I'm pretty shocked at this. I sent one (admittedly small sample) card to test out TAG:Dragonite JP 20th Anniversary FA that I cracked from a CGC 8.5/PSA 9. It ended up a TAG 8.5 with the specific issue noted and dinged accordingly. Your cards were more egregious in nature and received "better" grades
Great video! I love the look of the TAG slabs and might still use for PC but they clearly have a ways to go to compete for the big boys. I also think it’s quite likely they get bought out by one of the big companies at some point and their tech is incorporated.
This was a nice in depth comparison video thanks bud. I’m leaning more into sending to tag myself after many experiences I’ve had with a few of the others and see how consistent they are. I know some don’t trust ai but it’s grown on me. Seems like each company has more emphasis on certain things that knock cards down. Especially in vintage….
Thanks for putting this info out. It's a shame that this company is receiving so much hype from "influencers." This reminds me of all of the other basement grading companies that emerged during the pandemic.
I don't know exactly how PSA and BGS grades their card, but having actual information on how your card was graded, I think TAG beats both of them. Not to mention it eliminates the Subjective factor (some people like a card more than the other or some people grade harsher than others etc). It was a huge disappointment though to see that TAG didn't notice any of the surface issues that you mentioned like the Dragonite one. Hopefully when TAG improves that, I have no doubts that TAG's grading will be superior to PSA and BGS (and other grading).
TAG has talked about "AI Grading" but AI is a buzz word, and even if it's good, AI can be used in many different ways. I honestly don't know much at all about how or if TAG does use AI, but 2 things are interesting to me: - The images appear to capture the surface texture, but not pigment markings like stains and fading. This is a big weakness of the TAG grade. - The Grades appear to be fairly generous. Does this mean the AI or mere algorithm uses very wide grade parameters? Are the minus marks weighted in a way that minimizes dings, but counts other things more? IDK It's an interesting informative video, and thank you for posting!
Such a shame bc those slabs look like some of the best ive ever seen. If a card of mine got a 9 or a 10 when it clearly didnt deserve it bc of sizable deffect like a ding/dent like that, it would bug me. Idk thats just me.
Think they were trying to push a lot of volume a couple months ago... I was going to get a good deal in a bunch of cards. They probably trying to stick to their turn around times so quality could lack.
They apparently prefer to use the term "machine learning" which is fine. Here are the results of a simple Google search on the association of machine learning to AI. "Yes, machine learning (ML) is a subset of artificial intelligence (AI). AI is a broad term that refers to techniques and strategies that make machines more human-like, such as learning and problem-solving. ML is a branch of AI that uses algorithms and statistical models to help computers learn from data without direct instruction."
So (and I'll wtch the rest of the video) shortly. We should send with TAG to get easier grades because they're worse at grading 🤔 (I will obviously watch the rest and edit)
Well technically if you have good centering that's a good play, since their centering standards for a 10 are harder, but yeah with all these errors in the grading it's a play
Does the AI make a 360 image to do the grading? A bunch of damage is never going to be picked up on flat scans. It takes quite a bit of the right angle and lighting to find imperfections.
@JavaAkuma unfortunately that's something that could have happened and most people wouldn't know about. I think that's why tag is always gonna be a better option than psa and cgc
@@TrueAmericanTrucker TAG doesn't give you the comprehensive scans prior to them grading them. As far as I am aware, PSA is the only of big companies to provide "pre-scans" so in either scenario, if I didn't have prior knowledge of the damage prior to sending to either company, I wouldn't know if the grading company damaged the cards. Whether it was TAG or CGC. But im glad your enjoying TAG so far. They have a very nice slab and label imo.
@JavaAkuma I enjoyed ur video very much it was exactly what I was looking for I haven't graded with tag yet. But I just think psa is overrated and tag is great but I've been big into ags until now. I think tag has won the war lol. But I truly appreciate the info and the back and forth communicating much appreciated my friend
Some pen hole type dents aren’t really damage issues and more like issues with the cardstock quality. It’s not very obvious from your video which category the squirtle would fall in, but if it’s more of a card stock defect they shouldn’t ding the grade meaning the grade issue would be more with psa than tag.
