|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: Nickinvegas
I am not sure how many of you receive SMR,I thought there was an interesting commentary from PSA's Joe Orlando regarding trimmed & undersized cards. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: warshawlaw
Issued by Mecca and Tolstoi. It is not unusual to find T220 boxing cards with as much as 3/16" variance. Some cards I've seen were oversized to the point where the card exhibited a line of wear on the top or bottom because of it sticking up inside a stack. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: jay behrens
I've been collecting long enough that I can remember seeing BOTH oversized and small t206s, t205, t207s, etc. Thanks to the trimming craze that started when Copeland offered $100 per common for NM t206s, almost no oversized tobacco cards exist. And today, anything that is oversized is considered fair game for trimming size it will "measure up" and grade. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: petecld
AMEN Jay AMEN! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: botn
What Joe is saying is that PSA no longer has enough experience in the grading room to catch alterations. He has not only heard and read countless collectors and dealers who are publicly pointing out trimmed cards in PSA holders but he himself has seen an overwhelming amount of junk in their holders. But the golden rule at CU is that once PSA has encapsulated the card then the card MUST be good. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: Brian Weisner
While I agree with Jay, Pete, and Greg, that there are alot of trimmed cards in Holders. I disagree with the statement that there are No oversized T206's. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: dan mckee
Another easy way to tell a trimmed card that Joe Orlando hasn't mentioned above is having dog-eared corners. Like the Nice PSA Wagner and many of the other trimmed cards PSA had on display a few nationals ago. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: jay behrens
I didn't say there are no more oversized cards, but that they are not found that often anymore. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: TBob
Ask any woman, and she'll tell you, "YES!" (Sorry Julie) |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: Anonymous
At the risk of sounding redundant, I post these pictures from an earlier stream. It would appear that GAI and SGC are not immune from the same allegations. How are these grading companies responding? |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: jay behrens
I'd be interested in seeing closer scans of the corners. The SGC card appears to have plenty of wear on the coners, but I can't be sure. And doesn't appear to be so short that doesn't fall within the normal range. There are legit short cards out there, but and short that grades 7 or higher is very suspect. A short card with honest corner wear is not going to worry me as much. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: Anonymous
First of all, there are fewer SGC and GAI cards out there than PSA cards, so the number of questionable cards is going to be less by default. Second, I was not trying to produce a full library of questionable cards for SGC and GAI -- I wasn't doing research, I stumbled across those cards by accident. Third, again, all I'm trying to do is point out that short cards wind up in all different types of holders. What I'm asking for, as a collector that's new to this board, is what types of assurances can I give myself that short cards are really short, but not trimmed? And isn't that what third-party grading is all about? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: T206 Collector
I hadn't logged in. As a post-script, I am not a PSA lover. Quite the contrary, based on what I have read on this board I believe that PSA has done more chop-jobs than SGC or GAI, perhaps even knowingly rather than negligently. When I have asked for help, people have turned me to GAI and SGC, but as soon as I turned to GAI and SGC, I found the cards I posted above. As you might imagine, this gave me no great comfort. I'd buy a blacklight, but apparently that's what the grading companies do (and would be better at it I'm sure). So am I stuck purchasing vintage cards only if they're oversized? |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: petecld
" So am I stuck purchasing vintage cards only if they're oversized?" |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: T206 Collector
There is a reason that third party grading has gotten so popular. And it is because of trust. I have been collecting vintage cards for 15 years and am sorry to report that as a general matter I don't trust dealers of vintage material. I'm sure 95% of them are reputable -- I just don't know who the 5% are, the dollars at stake are material and the horror stories on this board have made me even more skeptical. And I certainly don't trust PSA anymore. My interest in vintage collecting, as with many collectors, can be directly attributable to third party grading and ebay. It is supposed to take the guess work out and reinstore trust. If you take away third party grading, you take away the main source of trust (and hence collecting) for many of us. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: Lee Behrens
I thought this discussion was about being short, not off center. I believe the SGC and GAI cards are off center not short, which would drop them out of this discussion. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: T206 Collector
Are you saying the cards above are only off-center because they appear to have "some room to grow" below the name? I would agree with that. But how would you know if a card was trimmed? Do you using a measuring tool or black light, or are you eye-balling it? What evidence of tampering do you look for? "Dog ears" that are left behind after a soft corner has been shaved? Does the centering of the back offer any clues? Anyone care to chime in with their techniques? I'm sure it would make an interesting read. The more details the better, please. It would be extremely helpful. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: david
it is hard to see the gai and sgc cards because of shadows on the images. again, we all recognize slight variance in size whether it is long or short. however, despite what the people at psa say a quarter of an inch is not normal as is the case with many of the psa high grade t206s |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: bimmy
as t206 collector asked, how do you tell if a cards been trimmed? more importantly, how can you tell trimmed entombed cards? ive seen some trimmed t205s and the corner wear gives em away, but those were raw and not good jobs. i dont think i could spot a very well doctored card that was in a holder. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: John Wojak
