Home› PSA Set Registry Forum

anybody got a razor blade i can borrow?

pcpc Posts: 743 ✭
in PSA Set Registry Forum
30452882 1962 MICKEY MANTLE ALL STAR Not Holdered, Evidence of Trimming
30452883 1963 MICKEY MANTLE psa 9
1963 psa 9 (ebay)
teensy weensy?
Money is your ticket to freedom.

Comments

  • MyBigToeMyBigToe Posts: 67
    Are any of their f---ing cards straight?
  • pcpc Posts: 743 ✭
    some of their edges are...
    Money is your ticket to freedom.
  • rw2winrw2win Posts: 557 ✭
    That does look "narrow", especially when you compare it to the card next to it.image
  • packCollectorpackCollector Posts: 2,786 ✭✭✭
    I have a few questions regarding these posts for all of you experts. I just went through about 100 cert #'s around this one. what I found was there was a group of 54's, evidence of trimming ; and a couple other unique instances where there was "trimming" .

    my question, is it possible that the graders catch the cards that are altered?
    I am curious becasue based on these posts we are all wasting are time grading cards since everyone has the ability to determine if card is altered in a holder by an internet scan.

    If that is the case then , how are all of these cards getting by graders who look at the card in person with precision instruments?

    If they are they can't recognize what is obvious then what are we paying for?

    Is it possible that a dealer can buy cards from different sources , some better that others?

    would really like to hear what you guys have to say?

  • mikeschmidtmikeschmidt Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭
    I would say that, as a general rule -- when a submission has a ton of cards that are rejected as trimmed/altered, there is probably an extra level of care put forward in authenticating and holdering the cards that do not appear trimmed/altered. That being said -- there seems to be a sometimes surprising number of short examples that get slabbed in submissions like that.

    I truly wonder what the size tolerances are in getting cards graded. I seemingly get some nearly full size cards rejected as "minimum size requirements" but then see other issues whereby the cards look short from the naked eye, but still appear in the slab.

    As a final note -- 1963 I believe was the final year of Presentation Sets -- and those cards on the whole run shorter than the regular issue -- but I am not suggesting that this is the case in this particular example.
    I am actively buying MIKE SCHMIDT gem mint baseball cards. Also looking for any 19th century cabinets of Philadephia Nationals. Please PM with additional details.
  • pcpc Posts: 743 ✭
    in fairness to PSA my submissions are always
    brutally graded so i feel comfortable they do a
    fine job.however it is the cards that appear questionable
    that i dont submit that are of concern.
    Money is your ticket to freedom.
  • gemintgemint Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well, the evidence continues to mount. Anyone interested in a 1963 NM-MT, formerly NM, Pete Rose Rookie?
    https://ebay.com/sch/gemint/m.html?_nkw=&_armrs=1&_ipg=&_from=
  • packCollectorpackCollector Posts: 2,786 ✭✭✭
    gemint, what evidence is this regarding the rose?
Sign In or Register to comment.