TRIMMING EXPERT?

jamesgotpoorman

Who would make this sub?


Line # Item # Cert # Grade Description Type Country
1 1 14421765 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1963 FLEER 37 BOB ASPROMONTE Card US
2 1 14421766 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 715 HORACE CLARKE Card US
3 1 14421767 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1975 TOPPS MINI 320 PETE ROSE Card US
4 1 14421768 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 35 LOU PINIELLA Card US
5 1 14421769 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 717 TOMMIE AARON Card US
6 1 14421770 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 712 JOSE MARTINEZ Card US
7 1 14421771 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 728 N.L. ROOKIES REDMOND/LAMPARD/WILLIAMS Card US
8 1 14421772 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 698 BREWERS TEAM Card US
9 1 14421773 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 645 JIM MALONEY Card US
10 1 14421774 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 659 BYRON BROWNE Card US
11 1 14421775 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 668 GARY NEIBAUER Card US
12 1 14421776 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 669 IKE BROWN Card US
13 1 14421777 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 672 ED CROSBY Card US
14 1 14421778 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 674 EXPOS TEAM Card US
15 1 14421779 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 682 TERRY HARMON Card US
16 1 14421780 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 678 GEORGE THOMAS Card US
17 1 14421781 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 681 BILL BUTLER Card US
18 1 14421782 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 683 BILL BURBACH Card US
19 1 14421783 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 688 SPARKY ANDERSON Card US
20 1 14421784 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 689 FRANK BAKER Card US
21 1 14421785 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 691 BOB HEISE Card US
22 1 14421786 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 690 BOB MOOSE Card US
23 1 14421787 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 692 A.L. PITCHERS HAYDEL/MORET/TWITCHELL Card US
24 1 14421788 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 699 JIM BRITTON Card US
25 1 14421789 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 701 BOB GARIBALDI Card US
26 1 14421790 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 702 MILT RAMIREZ Card US
27 1 14421791 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 695 JOE NIEKRO Card US
28 1 14421792 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 705 DICK SELMA Card US
29 1 14421793 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 710 SONNY SIEBERT Card US
30 1 14421794 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 720 MATTY ALOU Card US
31 1 14421795 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 718 BILLY WYNNE Card US
32 1 14421796 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 723 VICENTE ROMO Card US
33 1 14421797 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 741 SKIP GUINN Card US
34 1 14421798 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 730 JIM ROOKER Card US
35 1 14421799 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 749 KEN SZOTKIEWICZ Card US
36 1 14421800 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 529 N.L. ROOKIES HERNANDEZ/BUCKNER/PEREZ Card US
37 1 14421801 N1: EVIDENCE OF TRIMMING 1971 TOPPS 640 FRANK ROBINSON Card US
Total Items: 37
Date Received: 3/13/2009
Date Shipped: 3/24/2009
Order Status: Shipped

DavidPuddy

Expensive lesson learned.

jmoran19

A mohel?

IJustLoveCards

see whhhhaaa haaapppeenn wwwassss...

divecchia

Not a trimming expert, but a trimming novice.

Donato

bobsbbcards

Obviously PSA is not aware of the 1971 Topps Mini set.

Jeff85fan

Ouch.

Call me an optimist but I get the feeling the submitter isn't the one who trimmed the cards. I'm thinking he bought a batch of raw cards, likely at a price 'too good to be true', submitted them only to have this happen.

Yikes.

SOM

Then again, this could be another example of how out of control the PSA graders have become in 2009.

dude

My guess is that they were all crack-outs from cards won from some of the eBay "power sellers".

DavidPuddy

<< <i>My guess is that they were all crack-outs from cards won from some of the eBay "power sellers".[/]

hammered

It's funny how the graders treat 71s. I picked up a high grade lot and while I could never prove it, I know the seller did not trim. I picked the 10 best and subbed 5 with one group and 5 with another group. The first 5 came back w/ one 9 and four 8.5s. In the other sub, all 5 came back trimmed. All from the same source. That's how it works with '71 - if you know they are not trimmed, you just have to resubmit. This is their flagship set for catching altered cards, so they err on the side of caution, it's intentional.

fattymacs

That's unreal, maybe the submitter has no clue that nefarious types trim cards so they look minty. He's probably sick as hell right now.

jmoran19

since all but 3 cards are 1971 high #'s maybe he or she cut them from a full sheet

jradke4

what if they were cross overs?