It's an interesting question, whether common issues that occur during the manufacture or distribution process should be counted against the grade of a card. Cards like Masaki's for instance basically all have the same issue because of how they were distributed. Should that count against the overall grade for Masaki's? The little white dots on corners that are caused by a poor cut job in the factory. Should those count against the card? Personally, I think I have come to think that damage is damage whether the person caused it or the factory caused it. Either way, that damage is impacting the overall eye appeal or condition of the card in a similar way. It should probably count against the overall grade regardless.
its impossible to assess condition of a card based on 2 flat scans, they need to look at the card from multiple angles in order for the AI to be able to detect all the flaws
This is a disappointment imo. Their slabs are so clean and the online benifits are awsome. Unfortunately it looks like they have too many issues . Especially that they don’t know what a masterball is.
"AI" is such an empty buzzword - willing to bet these "AI" companies like this and AGS are as simple as cards get scanned, then an underpaid worker in another country looks at the scan and marks a thing or two a thousand times a day
Monetary value and gains aside, TAG is by far a better product. The slab looks better, AND you get an explanation to why a card got its grade. Yes the video shows some flaws missed in the scans, but come on, lets not pretend human grading is some how more consistent or better. Ultimately, people should be buying the card not the grade.
Great journalism! Tag has a long way to go if they wanna be a competitor. I for one am sick of AI everything already and can't stand just how blatantly wrong it can be so often.
TAG fan here. Great video. It was more objective than most others I've seen. I'll try to explain some of the grades where I can, but I'd encourage you to reach out to TAG to see if they can provide an explanation on some of the grades. Note that the DINGS section lists only defects that are deemed significant. But I can't speak to exactly what constitutes significant. The TAG S reports are much morr detailed and will lists defects even if they arent significant. I'll add explanations as replies below. Edit: I've probably wrote too much, but hopefully the below helps you get an idea of why the grades are what they are. Hopefully you can reach out to TAG for more answers. But I think with TAG are least I can see how they got to the grade and it's usually consistent with their standards. With the other graders you can't always see if they're consistent with their standards, because you don't know which defects they caught or didn't catch. Here are some other quick notes for the other cards: Dragonite - they didn't mention stains or print imperfections specially for a gem mint in their grading rubric, but might be considered insignificant. Defect location is also considered. Squirtle - the pits in the back fall within the threshold of a Gem Mint 10 similar to the Charizard I explained below.
For the 25th anniversary Charizard, the dent in the back is within the threshold of a 10. This is the description for surface for a Gem Mint 10 for TAG on their grading rubric on their site SURFACE An extremely attractive surface. A slight print imperfection may appear under hi-res imagery. A very minor defect such as a very small pit, light scratch that does not penetrate the gloss or a light print or refractor line may be present. Scoring is impacted by region. Back may have multiple print lines as well as a larger, deeper pit. So while you may not agree with the criteria, from what I've seen TAG is pretty consistent with the standards that they've laid out and the reports allow you to compare to their standards. The Zapdos dent was on the front so that may indeed be a TAG mistake but we shall see what happens with that.
For the Flareon, here is the criteria for the edges for 8.5 from their grading rubric. I don't have the card in hand but it seems the edge wear/chipping is consistent with their description for 8.5 EDGES Visible edge surface wear or light chipping on multiple edges on the front. Fray artifacts may become more visible. Again they are usually good with staying consistent with the standards they have set.
