2 1964 Topps Pete Rose. Which would you prefer?

[luciobar1980]

You guys are crazy. The cards are the same exact height in person.

[luciobar1980]

How is it you post about one thing and immediately people want to jump down your throat about your card being trimmed? And from a photograph.

[luciobar1980]

I'm checking this card on ebay and plenty seem to have as much spaceas my 7, and some a little less perhaps. Is it possible that these card varied by less than a millimeter in their production? You guys are making me paranoid.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

I'm checking this card on ebay and plenty seem to have as much spaceas my 7, and some a little less perhaps. Is it possible that these card varied by less than a millimeter in their production? You guys are making me paranoid.

It very well could be short from the factory. There was variance in size right from the factory. Cards from vending were also sometimes cut slightly small. The probem is that unethical dealers have used this information to trim lots of cards and grading companies have slabbed them. I would rather have a card one grade lower that was proper size unless I knew the provenance of the other card.

[RCMcKenzie]

I voted for the 6. I was expecting to see the backs with yellow circles around fibers that show it to be the same card. Rob

[ALBB]

problematic and pissy.... lets set up a vote

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

How is it you post about one thing and immediately people want to jump down your throat about your card being trimmed? And from a photograph.

Why the hell are you getting so pissy???? You're asking for opinions and someone points out how much the card is swimming in the holder and you are all annoyed???? Huh???? If he didn't say it, I would have. A hundred people would have. That card is very problematic.

[luciobar1980]

You seem to be getting pretty pissy yourself. I asked for opinions about eye appeal, not about my card being trimmed from a photograph where the cards aren't even lined up precisely. I just don't think it's very appropriate or wise to be alarmist in that way and get someone all worked up. So, are these also problematic, and also "swimming in their holders"?

[luciobar1980]

This one could do a breaststroke in its holder!

[JollyElm]

You're going to have to determine whether or not the shortness bothers you. It is quite significant in the one you posted, and it was pointed out to you, but you're mad because he used the everyday term 'trimmed' to describe it? It looks very short side to side. A common way to point that out is to say it looks trimmed. Why is that a problem???

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

You seem to be getting pretty pissy yourself. I asked for opinions about eye appeal, not about my card being trimmed from a photograph where the cards aren't even lined up precisely. I just don't think it's very appropriate or wise to be alarmist in that way and get someone all worked up. So, are these also problematic, and also "swimming in their holders"?

Please review your topic subject and first post. You generally asked for opinions concerning which card members preferred. I did what you requested. I provided my opinion that the 7 looked trimmed. Hence, I prefer the 6.

You did not limit the discussion to eye appeal. Alternatively, I would assert that potential trimming affects eye appeal. They are related. I may be wrong. That card may not have seen a blade since ‘64, when it came off the sheet. But, I am entitled to my opinion.

[luciobar1980]

I consider myself a pretty reasonable person, and if my posts came off as pissy it's because i was annoyed, and rightly so IMO. I've come to realize that in threads like this people want to just come in and be alarmist and rain on your parade. I also collect video games. I once posted a sealed Legend of Zelda on NintendoAge which had provenance and I was absolutely 100% sure was not resealed. Well, I asked for opinions on what the game might grade.. and what do you know.. here come people out of the woodwork to tell me its a reseal. Sent it to VGA, and of course it came back as genuine. I just think people should hesitate before telling someone they just blew their hard earned money on something. Especially when that specific aspect is not asked for, and based on one photograph. It's pretty immature, and I stand by that.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

I consider myself a pretty reasonable person, and if my posts came off as pissy it's because i was annoyed, and rightly so IMO. I've come to realize that in threads like this people want to just come in and be alarmist and rain on your parade. I also collect video games. I once posted a sealed Legend of Zelda on NintendoAge which had provenance and I was absolutely 100% sure was not resealed. Well, I asked for opinions on what the game might grade.. and what do you know.. here come people out of the woodwork to tell me its a reseal. Sent it to VGA, and of course it came back as genuine. I just think people should hesitate before telling someone they just blew their hard earned money on something. Especially when that specific aspect is not asked for, and based on one photograph. It's pretty immature, and I stand by that.

Here is your original post (minus the photos):

"Hey guys, interested to hear which card people would generally prefer as this is something I struggle with myself. We have a PSA 6 and PSA 7.

Here are some various aspects to consider:

PSA 6:

Color strike and black are super rich
A-grade gloss
Card has a fresh from pack look, whites are very white
Off center top to bottom
Very small wrinkle top right corner
Card is overall very sharp

PSA 7:

Better focus/registration
A-grade gloss
colors and black not as rich/contrasty as the 6
decently sharp but not as sharp as the 6 IMO
Nicely centered
back is crisper and has a deeper red color

I'm torn. I love the contrast and color and freshness of the 6, but the centering bothers me more than i thought it would, in hand. *Some of the above observations are harder to see in the pic."

*********

NOWHERE does it say you bought these cards ("blew their hard earned money"), just a vague reference to 'in hand,' and here's (again) what you said:
"Hey guys, interested to hear which card people would generally prefer as this is something I struggle with myself. We have a PSA 6 and PSA 7."

The PSA 7 card LITERALLY (and I'm not using that word the way a lot of people these days use it, where it means anything but literally) looks trimmed. LITERALLY. You could fit a slice of bacon next to the card and it still wouldn't hit the barrier (yes, that's obviously sarcasm). Yet, when that's pointed out by someone (just what you asked for, input) you act like he insulted your family, and now you're doubling down on it??? And somehow an old video game is introduced into the scenario??

This thread seemed to be about you asking which card would be 'better' to buy. You even said you were torn. By pointing out how short the PSA 7 is side to side, he was trying to give you very valid information to consider...and now he (and I) are the bad guys??? Holy cow, man!!!

[luciobar1980]

Dude, please go away.

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Here is your original post (minus the photos):

"Hey guys, interested to hear which card people would generally prefer as this is something I struggle with myself. We have a PSA 6 and PSA 7.

Here are some various aspects to consider:

PSA 6:

Color strike and black are super rich
A-grade gloss
Card has a fresh from pack look, whites are very white
Off center top to bottom
Very small wrinkle top right corner
Card is overall very sharp

PSA 7:

Better focus/registration
A-grade gloss
colors and black not as rich/contrasty as the 6
decently sharp but not as sharp as the 6 IMO
Nicely centered
back is crisper and has a deeper red color

I'm torn. I love the contrast and color and freshness of the 6, but the centering bothers me more than i thought it would, in hand. *Some of the above observations are harder to see in the pic."

*********

NOWHERE does it say you bought these cards ("blew their hard earned money"), just a vague reference to 'in hand,' and here's (again) what you said:
"Hey guys, interested to hear which card people would generally prefer as this is something I struggle with myself. We have a PSA 6 and PSA 7."

The PSA 7 card LITERALLY (and I'm not using that word the way a lot of people these days use it, where it means anything but literally) looks trimmed. LITERALLY. You could fit a slice of bacon next to the card and it still wouldn't hit the barrier (yes, that's obviously sarcasm). Yet, when that's pointed out by someone (just what you asked for, input) you act like he insulted your family, and now you're doubling down on it??? And somehow an old video game is introduced into the scenario??

This thread seemed to be about you asking which card would be 'better' to buy. You even said you were torn. By pointing out how short the PSA 7 is side to side, he was trying to give you very valid information to consider...and now he (and I) are the bad guys??? Holy cow, man!!!