MULLINS5

wow


Will he be able to get a voucher in place of these cards or is this a complete loss of money?


Patrick

rbdjr1

<< <i>It's funny how the graders treat 71s. I picked up a high grade lot and while I could never prove it, I know the seller did not trim. I picked the 10 best and subbed 5 with one group and 5 with another group. The first 5 came back w/ one 9 and four 8.5s. In the other sub, all 5 came back trimmed. All from the same source. That's how it works with '71 - if you know they are not trimmed, you just have to resubmit. This is their flagship set for catching altered cards, so they err on the side of caution, it's intentional. >>




wow!

shouldabeena10

<< <i>My guess is that they were all crack-outs from cards won from some of the eBay "power sellers". >>



That's funny, and kind of sad all at the same time ... because it wouldn't surprise me a bit.

RTB

Thoughts on Trimming... Back in the days before psa I relied on Beckett guidelines to learn and understand grading and card values. At that time beckett mentioned "rough cut" as a negative factor.

Now it is obvious that "rough cut" is actually a beautiful thing, a badge of honor if you will. I've seen 1961 PSA 10s on Mastro auctions that were rough cut. A rough card card is not likely to have been trimmed. A razor sharp edge on older cards is suspect of doctoring, a negative IMO.

otwcards

<< <i>Thoughts on Trimming... Back in the days before psa I relied on Beckett guidelines to learn and understand grading and card values. At that time beckett mentioned "rough cut" as a negative factor. >>



As an "industry leader," I have always thought Beckett to be lacking and oft times ill-informed. However, whenever something is printed in Beckett, it seems the Lemmings take the information as Gospel and run to their local store/show and suck up anything as if they've received the blessing of God Himself. I cannot count the runs I used to see when the Rookie Report would come out and a simple article by Ben Eckler would tout the most obvious of prospects and the cards would go crazy. The likes of Travis Lee and Bruce Chen would be touted while Lance Berkman and Jimmy Rollins would be ignored. I always used to love selling to the Ecklerarians, but alas, they've left the hobby as their "investments" have gone deep, deep, deep into the red.

I just wish PSA would get away from defining the rookie inclusions in the registries based upon the Beckett classifications of whether or not a card is a rookie.

KalineFan

I've sent in some OPC Baseball, that I ABSOLUTELY KNOW was NOT trimmed, in fact,
many came from packs, I OPENED. I usually check em before submitting them. I've
sent OPC Baseball that had the clean cut to them, only to be returned "EVID OF TRIM".
Especially so, on 1978's, they think ALL of them are ROUGH CUT, but there are some
that come incredibly well cut!

Same things on my beloved 1969 OPC set, many cards sent in with them coming back
EVID OF TRIM--they were not.

Tony
KalineFan

JMDVM

Just goes to show that the graders are clueless. I've had $1 high pop commons come back as "trimmed" on various sets. Who would waste time trimming such an inconsequential card?

TheVon

<< <i>I just wish PSA would get away from defining the rookie inclusions in the registries based upon the Beckett classifications of whether or not a card is a rookie. >>



Amen to that. The confusion surrounding what should be considered a rookie card and how it no longer means what it used to mean has completely snuffed out any interest in collecting prospects that I might have had.

WinPitcher

I thought PSA stopped showing such things?

Steve

dodgersin9

Regarding the trimmed cards that might not be trimmed-
I would rather PSA identify a card as "Evidence of trimming" when its not, than the opposite, i.e. holder a trimmed card. I like that they would err on the side of caution. The PSA graders are human and they will make mistakes. But if the mistakes are more on the not holdering clean cards rather than holdering tampered cards, I feel better about that.

mealeworm

Rube is that you???

Morgoth

maybe double s struck again? I doubt that this was an honest mistake and the submiter knew what he was doing.