For the Umbreon (9), here are the criteria for edges and surface for a TAG 9 from the grading rubric SURFACE A larger and deeper pit may be present. May have 2 or 3 small pits and/or a longer scratch not penetrating the gloss. May have a light but present print line or refractor line that runs the length of the card, vertically or horizontally. Has a minor print imperfection or multiple spots. A small scratch that penetrates the gloss on the back is visible. Multiple, more visible print lines present. EDGES Visible but minor edge surface wear on one or two edges. More significant fill or fray artifacts are present under high resolution imagery. So the edge wear you noticed and the scratches on the back fall within the thresholds for a 9. The other thing to note is on the TAG X report it only shows the Fill and Fray scores but not the Edge Surface Wear and Corner Surface Wear scores which do show in the TAG S reports. Those would tell you how significant the wear defects are.
Thanks for sharing. I appreciate this context. The Zapdos ended up getting an 8, which I very much am more in line with that standard. Personally, I think if what you have outlined is true and cards with dents and dings can get 10s with TAG, I just will steer clear for now. I guess I just don't agree with their grading standards. Sucks, because their slabs are really nice looking, but if I can't trust I'm getting what I think is a Gem Mint card in a 10 slab, then yeah, I guess I'll steer clear for now.
@@JavaAkuma for sure that's fair. But I should note that the TAG founders had tried to match industry standards within reason with their rubric, by reviewing other standards and real world examples. The bigger defects that are allowed for gem mint are typically only for the back. For PSA, if you read their standards they don't mention scratch or dents until PSA 6 and we've seen scratches or dents allowed in higher grades. CGC is a little more explicit but they also don't distinguish between back and from defects which I think is important. Anyway, everyone is free to choose who to go with but I like TAG because their report allows you to be more confident it met the standards it laid out. I don't know if it's more lenient than PSA, but mainly because PSA standards are vague and it's hard to know how close they got to the vague standards. Sorry for sounding like a shill, but just my thoughts. Again good video.
lmao i dont own any tag slabs and i can tell you they look way better than thease psa slabs i own as a collector thease slabs look like they have premium plastic just my opinion but no need to hate
I mean, understand why you did it, but the value is always gonna be with the big 3. No matter what new grading company comes in, I had to learn the hard way with AGS. It’s hard to sell when they aren’t in psa, cgc, or BGS holders. Great video but ill stick with psa and cgc
It would surprise me if you came away with this take having watched the actual video. I am in no way trying to promote people to use TAG as a grading company. The video is meant to illustrate the differences in their scale compared to the other grading companies and some potential issues that TAG should think about addressing.
@@JavaAkuma I never once said that you were trying to promote them. I was simply just stating that’s the big three will always be more valuable than other grading companies
Big names like Gem Mint Pokemon have been shilling this company. Its actually embarrassing and so transparently disingenuous. This demonstrates that their 10s are valueless and that the technology is not there.
What a great video! You went card by card, one at a time and explained everything perfectly. Subscribed!
can't wait for the follow-up video where TAG demands you to send the cards back
I'm pretty shocked at this. I sent one (admittedly small sample) card to test out TAG:Dragonite JP 20th Anniversary FA that I cracked from a CGC 8.5/PSA 9. It ended up a TAG 8.5 with the specific issue noted and dinged accordingly. Your cards were more egregious in nature and received "better" grades
I prefer TAG over PSA all day.
Great video! I love the look of the TAG slabs and might still use for PC but they clearly have a ways to go to compete for the big boys. I also think it’s quite likely they get bought out by one of the big companies at some point and their tech is incorporated.
This was a nice in depth comparison video thanks bud. I’m leaning more into sending to tag myself after many experiences I’ve had with a few of the others and see how consistent they are. I know some don’t trust ai but it’s grown on me. Seems like each company has more emphasis on certain things that knock cards down. Especially in vintage….
Thanks for putting this info out. It's a shame that this company is receiving so much hype from "influencers." This reminds me of all of the other basement grading companies that emerged during the pandemic.
"Professional grading where the standards are made up and the grades don't matter". Now send em back to the original companies and then back again.
I don't know exactly how PSA and BGS grades their card, but having actual information on how your card was graded, I think TAG beats both of them. Not to mention it eliminates the Subjective factor (some people like a card more than the other or some people grade harsher than others etc).
