Success with resubmission of "trimmed" cards?

[Jetsfan]

As someone getting back into card collecting, the whole card grading thing is still relatively new to me. I had a T206 card come back as evidence of trimming from SGC. I do not believe the card is trimmed, and I know the graders are not perfect, and I suspect do not spend much time with each card they grade.

So my question is this...have any of you had success getting a card a number grade after an initial "evidence of trimming?" Have you ever had to submit more than once? Just curious, as this obviously can have significant impact upon a card's value.

Thanks...

Adam

[bnorth]

Send it to Beckett. They grade modern hand cut cards with # grades so I assume they only have a size requirement.

[ullmandds]

post a scan here...chances are we can tell u if it's trimmed or not.

[Jetsfan]

Here it is...sorry I couldn't figure out how to rotate it on my iPad.

[Eric72]

Hi Adam,

Here is your card, with the image rotated. I'm still pondering whether or not it has been trimmed...the top left corner looks a bit too "square" at first glance.

Best regards,

Eric

[ullmandds]

tough one...diamond cut looks even...top left corner def a little sharp...bottom rt edge looks wavy but I presume thats because it's a poor photo.

a scan would help.

[Jetsfan]

Thanks. I'll try to scan it tomorrow and see if that helps.

[Eric72]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

diamond cut looks even...a scan would help.

Peter,

I agree, on both points.

The diamond cut is "equal and opposite," as it should be. Overall, though, it seems a bit short, from top to bottom...ever so slightly. Perhaps it was trimmed along two sides?

And yes, a scan would be quite helpful.

Best regards,

Eric

[Luke]

I think the right edge is wavy. Could just be the photo. When something looks wavy, I just put another card on the table and use the black border line as a guide and see if the card in question has a completely straight edge.

[t206blogcom]

To me it looks like both sides are slightly trimmed and not a true diamond cut. I don't think any TPG would give it a numerical grade as a result. Just my opinion of course.

[BleedinBlue]

I have no comment on the card in question. But to the first question of cards being returned E of T and subsequently getting a number grade, I have had both SGC and PSA return cards as E of T and subsequently assign a number grade on a resubmission. I have also cracked out cards from both graders that were definately trimmed that subsequently would not cross or would not regrade.

The graders are not perfect.

[t206hound]

Originally Posted by t206blogcom

To me it looks like both sides are slightly trimmed and not a true diamond cut. I don't think any TPG would give it a numerical grade as a result. Just my opinion of course.

I can't recall seeing a diamond cut that occurred on the left/right sides; only top/bottom. I'd say trimmed as well.

[iwantitiwinit]

Trimmed in my opinion but you should have a much clearer view. Don't let your hopes cloud your view.

[yankees23]

I sent a 51' Bowman Mays to SGC and it came back as being trimmed. I then sent it to PSA and they gave it a 4. Card matched up size wise to others and even had 4 relatively rounded corners. Not sure what SGC saw.

[Jetsfan]

So here's a scan. to me the scan is worse that the photo, but maybe it's a little better for seeing the corners. Not sure why it looks so bad, but maybe I just have a crappy scanner.

For what it's worth, the only reason I didn't think it was trimmed was because the condition didn't seem to warrant someone trimming it. Also, it measures up on size compared with other T206 that have received number grades. Several other cards I bought from the same dealer about 25 years ago all received number grades. But you all know far more about this than I.

[ullmandds]

Looks trimmed in the scan

[vthobby]

To me it looks like maybe someone tried to "even" the miscut up on the left vertical border. They either thought that it looked good (it doesn't) or they realized that they had screwed the card up even more and they gave up hoping it might pass as a slightly miscut card.

If you are going to sell it, I would not bother sending it to TPG and just put a disclaimer in that it is sold "as is" due to possible trimming. My 2 cents.

peace, mike

[Jetsfan]

Thanks for the advice. I'm certainly disappointed. Oh, well. Sounds like I'm not the first person on the board to have been burned by a trimmed card. When I bought it I thought cards from that era could be cut in ways that weren't quite perfect. Wish you guys were around in 1990 when I bought it...kind of feel like a sucker.

