Trimmed card back from PSA. 1940 Playball
Tunispaul
Posts: 156
What should I do now? I have held it up to other cards and I don't see the trimming. Could there be variances in these cards? The two sources I am using for measurement say the card should be 2 1/2" by 3 1/8". The card actually measures longer than that. If it is trimmed, I think I read it some where before but I can't find the thread, do I get a free submission for this? It was part of my 6 free submissions to begin with. If I do, how do I go about doing this? Any help would be appreciated.
#1 2000 Blue Xceptional Set(and #2 and #3, it's a sickness)
1933 Giants
1933 Giants
0
Comments
Minnie Minoso Master and Basic
1967 Topps PSA 8+
1960's Topps run Mega Set
"For me, playing baseball has been like a war and I was defending the uniform I wore, Every time I put on the uniform I respected it like the American flag. I wore it like I was representing every Latin country."--Minnie Minoso
1933 Giants
A card can be full sized and trimmed, just as it can be undersized and not trimmed.
Like women tell us (and we know in our hearts isn't true) size isn't everything. You have to look at the edges- if they cut isn't consistant in direction as the cuts of that issue, if the tilt or bevel isn't correct, if one edge isn't colored (faded) the same as others, all trimmed. Tiny, minute grains of sand? Definitely doctored.
There are other signs as well, so you can't just go by the size.
I've found they do err on the side of caution though (as they should), and if you've checked all of this via a loupe and it still looks good, resubmit it. Of the dozen or so I've had rejected for evid of trim virtually all have graded the next time thru.
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
1933 Giants
1933 Giants
I agree you should resubmit it. Just because PSA sez 'evidence of trimming' is not the end all as some believe.
Steve
<< <i>Wouldn't PSA keep a record of what a person has turned in the past to get graded?? Could they not see that this same card was submitted by the same person, say a few months back?? >>
Sure. And they could also keep an enormous scan of every card on file, and cross reference every card that's submitted to them to see if that card was submitted before. The question isn't whether they can do it-- the question is whether or not it's cost effective.
<< <i>if they said it was trimmed, it was trimmed, end of story.....i could see there being a question if they said a slabbed card submitted for crossover was "trimmed" because of the inability to touch the slabbed card....but this should be no question.... >>
This is about the worst argument on this subject I've ever seen. Obviously you've never had a card rejected for trimming that you yourself pulled out of a pack and put into a semi-rigid. Like Steve said, PSA's opinion on a card can change from sub to sub. There's no reason why their first opinion should be necessarily more valid than any future opinions.
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
<< <i>Fandango, I've had a dozen or so cards rejected for evid of trim and graded the next time thru. None were trimmed. It's an opinion, not a statement of fact. >>
Just like the grade on a slab
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
DJJ
<< <i>Fandango, The card comes back with a notice that says "Evidence of trimming". It does not come back with a note that says "100% sure that this card was trimmed". As Griffins stated, he has nearly always receieved grades on the second time. >>
that seems alittle far fetched to me...nearly all his resubmits come back slabbed?---dont believe it
My daughter was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes at the age of 2 (2003). My son was diagnosed with Type 1 when he was 17 on December 31, 2009. We were stunned that another child of ours had been diagnosed. Please, if you don't have a favorite charity, consider giving to the JDRF (Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation)
JDRF Donation
<< <i>
<< <i>Fandango, The card comes back with a notice that says "Evidence of trimming". It does not come back with a note that says "100% sure that this card was trimmed". As Griffins stated, he has nearly always receieved grades on the second time. >>
that seems alittle far fetched to me...nearly all his resubmits come back slabbed?---dont believe it >>
Fandango, Griffins word is good enough for me. I don't know why you are continuing to support a statement of yours that, I must agree, is one of the most ludicrous ones I've heard in a long time:
<< <i>if they said it was trimmed, it was trimmed, end of story >>
Comon man, you were kidding, weren't you?
"All evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
Here is that scan of the back. I think I have decided to re-submit at a later date. Thanks for all of the input. I will update later.
1933 Giants
<< <i>if they said it was trimmed, it was trimmed, end of story........ >>
I haad one card returned last year for "evidence of trimming".
sent it in on my next Sub. PSA8.
I would agree with that statment. I submit a decent amount of cards and I recently had some 57's come back trimmed and on a re-sub ALL 5 were graded.. 2-7's and 3-8's. Only a small number of 5, but I felt strongly they were not trimmed.
Dave
1957 Topps 99% 7.40 GPA
Hank Aaron Basic PSA 7-8(75%)