PSA Miscut

[Bkrum]

I have had several cards come back from PSA with the description Miscut. What exactly does that mean? Is this different than trimmed? There are no obvious issues with the cards. I requested no qualifiers so they were not slabbed

[swarmee]

PSA has two different miscuts:
1) Card is not cut into a true rectangle (4x 90 degree angles) or is otherwise irregular for the issue. Will only slab as AUTHENTIC if you write that you want that on the form. Otherwise they send back ungraded. Some people (normally large volume submitters) can get slanted cards into number graded holders. This is not a qualifier.

2) The Miscut (MC) qualifier is for cards that have parts of the main card cut off, or show parts of other cards on the card you graded. That is a qualifier that PSA also does not waive (usually), even if you request NQs. They are a little more forgiving on issues like 1955 Bowman where most of the backs are miscut even if the fronts are centered.

Add: post picture. Sometimes cards from the 1950s and 1960s Topps have wavy natural edges that PSA will also label miscut #1 and only slab as AUTH.

[Jobu]

For T206, they give them miscut if the tiniest sliver of any part of the caption has been cut off.

[swarmee]

Here are the cards in question.

The T206 and Bowman I would say are diamond cut, which is why they weren't graded. Most obvious on the Campanella, where the bottom right border is half the size it grows to on the top right.
The middle one looks like it has a wavy right side.

Submit again, and the first two could get a number with different eyes looking at it. If PSA thought either were trimmed, they would have said so.

[perezfan]

I wonder which is more prevalent with PSA...

Legitimate cards that are mistakenly graded "A" or have "miscut" qualifiers

or

Altered cards residing in numerical graded slabs

I'd bet it's pretty close.

[Bkrum]

Thanks for your expertise. I’m learning but my eye for miscut, Trims, etc still isn’t as good as it should be.

[Clutch-Hitter]

Love this card and couldn't care less about the qualifier. However, I don't know why it was deemed


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Clutch-Hitter]

Scan was too big




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Clutch-Hitter

Scan was too big




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Send it back in as a mechanical error. It is not a MC card.

Add: Is there any part of the name of the card above that one at the top? Even a trace? Double-name cards would get a MC qualifier. Can't see that region under the rail on your scan.

[Clutch-Hitter]

Here's a bigger scan. Thanks




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Jcosta19]

Random question about qualifiers, since the Marquard portrait has what appears to be a pen mark/writing but was also given a MC designation does that mean that the MC qualifier takes precedent over the MK?

I would have thought it was the opposite.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[brianp-beme]

PSA definitely got it wrong. It is not Miss Cut, it is actually Mr. Cut, due to Hal's chiseled facial features.

Brian

[swarmee]

Originally Posted by Jcosta19

Random question about qualifiers, since the Marquard portrait has what appears to be a pen mark/writing but was also given a MC designation does that mean that the MC qualifier takes precedent over the MK?

The card was not graded at all because it was deemed factory miscut, not qualifier miscut. But if it was awarded a number grade by PSA, it should have also gotten a MK qualifier.

[Clutch-Hitter]

Like I said, the qualifier doesn't concern me. Love the big borders on that one and the price the qualifier provided.