It was a huge disappointment though to see that TAG didn't notice any of the surface issues that you mentioned like the Dragonite one. Hopefully when TAG improves that, I have no doubts that TAG's grading will be superior to PSA and BGS (and other grading).
its a shame the grading system is so flawed, because the slabs and "labels" look absolutely amazing
I agree. The labels and slabs are pretty sleek.
@@JavaAkuma just super clear, complete focus on the card itself. CGC label is too outlandish.
I might use them for cards just for the PC because they look so good
@@FatherandSonHaveFun That's what I'm doing
and you think PSA has a better grading system? come onnn..
Did you get the full card service with your purchase where they clean your card? Or did I miss that in your video?
No, I did not opt for the option with "Card Care".
TAG has talked about "AI Grading" but AI is a buzz word, and even if it's good, AI can be used in many different ways. I honestly don't know much at all about how or if TAG does use AI, but 2 things are interesting to me:
- The images appear to capture the surface texture, but not pigment markings like stains and fading. This is a big weakness of the TAG grade.
- The Grades appear to be fairly generous. Does this mean the AI or mere algorithm uses very wide grade parameters? Are the minus marks weighted in a way that minimizes dings, but counts other things more?
IDK It's an interesting informative video, and thank you for posting!
Bro TAGs gonna put you on their hit list lmao
KAM! ❤️
clean psa 6s to TAG 10s is a play go go go
The whole system they have with the scans etc is so cool, but my word... the AI grading just doesnt work if its gunna miss most of the issues
Definetly never buying tag slabs. Thanks for the video.
do you think tag slabs will hold any value though?
Such a shame bc those slabs look like some of the best ive ever seen. If a card of mine got a 9 or a 10 when it clearly didnt deserve it bc of sizable deffect like a ding/dent like that, it would bug me. Idk thats just me.
Think they were trying to push a lot of volume a couple months ago... I was going to get a good deal in a bunch of cards. They probably trying to stick to their turn around times so quality could lack.
Enjoy your free grading with them after they see your video and ask you to send the Charizard back in. ♡
Tag grading is not AI. They also stated they never claimed to be AI
They apparently prefer to use the term "machine learning" which is fine. Here are the results of a simple Google search on the association of machine learning to AI.
"Yes, machine learning (ML) is a subset of artificial intelligence (AI). AI is a broad term that refers to techniques and strategies that make machines more human-like, such as learning and problem-solving. ML is a branch of AI that uses algorithms and statistical models to help computers learn from data without direct instruction."
So (and I'll wtch the rest of the video) shortly. We should send with TAG to get easier grades because they're worse at grading 🤔
(I will obviously watch the rest and edit)
That's definitely not what I am saying.
Well technically if you have good centering that's a good play, since their centering standards for a 10 are harder, but yeah with all these errors in the grading it's a play
Does the AI make a 360 image to do the grading? A bunch of damage is never going to be picked up on flat scans. It takes quite a bit of the right angle and lighting to find imperfections.
Was it easy to get a space in a store or was it a challenge
Do u think u sent the charizard to cgc like that or did that happen in handling at cgc or during shipping
I assume I missed that dent when sending in cards. Its been a while but I don't have any reason to think CGC damaged the card.
@JavaAkuma unfortunately that's something that could have happened and most people wouldn't know about. I think that's why tag is always gonna be a better option than psa and cgc
@@TrueAmericanTrucker TAG doesn't give you the comprehensive scans prior to them grading them. As far as I am aware, PSA is the only of big companies to provide "pre-scans" so in either scenario, if I didn't have prior knowledge of the damage prior to sending to either company, I wouldn't know if the grading company damaged the cards. Whether it was TAG or CGC. But im glad your enjoying TAG so far. They have a very nice slab and label imo.
