All I see is TRIM!!!!!!!

[ullmandds]

For me...when I see older cards graded 10's...all I see are TRIM/ALTERATIONS. I just can't unsee what looks like TRIM to me.

Opinions on this 1962 babe ruth special??

[Directly]

sorry doesn't matter what we think ---a PSA 10's a 10?

[Scocs]

I know things have been sketchy in the past, but based on serial numbers, this is a newly graded card (sometime in 2022). I have to believe that under the current scrutiny, graders are under enormous pressure to measure cards precisely.

After all, there are a lot more “trimmed” and “doesn’t meet minimum size” coming back from third party graders, at least PSA and SGC.

Having said that though, I do agree that I’ve never seen so many mint and gem mint vintage cards ever before — certainly none when I was collecting back in the 1980s and early 1990s BEFORE cards were graded and slabbed….

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by Scocs

I know things have been sketchy in the past, but based on serial numbers, this is a newly graded card (sometime in 2022). I have to believe that under the current scrutiny, graders are under enormous pressure to measure cards precisely.

After all, there are a lot more “trimmed” and “doesn’t meet minimum size” coming back from third party graders, at least PSA and SGC.

Having said that though, I do agree that I’ve never seen so many mint and gem mint vintage cards ever before — certainly none when I was collecting back in the 1980s and early 1990s BEFORE cards were graded and slabbed….

+1 Agree Well Said

[Rhotchkiss]

Originally Posted by Scocs

I know things have been sketchy in the past, but based on serial numbers, this is a newly graded card (sometime in 2022). I have to believe that under the current scrutiny, graders are under enormous pressure to measure cards precisely.

Look at this beauty with a recent cert number. It’s a fake!! If PSA, with all the scrutiny, cannot identify fakes, then I am dubious they can determine proper measurements.

As for whether the card in the initial thread is trimmed, just like PSA, I have no idea

[Peter_Spaeth]

Photos are not evidence. Before and after photos are not evidence. That a submitter is a known notorious card doctor is not evidence. Nothing is evidence. If you have a question, ask for a review, and PSA in its sole discretion will decide.

[Keith H. Thompson]

It ain't nothing until I call it it. substitute TPA for umpire for the modern version.

[JustinD]

Originally Posted by Scocs

I know things have been sketchy in the past, but based on serial numbers, this is a newly graded card (sometime in 2022). I have to believe that under the current scrutiny, graders are under enormous pressure to measure cards precisely.

After all, there are a lot more “trimmed” and “doesn’t meet minimum size” coming back from third party graders, at least PSA and SGC.

Having said that though, I do agree that I’ve never seen so many mint and gem mint vintage cards ever before — certainly none when I was collecting back in the 1980s and early 1990s BEFORE cards were graded and slabbed….

It's apples to oranges, however it's still all fruit. Altering was just as common or more so in the 80's and more. It's just done much better now.

Whether it was the commonplace action of dealers themselves trimming cards to make them more presentable or grabbing a sharpie to clean up the edges of a 71' Topps, it was rampant. The issue is, just like most things, they got a hell of a lot better at at. People get frustrated because it's so good that often the only way they know is by comparing an old scan of the same card. A process that was impossible a short while ago.

I have no solutions to solve it all and the unfortunate fact is that as time progresses this is only getting worse...no matter the effort. Technology will likely be able to create perfect replicas in 20 years and what will happen to collectables in that world?

Not sure what to say other than "buckle in, it's going to be a bumpy ride".

[perezfan]

Most likely submitted to PSA by someone with favorable "status". The top 2 corners were not even squared up, as they are noticeably curved. And the bottom 2 corners show touches of wear that in no way indicate a Gem Mint "10".

Definitely inferior to thousands of PSA 8s and 9s circulating out there. I guess it's simply too much to ask them for consistency.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Scocs

I know things have been sketchy in the past, but based on serial numbers, this is a newly graded card (sometime in 2022). I have to believe that under the current scrutiny, graders are under enormous pressure to measure cards precisely.

I don't believe that for a second. They've never measured "precisely", and are not going to start now. How many times has the same card been at various points a Minsize, sent back as trimmed, AND resided in a PSA 6 holder? This kind of thing in the past and the revenue that PSA generates from people continuing to crack and resub is not something they are going to give up in the name of being more accurate. The large majority of their customer base has proven time and time again that they simply don't care, as long as their cards eventually make it into nice, numbered holders.

[JollyElm]

It's really quite simple, actually. Pictured on the left is the card a 'regular' collector sent in to be graded. On the right is the card a 'preferred' submitter sent in...

1952mantlepsacomp02.jpg1952mantlepsacomp01.jpg

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by jollyelm

it's really quite simple, actually. Pictured on the left is the card a 'regular' collector sent in to be graded. On the right is the card a 'preferred' submitter sent in...

lol

[Leon]

+1

Originally Posted by jchcollins

I don't believe that for a second. They've never measured "precisely", and are not going to start now. How many times has the same card been at various points a Minsize, sent back as trimmed, AND resided in a PSA 6 holder? This kind of thing in the past and the revenue that PSA generates from people continuing to crack and resub is not something they are going to give up in the name of being more accurate. The large majority of their customer base has proven time and time again that they simply don't care, as long as their cards eventually make it into nice, numbered holders.

[Fred]

Anybody want to bet that the ratio of the following is very lopsided?

