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

[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.

[Keith H. Thompson]

How long ere we lose the illusion that TPA was created to grade cards impartially and without prejudice for the benefit of the average hobby buyer

[Section103]

"Average hobby buyer?" Those days are long gone. There is some functionality for the average Joe, but the material benefits go to a select subgroup. I think everyone in the hobby at any real level acknowledged that long ago.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Keith H. Thompson

How long ere we lose the illusion that TPA was created to grade cards impartially and without prejudice for the benefit of the average hobby buyer

As I like to say, all submitters are equal. Some are more equal than others.

[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.

[Bigdaddy]

Fred, its simple. If you have a random assortment of cards in a stack, the oversized cards will get the most wear and protect the undersized cards from having their razor sharp corners worn down.

Now doesn't that explain everything??

Originally Posted by 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.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by 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.

That is because there are less oversized cards due to the fact they have been trimmed down.

As I have mentioned, this could be a 9 in the wrong hands!@

[swarmee]

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

[Popcorn]

to me a 6-7 is a vintage mint pack pulled card, anything over is suspect lol no cards come from a wrapped pack with out flaws.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Popcorn

to me a 6-7 is a vintage mint pack pulled card, anything over is suspect lol no cards come from a wrapped pack with out flaws.

This is a very good point. Especially considering how many 6-7 slabbed cards today would have been considered "mint" no questions asked in the mid-1980's and earlier.

The scrutiny applied to grade a vintage card an 8 or higher today would have been seen as unrealistic only a few decades ago. To me this is a huge part of the consistency problem with third party grading. They don't change the written standards, but they bump up the unsaid subjective needle to where today's 4 is yesterday's 5 or 6, and get away with it.

[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.