PSA question

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>daryle</b><p>Somebody is smoking crack at PSA. I just received my cards back from PSA and they have said that one is trimmed BUT it measures perfectly and is the same size as the other '53 Topps card that I submitted. Anything I can do as in calling PSA and asking them to look at it again. It does have what appears to be a little "crimp" at the top like it was in one of those new packs that are crimped at the top and bottom but it is not trimmed. Any suggestions?

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>D.C. Markel</b><p>Without seeing the card and examining the card, it's impossible to tell you why they deemed it evidence of trimming. However, I will tell you that the size of the card alone isn't the reason for determining if a card is trimmed. It all boils down to carefully examining the cut of the card on all four sides.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>daryle</b><p>But if the card measures perfectly as stated in guides how can it be trimmed? I will try to get scanned later and post on here along with the other '53 Topps card that was graded. It is the same size.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jason L</b><p>an originally oversized card will be of propoer size after it is trimmed...<br />not saying yours is, obviously, but that could theoretically be possible.<br /><br />It is also highly plausible that PSA simply wants you to re-submit the card and pay again <img src="/images/wink.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br /><br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anthony</b><p>It could've been oversized and trimmed down, or it could've been soaked, stretched and trimmed.<br />Or they could've gotten it wrong. It's happened to me before on both PSA and SGC- cards were rejected for trimming that I knew were not, and then graded the next time thru.<br /> I have heard that PSA has been rejecting a lot more cards for trimming since the National. If you're really sure it's not trimmed resubmit it. But first check the edges for a variance in coloration, grain, bevel/slant, and microscopic grains of sand.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>daryle</b><p>Had that same feeling, but I will post later today.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Chris Nerat</b><p>Also, it could have been possibly cut from a sheet??<br />Are you using a normal ruler or a Schadler ruler? If you are using a normal ruler it is really hard to tell if a sliver is sliced off.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>jay wolt</b><p>"It is also highly plausible that PSA simply wants you to re-submit the card and pay again"<br /><br />I believe they will send a voucher for this card<br />if so, their intent isn't having you re-submit it<br />as it won't bring any $ to them.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Anthony</b><p>Jay- no vouchers for evid of trim, only for miscut.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Marc S.</b><p>you need to look at each edge under a loupe. I was a very advanced collector of the 1955 Bowman baseball set for many years...and that is one of the post-war sets that has the highest variation in card size, from the factory. Within a single pack, cards could be 1/8 to 1/4" oversize, or undersize. So from a card alterer's perspective, it is much easier to take an issue like that, trim down an oversized example, and have a card that "measures correctly", but is still trimmed.<br /><br />The T-206 set is another example of this. I have heard many say how the average size of a T-206 has gotten increasingly smaller over the years.<br /><br />You can also look at the opposite side of the argument. Just because a card is too small, it does not imply that it was trimmed. It only implies that it is small -- whether by trimming or because it was factory cut short is a different analysis altogether.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Neal</b><p>How tough is PSA VS SGC on cards with Paper loss to back but very very nice fronts.