Question on Grading Surface (Pokemon Cards) 2 2

[Pokemon Mattster]

Hello,

First things first I want to say that I am a huge fan of CGC and love your slabs, grading, website, set registry, and basically everything you do. I think you guys beat all other grading companies along every dimension. I am currently ranked 43 in the competitive set registry and hope to move way up the ranks soon, especially once I submit the 50+ 1st edition vintage holos that I have been collecting for some time now. All this to say, I plan for my entire collection to be CGC, and my goal is to complete the first 4 original sets in 1st edition someday 

Now for the question on grading surface...I have several CGC graded cards with subgrades and a few of them keep me up at night, specifically their grade for surface. I know you cannot speak to the specifics of your grading criteria, and I know that if a card has a wrinkle/crease the surface grade immediately drops to a 5 or so. That said, I have a 1st Edition Dark Charizard 4/82 that was graded a 5 on surface, even though on the back there are several dents, minor wrinkling near one edge, and a slight bend across the entire card (see pics 1 and 2). One of the dents is so major you can see it on the front and it caused decent surface wear. Meanwhile, I have a 1st Edition Venusaur 15/102 that is very solid, graded 8.5 for centering, 8 on corners, and 8 on edges, but got a 4.5 for surface...I was able to find a slight crease on the back of the card, which is why I could see a max grade of 5, but I for the life of me cannot figure out how it got a 4.5 while the Charizard got a 5 (see pics 3 and 4). I also have a Poliwrath that got 9 for centering, 8 on corners, and 7.5 on edges, but also a 4.5 for surface...I again looked very closely at the card and was able to find the slightest of wrinkling on the top back edge (see pics 5 and 6). All this to say, I cannot figure out how the Charizard could have scored a 5 on surface while these other cards got a 4.5. As a collector, I would much rather have a card surface in the condition of the Venusaur or Poliwrath, yet they scored lower than the Charizard. I would also bet that other collectors would feel similar. 

After comparing these 3 cards meticulously, there are only 2 conclusions I could reach. The first is one is simply that the Charizard was over-graded on surface. However, it is important to note that the Charizard was graded more recently, while the Venusaur and Poliwrath were graded awhile ago and have the older CGC slabs. I am not sure if/how grading standards have evolved/changed over time, but this would be my second guess (and the one I am hoping is correct). Given that the Charizard was graded recently and received a surface grade of 5, I ultimately am hoping to submit the Venusaur and Poliwrath for regrading to see if the surface might get upgraded to a 5. Both of these cards are in pretty amazing condition, and their surface is without a doubt better than the Charizard, yet their scores do not reflect this. This has literally kept me up at night as well as question grading consistency (which I know is a challenge for any company since humans are, well, humans). 

Do you suggest I resubmit the Venusaur and Poliwrath for regrading (assuming the minor wrinkles I mentioned are the only big issues) to see if they might grade a 5 for surface, or do you think the Charizard was simply over-graded? I really want to keep the Venusaur and Poliwrath in my collection but feel they weren't given a fair shake. Please let me know your thoughts!

[CGC Mike]

Hello

There is no way we can give opinions of grades or subgrades based on scans.  I will move this to the regular trading cards section, and possibly other collectors will give their opinions which might help you make a decision.

Mike

[Pokemon Mattster]

Fair enough. Appreciate it.

Matt