1950 Royal Stars of Baseball dimensions?

[Archive]

Posted By: don fluckinger/scd

Hey, does anyone collect these and can anyone give me a definitive answer on this reader question?

Thanks for any help you can give.

And here's to everyone's safe, happy, and healthy New Year. Cheers!

--don

I have a suggestion for the next issue of the "Standard Catalog of
Baseball Cards". My suggestion concerns 1950 Royal Stars of Baseball cards
(on page 329 of the 2007 catalog). The card size listed in the Standard
Catalog is used by grading companies to determine the card's grading status.
I just got a card back from SGC that couldn't be graded because it was
"undersized". The Standard Catalog lists the size for these cards as 2.5 x
3.5. There's no way this is correct. The 2.5 dimension is too short (it
would leave no top and bottom border), and the 3.5 dimension is too long
(probably the size of the entire box). I suggest more suitable dimensions
should be 2 and five eighths by 3 and one quarter.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

The Oldcardboard website has the dimensions at:

Card Size (inches): 2-1/2 x 3-1/2

It seems as though the question from your reader is about the dimension within an eighth of an inch. It is very important to have good dimensions in the big book as that is what SGC (don't know about PSA) will go by when determining size requirements. Back about 15 years ago Lew Lipset mentioned, in The Old Judge, that a card that didn't meet size requirements should not be graded "mint" due to possible trimming, even if it wasn't. It makes good sense but at the same time we all know of the variations in size of older vintage cards. I have never collected this set but maybe someone on the board has one, or some, and can chime in? If what your reader says is true, and I have nothing to go by other than their statement, then the measurement should be changed. Again, hopefully someone on the board can help out.....thanks for coming to us and keeping vintage an important part of the Krause SCD. best regards

*edited due to error- Lew had said any card should not be graded "mint" if it didn't meet size requirements. TOJ issue 16 page 8

[Archive]

Posted By: David Vargha

I have a few of these at home and would have to check on them later. I believe that the cards came from gelatin boxes and are hand cut (á la Post Cereal). So it seems that SGC may be dinging you for submitting cards that were trimmed too closely.

DavidVargha@hotmail.com

[Archive]

Posted By: fkw

David is right,
The cards are all handcut from a small box of Jello (seen as an unopened box from time to time on eBay). It all depends on how good the person cut it off the box. Ive seen many where they have trimmed the red strip with card number from the top, or sometimes even the "plastic album" ad on bottom right corner has been cut off.

I would think they should all receive the "A" for authentic grade, since they are handcut.

[Archive]

Posted By: Lyman

Don, Leon, David and Frank, thanks for your posts.

Don, based on the several Royal Desserts cards in my collection, your reader is correct. We have therefore corrected the dimensions on the Royal Desserts page of the Old Cardboard website (see <a href="http://www.oldcardboard.com/f/dessert/f219-1/f219-1.asp?cardsetID=1046").

As noted, the cards are hand cut from boxes of Royal Dessert product and can therefore vary in size. When properly cut, however, they should measure very close to 2-5/8 x 3-1/4 inches. While cards can be found with dimensions slightly larger, those cut smaller could reasonably be considered "trimmed" because they are cut too close to the text and graphics printed on the card.

Thanks again for your input...and Happy New Year!
Lyman