[vthobby]

Adam,

Unfortunately we have to mistakes in this hobby to learn. (much like life in general)

If someone tells you they have never been burned or made a mistake then they are lying or conveniently forgetting the truth or they are the "Bubble Boy" and have never been outside that little bubble!

If you PM me, I will tell you my TPG trimmed horror story "lesson learned" and it was painful!

Take care.

Peace, Mike

[Luke]

And, it's still a great card even with the trim. I'd buy it.

[EvilKing00]

Looks trimmed to me

[ullmandds]

I had a beautiful e106...that looked high grade...sent it to sgc...came back trimmed. Sold it dirt cheap on the bst. The buyer in turn sent it to sgc...got a high grade on it and sold it for a small fortune...grading companies are not like macdonalds french fries!

[Jetsfan]

Pete...wow.

I'd love to know the record for the number of times a card has been sent to a TPG before it got a number grade.

I read a story on another site about someone who opened up a 1986 fleer Jordan rookie card (I believe on a webcast, so others saw the card fresh from the pack). The card was sent into PSA and was graded as trimmed. It eventually made it to the head of the company, and was regraded a 9.

Adam

[ullmandds]

Adam...if you are new to grading...it can be an extremely frustrating process...seemingly littered with favortism, errors...and downright ineptitude.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by ullmandds

I had a beautiful e106...that looked high grade...sent it to sgc...came back trimmed. Sold it dirt cheap on the bst. The buyer in turn sent it to sgc...got a high grade on it and sold it for a small fortune...grading companies are not like macdonalds french fries!

Pete I thought grading companies are exactly the same as McDonalds Fries. They usually leave a very bad taste in your mouth and when done with them you ask yourself why did I do that.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Pete I thought grading companies are exactly the same as McDonalds Fries. They usually leave a very bad taste in your mouth and when done with them you ask yourself why did I do that.

baaaaaaaaahhhhhhh...good point Ben...you are right!!!!!

[T206Collector]

Originally Posted by t206blogcom

To me it looks like both sides are slightly trimmed and not a true diamond cut. I don't think any TPG would give it a numerical grade as a result. Just my opinion of course.

+1 ...and my opinion as well.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Jetsfan

Thanks for the advice. I'm certainly disappointed. Oh, well. Sounds like I'm not the first person on the board to have been burned by a trimmed card. When I bought it I thought cards from that era could be cut in ways that weren't quite perfect. Wish you guys were around in 1990 when I bought it...kind of feel like a sucker.

The upper left corner looks a like it was trimmed slightly. Corner wear can be a tough call. Too uneven is sometimes a sign of trimming, too regular and even is also a bad sign. Both can also be just fine. I saw one batch that had been stored in a narrow box for a really long time. All the lower corners were rounded, all the tops were fairly nice. At a quick glance they looked trimmed.

The edge quality is the real key. The cutters would generally leave the front edge slightly rounded and a little ridge on the back side that typically shows some chipping. A sharp crisp edge front and back is usually a bad sign. But a newly sharpened blade will get pretty close to a sharp edge. A dull blade leaves a very ragged cut.

Cards from that era can have odd cuts.

A diamond cut on the sides of a T206 is unusual, but not impossible. Cards that are oversize and undersize are fairly common. Two of the ones I've sent in are nice, but didn't make the minimum size.

Than there's the cuts that are just odd. Like this one caused by some debris in or under the stack of sheets being cut, probably a bit of wood coming off the strip the blade goes into underneath the stack.

Is it trimmed? Nope. Will it grade? Probably not, and that's not a bad thing. Not understanding the edge quality makes some people see every slightly undersize card as a TPG mistake, if it graded, it would be viewed as a really bad mistake. They do make mistakes, as we all do. I have a few trimmed cards, and a couple I'm not sure about.



And one that wouldn't grade because the top and bottom cuts are just too rough.




Steve B

[Kzoo]

A couple years ago, I had about 30 beautiful '55 Topps cards that I submitted to PSA. One card in particular (Stan Hack) looked like it should get a '9', but instead came back 'evidence of trim', while the majority of the rest of them came back 8's and 8.5's. I knew it wasn't trimmed because I bought the cards from the original guy that opened the packs himself as a kid in 1955. So, I resubmitted a short time later and it graded a 9.

