T206 Wagner PSA 8? at ebay
 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/T206-Heinie...oAAOSwiS9duJnT

PSA 8 or A? &;}

Seeking real opinonions


MD

That's the rare "tiny" variation...

Wagner
 

First slabbed PSA card with the beginning number of 44 I have seen. Larger slab maybe?

The card appears to be wider than normal, so it was put in the oversized-cutout slab. This makes it look too short.

Steve

No idea how you're determining the card looks wide. The side borders look possibly acceptable in their total width, but when you add the width of the top and bottom borders together you come up way short of a standard T206.

How many opened this thread expecting a different Wagner? lol

EXACTLY.

Why peoples' first inclination is to come to PSA's defense, with some far-fetched explanation is a mystery to me. Especially after the thousands of very similar cards we've seen proven altered. Old habits die hard, I suppose.

compare

And even the borders on that example aren't exactly oversized. It's probably fine, but still seems a little light top to bottom, and I'd take a really close look at that bottom border. There are variations in the cuts on these to be sure, but if you don't recognize what a somewhat standard amount of border is you're doomed.

To me the quickest way to make a judgement is what I alluded to above. Don't worry about does one border look small, worry about the combined size of parallel borders.

A corollary to that is don't worry about an angled cut as long as the cut is parallel. If the top cut runs up and to the right compared to the frame of the image than the bottom should also. That just means the sheet wasn't squared up properly when it was cut. But if one border runs up and to the right and the parallel border is square...

Is there really any question...:D:D:D:D

These two cards are both the exact same size.

https://oi60.photobucket.com/albums/...psj3rvways.jpg
https://oi60.photobucket.com/albums/...pslhkr6ue5.jpg

All I'm saying is, you can't always judge if a card is trimmed or not, by size alone.


Steve

T206s really vary a lot.
I've had a couple rejected by SGC for not meeting the minimum size, which is what probably should have happened with this card at PSA.

From the little bit I can see in the scan, I think the 8 might be ok as far as trimming goes.
The top edge has a bright line, which to me looks like the slight curve of a factory cut.
The bottom does not, but that slight curve will be smaller on the opposite side of the blade, and I just can't tell from that scan.

I didn't mention size of the card once in any of my posts. I agree it's not a great way to tell on T206's. My method isn't 100% either as I agree, and mentioned, the cards are not cut to the standard of modern cards. All that being said I still hate the card the OP posted.

You didn't mention the size of the card?:eek:
You said it was the "tiny" variation in post 2.

OK you got me, but when I seriously started discussing things that wasn't my focus

Uh ... post 5 is all about size too?

...
 

I’ll be attending my first National next year, I can’t wait to see if the Antagonism exists in person as much as it does here....

These 2 cards aren’t sized accurately. If you measure the inside portion (between the black lines) of both cards you will see the Wagner is wider. So you need to downsize it a bit to compare identical dimensions.

The Wagner is smaller than standard.

Peter doesn’t attend Nationals. You’ll need to go to Boston to find out.

LOL. There's no antagonism at all, truly, just bewilderment at Scott's claim that his objection to the card wasn't based on its size when it clearly was.

Not overall size of the card but rather the size of the borders. Maybe splitting hairs, but I compare borders before I would ever bother measuring the overall dimensions of the card

I don't feel antagonized sorry, to disappoint. I'm one of those weirdos who can discuss and even disagree with people without taking (and hopefully without giving) offense.

OK.