High graded (razor sharp corners) that are "undersized"

VS

High graded (razor sharp corners) that are "oversized"


I continue to read posters saying that card sizes vary. I get that, but why is it that TPGs have probably graded MORE undersized cards with razor sharp corners than oversized cards?

Are we to believe that if card sizes do vary, that most of the cards will be "undersized" than "oversized"? Why is it that there are more "undersized" cards than "oversized" cards if we are to believe that cards vary in size?

Take a stack of just about ANY year card from the 50s going forward (heck, I'd even go back to Playballs or earlier) and I bet MOST will all be about the same size (within 1/32" or tighter).

How many different size holders does PSA have for Topps cards 1957 and later? I'm going to guess there's probably a basic standard holder for those cards and if you look at many of the cards with razor sharp corners, there's a bit more room between the plastic indents that hold the card in place.

[swarmee]

It's trimmed. Cards in the 1960s were not laser cut; they have some minor rough cut if they're natural.

[Flintboy]

Originally Posted by Scocs

I know things have been sketchy in the past, but based on serial numbers, this is a newly graded card (sometime in 2022). I have to believe that under the current scrutiny, graders are under enormous pressure to measure cards precisely.

After all, there are a lot more “trimmed” and “doesn’t meet minimum size” coming back from third party graders, at least PSA and SGC.

Having said that though, I do agree that I’ve never seen so many mint and gem mint vintage cards ever before — certainly none when I was collecting back in the 1980s and early 1990s BEFORE cards were graded and slabbed….

I don’t think it matters when the card was graded. Since the first card PSA has ever graded, they have shown they are incapable of consistently spotting alterations.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by Directly

sorry doesn't matter what we think ---a PSA 10's a 10?

^^THIS^^ Also I highly doubt when it was graded has anything to do with it being altered or not. Altering cards has been a big thing for many decades.

[BioCRN]

Considering how irregular sized 1955 Bowman is, I don't know if I'd ever be willing to pay a premium for a high-end version of one.

I low-key feel some of the variability comes from decades of trimming hiding out in an already terribly irregular cut set.

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by BioCRN

Considering how irregular sized 1955 Bowman is, I don't know if I'd ever be willing to pay a premium for a high-end version of one.

I low-key feel some of the variability comes from decades of trimming hiding out in an already terribly irregular cut set.

I put that set together a few years ago. What I noticed was the height was always exactly thew same but the length varied greatly. It took me a few Willie Mays cards to find one that wasn't extremely short with a couple of them being obviously trimmed.

[Exhibitman]

When I saw that title I thought this might be something eise...

I think Pete just likes to say "TRIM".

[Michael B]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

When I saw that title I thought this might be something eise...

I think Pete just likes to say "TRIM".

Adam,

My first thought also. A little part of my brain is also still in the adolescent teenage gutter. I guess those of us who grew up in the 70's know that slang.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Michael B

I guess those of us who grew up in the 70's know that slang.

which strikes me as odd considering how little trimming of the area in question was going on in that era...

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

When I saw that title I thought this might be something eise...

I think Pete just likes to say "TRIM".

it might have been 48 hours...eddie murphy...the first time I heard the term "trim?"

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I put that set together a few years ago. What I noticed was the height was always exactly thew same but the length varied greatly. It took me a few Willie Mays cards to find one that wasn't extremely short with a couple of them being obviously trimmed.

This is common with a lot of the Topps sets too. Most of them measure pretty much the exact same in the narrow direction (L/R for a standard card, and T/B for a horizontal issue), but they can vary by upwards of an entire 1/4" in the long direction. A card that is trimmed narrow is often easy to identify because of this. But a card that is trimmed short could easily never be detected if it was tall to begin with. I think there are likely millions of trimmed cards in slabs.

[Lorewalker]

Originally Posted by Snowman

This is common with a lot of the Topps sets too. Most of them measure pretty much the exact same in the narrow direction (L/R for a standard card, and T/B for a horizontal issue), but they can vary by upwards of an entire 1/4" in the long direction. A card that is trimmed narrow is often easy to identify because of this. But a card that is trimmed short could easily never be detected if it was tall to begin with. I think there are likely millions of trimmed cards in slabs.

Would agree.

Just a general comment on the topic of trimming...Size is not what graders are supposed to rely on for determining if a card has been trimmed. Looking at the edges and consistency of the cuts are factors which would more likely than not determine if a card has been trimmed.

[bn2cardz]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Would agree.



Just a general comment on the topic of trimming...Size is not what graders are supposed to rely on for determining if a card has been trimmed. Looking at the edges and consistency of the cuts are factors which would more likely than not determine if a card has been trimmed.

This is absolutely correct. Measurements help, but the look and feel typically give it away prior to measuring.

[Snowman]

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

Would agree.

Just a general comment on the topic of trimming...Size is not what graders are supposed to rely on for determining if a card has been trimmed. Looking at the edges and consistency of the cuts are factors which would more likely than not determine if a card has been trimmed.

That's true to a certain extent, but there are also a lot of slabbed cards out there that you can tell with absolute certainty that they have been trimmed simply by the size alone. If a card measures within spec, it measures within spec. And I would guess that the majority of trimmed cards are probably still within spec. But once a card gets too small, it simply has to have been trimmed, particularly for L/R cuts on vintage Topps cards.