BVG holder for Aaron RC

[Marchillo]

I’m on a mission to help my buddies wife pick up a card for him. One card I’m looking at is the 54 Aaron. I feel I’ve seen people suggest staying away from BVG on vintage. Should I worry about anything in particular? I worry more about this stuff when I’m spending someone else’s money.

Thanks-Steve

[dio]

removing comment

[Peter_Spaeth]

If she buys BVG it may lead to a divorce.:eek:

[swarmee]

For this card, BVG should be fine. Basically most people worried about BGS are those concerned about the card's authenticity for oddballs (like the Fro-Joy Babe Ruths or 1985 Star Basketball) or that they're not grading sheet cut/trimmed/undersized cards with number grades (like 1979 OPC Gretzky or 1993 SP Jeter).
For a 1954 Topps Hank Aaron, BVG should be able to check all the boxes (authentic/untrimmed); look for a nicely presenting one with a regular rough cut for this set, and you'll be fine.

I'm normally a PSA homer, but I'm not too worried about Beckett grading a fake Aaron RC or not detecting a trim on it.

[Fuddjcal]

For this card, BVG should be fine. Basically most people worried about BGS are those concerned about the card's authenticity for oddballs (like the Fro-Joy Babe Ruths or 1985 Star Basketball) or that they're not grading sheet cut/trimmed/undersized cards with number grades (like 1979 OPC Gretzky or 1993 SP Jeter).
For a 1954 Topps Hank Aaron, BVG should be able to check all the boxes (authentic/untrimmed); look for a nicely presenting one with a regular rough cut for this set, and you'll be fine.

I'm normally a PSA homer, but I'm not too worried about Beckett grading a fake Aaron RC or not detecting a trim on it.

Why would you suggest looking for a rough cut, for authenticity purposes? I avoid rough cuts at all costs for the most part.

[swarmee]

Mostly to confirm lack of trimming. 1954 has a bunch of rough cut cards, and because some people ignore them, you can usually save money that way and get a better looking card for the other important attributes.
https://img.comc.com/i/Baseball/1954/Topps---Base/89/Howie-Pollet.jpg?id=309df5c6-f77a-4845-809a-22379a0fcb40&size=zoom&side=back
Although it's not drastic (like an OPC rough cut), the back of this card shows that it hasn't been trimmed. A sharp edge on the back in the green section on a high valued card would worry me.

[glynparson]

I’d personally stick with psa or sgc.

[samosa4u]

Stick with PSA.

[Fuddjcal]

Mostly to confirm lack of trimming. 1954 has a bunch of rough cut cards, and because some people ignore them, you can usually save money that way and get a better looking card for the other important attributes.
https://img.comc.com/i/Baseball/1954/Topps---Base/89/Howie-Pollet.jpg?id=309df5c6-f77a-4845-809a-22379a0fcb40&size=zoom&side=back
Although it's not drastic (like an OPC rough cut), the back of this card shows that it hasn't been trimmed. A sharp edge on the back in the green section on a high valued card would worry me.

I follow ya, thanks for the education, much appreciated.