Trimmed? Or something else?

[Archive]

Posted By: Ken W.

I don't mean to bring the level of this discussion down to the era of "modern" cards-- the 1960s--but I need some help. I have written to PSA, Sy Berger, and talked to SGC about my Topps cards from the '60s, mostly all-star rookies, WS subsets, a '68 set, and '64 Giants, and no one will give me a number, such as 1/32nd or 1/64th, which I should accept as a variation from the supposed intended size of manufacture, without worrying about trimming. I have many commons worth less than one dollar that are short 1/64th or less, usually l to r. No one would go to the trouble to cut these cards, would they? I have several PSA graded '68 HOFers which are 1/64th short, but they are graded so I shouldn't worry about them being cut, right? I have collected these cards over 14 years and acquired them from many sources, and they display the same characteristics generally. Doesn't that support the conclusion that size variances resulting from the manufacturing process were common-- I mean not everyone is cutting cards are they? Does anyone know what tolerances Topps had, if any? Are there any articles on this subject written by an authority on the manufacturing process and tolerances? For cards I am buying now I have finally made the decision that if the card is short 1/64th or less, and doesn't show signs of trimming, i.e. clean edges when the others are dull, wavey edges, and such, I will accept the card as unaltered. By worrying about cards being short by 1/64th am I being paranoid? Any comments on this approach or information on this issue would be appreciated.