[freakhappy]

Originally Posted by Kzoo

A couple years ago, I had about 30 beautiful '55 Topps cards that I submitted to PSA. One card in particular (Stan Hack) looked like it should get a '9', but instead came back 'evidence of trim', while the majority of the rest of them came back 8's and 8.5's. I knew it wasn't trimmed because I bought the cards from the original guy that opened the packs himself as a kid in 1955. So, I resubmitted a short time later and it graded a 9.

It has to be real tough sometimes as graders, especially when it comes to high grade examples. IMO, it would seem that when they get a very sharp looking vintage card, that is when they really look close and dissect for any possible indication of alteration. It seems for every good TPG story, there is a horror story to go with it.

[the 'stache]

I agree with you, Mike.

In my very humble opinion, a grader's job is to critically assess the piece of cardboard before them, and absolutely nothing else should factor in their assessment. If you believe PSA's video of the on-site grading process, the grader never knows who submitted the card. Well, the name of the player on the card, also, should not matter. Mickey Mantle's baseball cards should receive the same treatment as Mickey Tettleton's cards. Do they? I would assume most, if not all of PSA's graders are hobbyists. If they're holding a 1952 Mickey Mantle, can they be objective? They may stick to their protocols throughout the entire process, but who knows how any personal feelings about the card might affect their judgement?

Going back to what you said, Mike:

IMO, it would seem that when they get a very sharp looking vintage card, that is when they really look close and dissect for any possible indication of alteration.

Absolutely, and that is what they should be doing. Getting a high grade on a card should be hard. A 9.5 card is near perfection. You should need a loupe to see a flaw. A 10 should be absolute perfection. And, if you ask me, there are too many 10s and 9.5s out there.

It is my humble opinion, again, that there should be one flat grading scale that applies to all cards. There should not be any adjustments made to a grade, or grading scale, because a card was printed 60 years ago. If a card is rough cut, well, then it should be adjusted downward accordingly. It doesn't mean the card isn't beautiful. It just means it won't be a 10, or a 9. A 10 gem mint card is a 10 gem mint card. Perfect centering, razor sharp corners, pristine edges, and a remarkable surface. No blemishes, no scratches. No print flaws, no registration issues. If that means there are no 10s from cards printed in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s, so be it. Realize that the printing technology employed at that time was incapable of printing 10 condition baseball cards. I just think the whole idea of bumping a card up because it was printed on an ancient machine is ridiculous. Grading, though there are guidelines, is a subjective process. When you ask graders to start making allowances for cards that are old, you creating more room for error.

Originally Posted by freakhappy

It has to be real tough sometimes as graders, especially when it comes to high grade examples. IMO, it would seem that when they get a very sharp looking vintage card, that is when they really look close and dissect for any possible indication of alteration. It seems for every good TPG story, there is a horror story to go with it.

[Jetsfan]

It seems to me that the bigger issue may be on the buyer side. There is often a tremendous premium from a 9 to a 10, when I believe each of us knows that on any given day, a 9 might be graded a 10 and vice versa. You're really paying a huge premium for a label. At least, for the most part, I can tell a 3 from a 4.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

I agree with you, Mike.
Realize that the printing technology employed at that time was incapable of printing 10 condition baseball cards. I just think the whole idea of bumping a card up because it was printed on an ancient machine is ridiculous.

The technology of the time- especially by the 70's was entirely capable of printing things perfectly. The registration issues and print flaws are result of cutting corners to make the job cheaper.

Topps did a few things in design that made it easier, especially on the backs.

My first job I ran on the press was registered almost perfectly - Probably within a .005-.007 of an inch. The second was a bit better, maybe one color off by that much the others closer. The guy who ran the 24" press was almost always exactly registered. The little targets on the margins looked almost black before he ran the black layer, and no hints of the individual colors.

But if we'd been trying to make cardboard freebies as cheaply as possible, it would have been quicker and less accurate.

We had a calendar from a paper company that had the slogan "Want it good, fast and cheap? Pick two and call me back"

Steve B