2 1964 Topps Pete Rose. Which would you prefer?

[luciobar1980]

Hey guys, interested to hear which card people would generally prefer as this is something I struggle with myself. We have a PSA 6 and PSA 7.

Here are some various aspects to consider:

PSA 6:

Color strike and black are super rich
A-grade gloss
Card has a fresh from pack look, whites are very white
Off center top to bottom
Very small wrinkle top right corner
Card is overall very sharp

PSA 7:

Better focus/registration
A-grade gloss
colors and black not as rich/contrasty as the 6
decently sharp but not as sharp as the 6 IMO
Nicely centered
back is crisper and has a deeper red color

I'm torn. I love the contrast and color and freshness of the 6, but the centering bothers me more than i thought it would, in hand. *Some of the above observations are harder to see in the pic.

[quitcrab]

7 all day

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

I like the centering and overall appearance of the 7.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Tyruscobb]

The 7 looks trimmed to me.

[hcv123]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

I like the centering and overall appearance of the 7.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

The centering through my eyes is off on both. The Richness of the "REDS" on the 6 has me picking that one all day long.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by hcv123

The centering through my eyes is off on both. The Richness of the "REDS" on the 6 has me picking that one all day long.

To each his own. Two nice cards...

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[rats60]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

I like the centering and overall appearance of the 7.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Perfect 45/45 centering.

[Hxcmilkshake]

7 has alot of room in the holder and top edge is not straight. Ez pass.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[luciobar1980]

You guys are crazy. The cards are the same exact height in person.

[luciobar1980]

How is it you post about one thing and immediately people want to jump down your throat about your card being trimmed? And from a photograph.

[luciobar1980]

I'm checking this card on ebay and plenty seem to have as much spaceas my 7, and some a little less perhaps. Is it possible that these card varied by less than a millimeter in their production? You guys are making me paranoid.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

How is it you post about one thing and immediately people want to jump down your throat about your card being trimmed? And from a photograph.

Why the hell are you getting so pissy???? You're asking for opinions and someone points out how much the card is swimming in the holder and you are all annoyed???? Huh???? If he didn't say it, I would have. A hundred people would have. That card is very problematic.

[luciobar1980]

You seem to be getting pretty pissy yourself. I asked for opinions about eye appeal, not about my card being trimmed from a photograph where the cards aren't even lined up precisely. I just don't think it's very appropriate or wise to be alarmist in that way and get someone all worked up. So, are these also problematic, and also "swimming in their holders"?

[luciobar1980]

This one could do a breaststroke in its holder!

[JollyElm]

You're going to have to determine whether or not the shortness bothers you. It is quite significant in the one you posted, and it was pointed out to you, but you're mad because he used the everyday term 'trimmed' to describe it? It looks very short side to side. A common way to point that out is to say it looks trimmed. Why is that a problem???

[Tyruscobb]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

You seem to be getting pretty pissy yourself. I asked for opinions about eye appeal, not about my card being trimmed from a photograph where the cards aren't even lined up precisely. I just don't think it's very appropriate or wise to be alarmist in that way and get someone all worked up. So, are these also problematic, and also "swimming in their holders"?

Please review your topic subject and first post. You generally asked for opinions concerning which card members preferred. I did what you requested. I provided my opinion that the 7 looked trimmed. Hence, I prefer the 6.

You did not limit the discussion to eye appeal. Alternatively, I would assert that potential trimming affects eye appeal. They are related. I may be wrong. That card may not have seen a blade since ‘64, when it came off the sheet. But, I am entitled to my opinion.

[Phil68]

Originally Posted by hcv123

The centering through my eyes is off on both. The Richness of the "REDS" on the 6 has me picking that one all day long.

It's funny...the "Richness" is actually because the card is terribly out of register and, frankly, quite flawed technically.
It's poor printing--that PSA seems to not understand, as well--that creates that effect. The NM 7 is properly focused and the plates are tight. It's interesting that collectors like poorly registered cards; but some do! I can't stand blurry or off-centered cards. To each, his own. The hobby is great like that.

The card certainly does not appear "problematic" or trimmed and I happen to agree that folks are WAAAAAY to quick to start the "Altered" commentary. It's your right to do so, but it's silly. PSA, and others, certainly miss some. There are obviously altered cards floating around, but it's not the epidemic proportion the doomsayer would suggest.

Try this...trim up a few of your cards. Film it. Document it. Submit the cards and see what happens. That's a post I would enjoy.

[Phil68]

Lucio,
How important is a '64 Rose to you? If it's a mid-level want card, go with the least expensive (both cards are beautiful). If it's a high-level "wantlist" card, then...buy 'em both and sit on them awhile and see which you like more. It's tough to pull the trigger when you're torn. I understand that one. I'm sitting on 3 '56 NM/MT Elston Howard cards that each have different qualities. One of them I'm keeping because his lips are the "most red"...Talk about a nutjob! Lol

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by Hxcmilkshake

7 has alot of room in the holder and top edge is not straight. Ez pass.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Ok, now I see it. Yes, the top edge doesn't look right to me either. I guess I have seen so much craziness production-wise from Topps in the 60s and 70s that I didn't notice that top edge.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Mark17]

They are both nice cards. Since you can resell a 7 for more than a 6, keep the 6, sell the 7, and have more $$$ to play with.