@JavaAkuma I enjoyed ur video very much it was exactly what I was looking for I haven't graded with tag yet. But I just think psa is overrated and tag is great but I've been big into ags until now. I think tag has won the war lol. But I truly appreciate the info and the back and forth communicating much appreciated my friend
Flareon regular/masterball TAG misprint? 400% increase in value
Some pen hole type dents aren’t really damage issues and more like issues with the cardstock quality. It’s not very obvious from your video which category the squirtle would fall in, but if it’s more of a card stock defect they shouldn’t ding the grade meaning the grade issue would be more with psa than tag.
Also this might be more of a thing with English cards than Japanese
It's an interesting question, whether common issues that occur during the manufacture or distribution process should be counted against the grade of a card. Cards like Masaki's for instance basically all have the same issue because of how they were distributed. Should that count against the overall grade for Masaki's? The little white dots on corners that are caused by a poor cut job in the factory. Should those count against the card? Personally, I think I have come to think that damage is damage whether the person caused it or the factory caused it. Either way, that damage is impacting the overall eye appeal or condition of the card in a similar way. It should probably count against the overall grade regardless.
As long as it's not intentional, then whether it comes from your own mistake or the factory, it's damage.
Yikes. This is such a bad look.
its impossible to assess condition of a card based on 2 flat scans, they need to look at the card from multiple angles in order for the AI to be able to detect all the flaws
Great. And my card with a very slight dent got a tag 8... Fml
wow I had high hopes for TAG but this shows their system has massive flaws.
how about doing this Mana Grading?
This is a disappointment imo. Their slabs are so clean and the online benifits are awsome. Unfortunately it looks like they have too many issues . Especially that they don’t know what a masterball is.
TAG's slogans: We "TAG" your slab for a quick bucks or You ask for Tens, you shall receive it!
Very nice deep dive. Never was interested in TAG but nice to see my suspicions confirmed.
LOL WHAT 7 with dents to a 10?
dudes must have been like, eh its japanese prob a 10
"AI" is such an empty buzzword - willing to bet these "AI" companies like this and AGS are as simple as cards get scanned, then an underpaid worker in another country looks at the scan and marks a thing or two a thousand times a day
Why?...
Monetary value and gains aside, TAG is by far a better product. The slab looks better, AND you get an explanation to why a card got its grade. Yes the video shows some flaws missed in the scans, but come on, lets not pretend human grading is some how more consistent or better. Ultimately, people should be buying the card not the grade.
Great journalism! Tag has a long way to go if they wanna be a competitor. I for one am sick of AI everything already and can't stand just how blatantly wrong it can be so often.
Glad I didn’t start buying TAG slabs. Yikes that’s not a good investment lol
TAG fan here. Great video. It was more objective than most others I've seen.
I'll try to explain some of the grades where I can, but I'd encourage you to reach out to TAG to see if they can provide an explanation on some of the grades.
Note that the DINGS section lists only defects that are deemed significant. But I can't speak to exactly what constitutes significant. The TAG S reports are much morr detailed and will lists defects even if they arent significant.
I'll add explanations as replies below.
Edit: I've probably wrote too much, but hopefully the below helps you get an idea of why the grades are what they are. Hopefully you can reach out to TAG for more answers. But I think with TAG are least I can see how they got to the grade and it's usually consistent with their standards. With the other graders you can't always see if they're consistent with their standards, because you don't know which defects they caught or didn't catch.
Here are some other quick notes for the other cards:
Dragonite - they didn't mention stains or print imperfections specially for a gem mint in their grading rubric, but might be considered insignificant. Defect location is also considered.
Squirtle - the pits in the back fall within the threshold of a Gem Mint 10 similar to the Charizard I explained below.
For the 25th anniversary Charizard, the dent in the back is within the threshold of a 10. This is the description for surface for a Gem Mint 10 for TAG on their grading rubric on their site
SURFACE
An extremely attractive surface. A slight print imperfection may appear under hi-res imagery. A very minor defect such as a very small pit, light scratch that does not penetrate the gloss or a light print or refractor line may be present. Scoring is impacted by region. Back may have multiple print lines as well as a larger, deeper pit.
So while you may not agree with the criteria, from what I've seen TAG is pretty consistent with the standards that they've laid out and the reports allow you to compare to their standards.