If you've ever tried to cut off a thin strip of paper or cardboard, when you get to the very edge the paper tends to pull away a little and what you get is what people call a "bat ear" - a little point that sticks up. For example, a card that was trimmed along the bottom border (very common with E90-1, e92/101/102 and other caramels with those very wide bottom borders) will frequently have a very nice bottom border with sharp corners that, upon close examination, have points sticking down at the very corners. This, in conjunction with a too-short card or too-good-to-be-true corners, is a real red flag. Generally, trust your eyes. If you have examined in person, or in scans on ebay etc., hundreds of cards from a particular set (and every set has its own quirks) you will know what the appropriate height/width appearance and border width should be, and a card that has been trimmed on the sides or ends will just look wrong. And study the worn, low-grade cards, not the high grade cards, to see what the card SHOULD look like. Nobody is going to mess with and trim a card that still has a bunch of creases in it, or paper loss, so you know that the edges are the real thing. Get a feel for how wide the borders should be. Then when you see a high grade card, a hundred year old 7 or 8, you'll be surprised at how many of them just don't have the same border width as the low grade cards, and you can't study the high grade cards to see what the border widths should look like. Then, when you see a card you are interested in, measure it. I actually take a ruler sometimes and measure the scan on the screen of my computer and do a height v. width proportional calculation. On a scan you can't tell absolute height or width, but you can tell if the proportion between the width and the height is right or wrong compared to a standard card. Believe me, it works. Another thing to look for is angle cuts - a lot of caramel cards have angle cuts; some like e90-1 and the e92/101/102 family tend to have angle cuts on the top and bottom. Just poor cutting quality. But they almost always have a matching cut top and bottom, like if the whole sheet was misaligned for the whole cut run. If you see an angle cut on top or bottom, and the opposite edge is straight across with sharp corners, in general that should raise a concern. Above all, take the time to get to view as as many examples of the particular set you are interested in as you can to get a feel for them, not only for what a typical card should look like, but also to see what types of cutting or printing anomalies appear commonly on the low-grade (and therefore probably unaltered) cards and are probably factory glitches and not tampering. Some sets are generally very uniformly cut (like t206s) and some are notoriously poorly cut (like e220s). What may be acceptable for one set will not be acceptable for another. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: jay behrens
You have to be kidding. You say you've been collecting vintage cards for 15 years, yet you cannot tell the good dealers from the bad ones? Granted, I'm the exception and not the rule most people experience in the hobby since I was lucky enough to get to know Ron Oser and Bill Bossert when I first got into the hobby and they guided me, but there is no excuse for collecting for 15 years and not knowing who the good and bad dealers are. Also, after 15 years, I would think you have a healthy knowledge of the cards you collect. Not to sound mean, but the only other option would seem to be that you are one of these collectors with more money than common sense. If you are serious about collecting, it should take you about 6 months or less to learn who is the good guys and bad guys are. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: petecld
I promise, no tangents this time. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: T206 Collector
...because these descriptions don't help me, but I'm sure we'd all know what you were describing if we could see it. "a little point that sticks up"? |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: bimmy
theres a lajoie t206 port 8 on ebay, is that upper left a tiny bat ear? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: Anonymous
The Lajoie is at: |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: MW
edited |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: Mike Ward
As much as they seem to encapsulate cards that are questionable, they are quick to call cards trimmed that are not. They need work on both sides of the ball. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: Todd
You wanna see bat ears, try starting with this guy's auctions: |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: John Wojak
Todd - you hit the nail right on the head with the link to the PRO graded T206 Keeler and Chase. PRO high grade cards are almost all trimmed crap. A shame, really. If you look at that Keeler and Chase and just compare them to well-love T206 commons, you can easily see that the white borders around the PRO cards are just too narrow all around. And if you look carefully at the corners, some of them do seem to stick out a little. Check out the bottom corners of the Keeler. I have seen much more obvious bat ears than on these cards, but in my opinion these cards are trimmed. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: TBob
Maybe I am missing the boat here but I have several "undersized" cards in my collection which do not appear to have been trimmed based on 25 years of collecting vintage cards yet they won't grade because they are undersized. I hate to beat a dead horse but as Scott B. or any other M116 collector knows, there are tons of Sporting Life cards out there which are NOT trimmed but ARE undersized. The major grading companies, despite what Orlando says, appear to be fixated on the theory that card dimensions less than the stated "book" size equals trimming. That is unless you are one of the "good old boys" who get everything graded without a hint of objection. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: Lee Behrens
Bob, I believe that issues other that T206s and T205 have quite a variance in size on both ends but T205s and T206s do not seem to come undersized, (yes, I know there are exceptions). |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: jay behrens
The Broadway Rick's Scam Zone offered all those m116s about a year and a half ago all the ones I won were very short and I thought were trimmed. They refunded a chunk of my money further confirming my belief they were trimmed. On a whim and a special, I submitted all these m116s on the off chance one might grade. They ALL came back graded graded by SGC. Small size doesn't not seem to be instant rejection for trimming. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: dan
NOT trimmed, and no "bat ears" |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: dan
Absolutey a perfect example of trimmed cards Todd, nice job. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: dan
Lee, the majoriety of my T206 set was assembled in the 1970s, I have about 40 different sizes in the 500+ cards. None are trimmed. The trimming craze started in the late 1980s. dan. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Size Matters?
Posted By: runscott
I don't know how m116's were originally printed and cut, but they were distributed in series by "Sporting Life". Because the Matty is almost always short on top, I suspect each sheet contained one of each card and Matty was always on top, as opposed to the way t206s were almost always printed - each vertical row containing a different player. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Size Variance??????? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 3 | 02-16-2007 07:20 AM |
Size Variance? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 5 | 01-26-2007 02:19 PM |
t206 size? | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 05-20-2006 03:42 PM |
Size Matters! Plow Boy | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 0 | 03-11-2005 06:33 AM |
zeenut size | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 4 | 10-13-2004 02:02 PM |