]I[/I] do that, though. I have the money and interest to do it, so I do it. If there is an issue, I don't think this is it.

And I pay grading fees on 25 cent cards.[/QUOTE]

I should have added *BGS grading for resale.

[QUOTE=sammyjankis;14738082]11014560 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update Juan Soto RC
11014562 Baseball 2017 Bowman Chrome Draft Royce Lewis
11014563 Baseball 2018 Topps Walmart Holiday Snowflake Ronald Acuna Jr. RC
11014565 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update An International Affair Shohei Ohtani
11014567 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update Walker Buehler RC
11014568 Baseball 2013 Bowman Chrome Draft Manny Machado RC
11014570 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update Shohei Ohtani RD
11014571 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update Juan Soto RD
11014573 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update Mookie Betts
11014575 Baseball 2018 Topps Update An International Affair Shohei Ohtani
11014577 Baseball 2018 Topps Walmart Holiday Snowflake Shohei Ohtani RC
11014580 Baseball 2018 Topps Chrome Update Mike Trout
11084358 Basketball 2018-19 Panini Prizm Prizms Silver Josh Okogie
11084370 Basketball 2018-19 Hoops Luka Doncic RC
11084378 Baseball 2018 Bowman's Best Refractors Ronald Acuna Jr.
11084380 Baseball 2018 Bowman's Best Refractors Mike Trout
11084382 Baseball 2018 Bowman's Best Mookie Betts

These are the black labels he received from same-day grading. He submitted 22 cards and received 17 black label 10s. Not sure what the other 5 cards graded.

There's a difference between paying $30-50/card for same-day grading and paying $5-8/card in a bulk order.[/QUOTE]

Understood. That's fair. My point is only that paying $8 or $10 to slab a 25 cent common is crazy to some, but that's what I do. People spend their money how they see fit.

The preponderance of Black Labels I think is where the intrigue lies.

[QUOTE=dfresh559;14738044]The smoking gun is the fact that he is paying grading fees on $3 cards, let that sink in.[/QUOTE]

And?

What if that $3 card sells for $30-$40 slabbed? That’s a FANTASTIC ROI

This is only page 33 for me, change your settings folks lol

Mike

This thread is turning into a referendum on the poor state of American math and critical thinking skills. [B][U]The fact is that we have a great deal of evidence that strongly suggests something nefarious has occurred within BGS and its relationship with Joe Clemons[/U][/B]:

• [B]We have proof that Joe receives a MINIMUM of 14% of PERFECT 10 BLACK LABELS in his submissions[/B]. It is possible that the real percentage is higher, as there is some debate as to the completion of the data set used to arrive at this number.

• [B]This 14% appears to be a statistical anomaly on par with someone winning the Powerball in back to back drawings[/B]. It seems that people may be getting hung up on 14% in the absolute, saying things like “well, if it were 30% it would be high” and “14% seems normal”. This is incorrect analysis. While we don’t have a complete dataset, we have significant anecdotal evidence to suggest that other “best in class” graders receive somewhere around 4% Black Labels and we have (to my knowledge) exactly zero cases of anybody who either personally or even knows of someone who has received even 6% Black Labels over a significant sample size. The impact of this absolute cannot be over-stated. See my post #2015 for an attempt to explain this in simple terms. Any stats PhD out there want to give it a shot to succeed where I have failed?

• [B]We have a case of Joe purposefully failing to provide information that could potentially help clear his name[/B], namely the %s of these same submissions that were given a 10 grade (but not Black Label). Occam’s Razor would tell us this is because he feels the information will not help him. We have seen from work by kyaa that anecdotally Joe receives a large % of 10 grades. It is likely that this information would present a similar statistical anomaly as to the above.

• [B]Additionally, we have several examples of where Joe has “beaten extreme odds”[/B], including:[INDENT]o Having the only 2018-19 Panini Prizm silver prizm Black Label (out of thousands of cards submitted)[/INDENT][INDENT]o Having the only 2018-19 Panini Prizm blue prizm Black Label (out of thousands of cards submitted)[/INDENT][INDENT]o Having something like 50% of the total number of 2018 Topps Chrome Update Black Labels in existence (out of many thousands of cards graded)[/INDENT][INDENT]o Having two of the three 2001 Upper Deck Gallery Tiger Woods Black Labels in existence (out of thousands of cards graded)[/INDENT][INDENT]o Having received three Black Labels in a single submission of three cards. Even if these cards were RCRd, that seems like the most unlikeliest of results for any submitter regardless of how well-trained and previously successful[/INDENT]
• [B]We have additional circumstantial evidence to support the conditions necessary for Joe and someone(s) in BGS to knowingly give/receive preferential grades[/B], including:[INDENT]o Joe used to be an employee at BGS and remains friends with several active BGS graders[/INDENT][INDENT]o Joe uses submission techniques that would maximize the chances of removing any “blinds” from the process, including dropping off submissions in person (which allows graders to know they are getting cards from him) and using same day submissions (which allow him to know which grader(s) is/are likely to grade his cards)[/INDENT][INDENT]o Joe’s submissions have, at times, appeared to not follow standard BGS operating procedures, such as grouping of Black Labels together, etc.[/INDENT]
[B]Taken together, this evidence provides a strong case that Joe has someone(s) at BGS who provide him with “special treatment” in the form of grading results that far and away exceed what he or any other highly successful, high-volume grader should receive.[/B]

Now, does this data meet the US criminal justice system requirement for conviction of “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt”? No, probably not, at least in my opinion. But it could meet the US civil justice system for “a preponderance of evidence”, especially when Joe has failed to provide other evidence that should tip the scales in his favor were he not involved in nefarious conduct. And in reality this is neither a criminal or a civil court case, but an assessment of a market that relies (as most markets do) on the trust of parties in the good intentions of one of the market participants (in this case BGS). [U][B]To me, the data presented above is enough to cause me to lose faith in BGS as a neutral arbiter of card condition and, for me, to change my buying habits accordingly. [/B] [/U]

[B]Now, there are certainly things that could change my opinion[/B]. BGS could release its entire database and we could see that there are in fact “more Joes” out there who receive a seemingly improbably % of Black Label and/or 10 grades. We could get Joe’s full dataset that shows he’s really submitted millions of cards and actually receives Black Labels closer to 2-4% and has been playing up his “eagle eye” reputation for personal status. Sure, that’s dumb and unlikely, but it’s an example of something that could change opinions. But in the absence of more data both math and critical thinking tell us that something nefarious is likely to have occurred between Joe Clemons and BGS, and we should all proceed accordingly. Thanks to kyaa, Superdan49 and others for helping us get to the point where we can all make informed opinions about the parties involved.

EDIT: I don't know Joe or, to my knowledge, anyone who has posted in this thread. I actually don't even think this issue is about Joe. To me, it's about the status of BGS as a neutral arbiter of card condition (and, as follows, card value). And that status is not as good as it was before this thread...