The Zapdos dent was on the front so that may indeed be a TAG mistake but we shall see what happens with that.
For the Flareon, here is the criteria for the edges for 8.5 from their grading rubric. I don't have the card in hand but it seems the edge wear/chipping is consistent with their description for 8.5
EDGES
Visible edge surface wear or light chipping on multiple edges on the front. Fray artifacts may become more visible.
Again they are usually good with staying consistent with the standards they have set.
For the Umbreon (9), here are the criteria for edges and surface for a TAG 9 from the grading rubric
SURFACE
A larger and deeper pit may be present. May have 2 or 3 small pits and/or a longer scratch not penetrating the gloss. May have a light but present print line or refractor line that runs the length of the card, vertically or horizontally. Has a minor print imperfection or multiple spots. A small scratch that penetrates the gloss on the back is visible. Multiple, more visible print lines present.
EDGES
Visible but minor edge surface wear on one or two edges. More significant fill or fray artifacts are present under high resolution imagery.
So the edge wear you noticed and the scratches on the back fall within the thresholds for a 9.
The other thing to note is on the TAG X report it only shows the Fill and Fray scores but not the Edge Surface Wear and Corner Surface Wear scores which do show in the TAG S reports. Those would tell you how significant the wear defects are.
Thanks for sharing. I appreciate this context. The Zapdos ended up getting an 8, which I very much am more in line with that standard. Personally, I think if what you have outlined is true and cards with dents and dings can get 10s with TAG, I just will steer clear for now. I guess I just don't agree with their grading standards. Sucks, because their slabs are really nice looking, but if I can't trust I'm getting what I think is a Gem Mint card in a 10 slab, then yeah, I guess I'll steer clear for now.
@@JavaAkuma for sure that's fair. But I should note that the TAG founders had tried to match industry standards within reason with their rubric, by reviewing other standards and real world examples. The bigger defects that are allowed for gem mint are typically only for the back. For PSA, if you read their standards they don't mention scratch or dents until PSA 6 and we've seen scratches or dents allowed in higher grades. CGC is a little more explicit but they also don't distinguish between back and from defects which I think is important.
Anyway, everyone is free to choose who to go with but I like TAG because their report allows you to be more confident it met the standards it laid out. I don't know if it's more lenient than PSA, but mainly because PSA standards are vague and it's hard to know how close they got to the vague standards.
Sorry for sounding like a shill, but just my thoughts. Again good video.
Can't help but laugh at all the TAG fanboys that have recently come around.
Fanboys? You think some creators are currently "sponsored" by them or something?
lmao i dont own any tag slabs and i can tell you they look way better than thease psa slabs i own as a collector thease slabs look like they have premium plastic just my opinion but no need to hate
Proof there is no standard in grading and the numbers are arbitrary. There should be a universal system for point deductions.
I mean, understand why you did it, but the value is always gonna be with the big 3. No matter what new grading company comes in, I had to learn the hard way with AGS. It’s hard to sell when they aren’t in psa, cgc, or BGS holders. Great video but ill stick with psa and cgc
It would surprise me if you came away with this take having watched the actual video. I am in no way trying to promote people to use TAG as a grading company. The video is meant to illustrate the differences in their scale compared to the other grading companies and some potential issues that TAG should think about addressing.
@@JavaAkuma I never once said that you were trying to promote them. I was simply just stating that’s the big three will always be more valuable than other grading companies
Big names like Gem Mint Pokemon have been shilling this company. Its actually embarrassing and so transparently disingenuous. This demonstrates that their 10s are valueless and that the technology is not there.
@@christopherhunter9671he didn’t send them in to be more valuable. It was purely an experiment.
Maybe you can get me Pokemon cards please i don't havet
Ok so TAG just isn't fit for purpose as a grading company. That's awful
I will never use TAG grading. It is irresponsible for them to be grading cards and taking submissions when their "AI" is so flawed.
not defending either companies but people grading is just as or in some cases even more flawed