>>53228883You mentioned some of it, but it goes further than that. Sure, there is some consistency, but in its current form grading is just guesswork that we ascribe far too much value to.
>Grading fuzzinessUnless a major error occurred, you'll never really see a card that should have been a 4 grade as a 9 or 10 (inb4 some random 1-off example). But once you get to sequential grades, the fuzziness becomes really apparent. Of course there will always be overlap with 8s and 9s, and some 9s and 10s, but should there be? Should we be debating if something is a "clean 9" or a "weak 10?" But that is the least of the problems, 2bh. All the problems arise because we place so much value on each grade.
We care so much about having a 10 (some people do, at least), that they will pay >5x the price of a 9 for one. As such, the incentive to get 10s is huge for resellers. This then bleeds into the transparency with the grading companies themselves and the graders.
Whenever there is big money involved, you can be sure there are scams coming for it and that there's a bit of corruption. This goes beyond Pokemon too, and into sports cards where there's huge money.
I could elaborate for an entire essay on this. But I'm sure you can connect some dots here.