I wouldn't agonize it too much.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

I'm checking this card on ebay and plenty seem to have as much spaceas my 7, and some a little less perhaps. Is it possible that these card varied by less than a millimeter in their production? You guys are making me paranoid.

It very well could be short from the factory. There was variance in size right from the factory. Cards from vending were also sometimes cut slightly small. The probem is that unethical dealers have used this information to trim lots of cards and grading companies have slabbed them. I would rather have a card one grade lower that was proper size unless I knew the provenance of the other card.

[RCMcKenzie]

I voted for the 6. I was expecting to see the backs with yellow circles around fibers that show it to be the same card. Rob

[ALBB]

problematic and pissy.... lets set up a vote

[luciobar1980]

I consider myself a pretty reasonable person, and if my posts came off as pissy it's because i was annoyed, and rightly so IMO. I've come to realize that in threads like this people want to just come in and be alarmist and rain on your parade. I also collect video games. I once posted a sealed Legend of Zelda on NintendoAge which had provenance and I was absolutely 100% sure was not resealed. Well, I asked for opinions on what the game might grade.. and what do you know.. here come people out of the woodwork to tell me its a reseal. Sent it to VGA, and of course it came back as genuine. I just think people should hesitate before telling someone they just blew their hard earned money on something. Especially when that specific aspect is not asked for, and based on one photograph. It's pretty immature, and I stand by that.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

I consider myself a pretty reasonable person, and if my posts came off as pissy it's because i was annoyed, and rightly so IMO. I've come to realize that in threads like this people want to just come in and be alarmist and rain on your parade. I also collect video games. I once posted a sealed Legend of Zelda on NintendoAge which had provenance and I was absolutely 100% sure was not resealed. Well, I asked for opinions on what the game might grade.. and what do you know.. here come people out of the woodwork to tell me its a reseal. Sent it to VGA, and of course it came back as genuine. I just think people should hesitate before telling someone they just blew their hard earned money on something. Especially when that specific aspect is not asked for, and based on one photograph. It's pretty immature, and I stand by that.

Here is your original post (minus the photos):

"Hey guys, interested to hear which card people would generally prefer as this is something I struggle with myself. We have a PSA 6 and PSA 7.

Here are some various aspects to consider:

PSA 6:

Color strike and black are super rich
A-grade gloss
Card has a fresh from pack look, whites are very white
Off center top to bottom
Very small wrinkle top right corner
Card is overall very sharp

PSA 7:

Better focus/registration
A-grade gloss
colors and black not as rich/contrasty as the 6
decently sharp but not as sharp as the 6 IMO
Nicely centered
back is crisper and has a deeper red color

I'm torn. I love the contrast and color and freshness of the 6, but the centering bothers me more than i thought it would, in hand. *Some of the above observations are harder to see in the pic."

*********

NOWHERE does it say you bought these cards ("blew their hard earned money"), just a vague reference to 'in hand,' and here's (again) what you said:
"Hey guys, interested to hear which card people would generally prefer as this is something I struggle with myself. We have a PSA 6 and PSA 7."

The PSA 7 card LITERALLY (and I'm not using that word the way a lot of people these days use it, where it means anything but literally) looks trimmed. LITERALLY. You could fit a slice of bacon next to the card and it still wouldn't hit the barrier (yes, that's obviously sarcasm). Yet, when that's pointed out by someone (just what you asked for, input) you act like he insulted your family, and now you're doubling down on it??? And somehow an old video game is introduced into the scenario??

This thread seemed to be about you asking which card would be 'better' to buy. You even said you were torn. By pointing out how short the PSA 7 is side to side, he was trying to give you very valid information to consider...and now he (and I) are the bad guys??? Holy cow, man!!!

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by Phil68

It's funny...the "Richness" is actually because the card is terribly out of register and, frankly, quite flawed technically.
It's poor printing--that PSA seems to not understand, as well--that creates that effect. The NM 7 is properly focused and the plates are tight. It's interesting that collectors like poorly registered cards; but some do! I can't stand blurry or off-centered cards. To each, his own. The hobby is great like that.

The card certainly does not appear "problematic" or trimmed and I happen to agree that folks are WAAAAAY to quick to start the "Altered" commentary. It's your right to do so, but it's silly. PSA, and others, certainly miss some. There are obviously altered cards floating around, but it's not the epidemic proportion the doomsayer would suggest.

Try this...trim up a few of your cards. Film it. Document it. Submit the cards and see what happens. That's a post I would enjoy.

I agree with you. All of the quick conclusions here of "oh everyone knows it's trimmed" (when something doesn't appear practically perfect in the holder, or an edge could be a little off) has stood out to me too since I joined.

Obviously altering has been outed as more of a problem than most would have expected, but these exaggerations like "oh I know this is obviously short" and "half of the cards in existence are trimmed" seem more like anger and frustration spilling out than anything else. I'd imagine there are plenty of slight diamond cut issues and factory differences that often account for an initial appearance of minuscule edge or size variations

[luciobar1980]

Dude, please go away.

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Here is your original post (minus the photos):

"Hey guys, interested to hear which card people would generally prefer as this is something I struggle with myself. We have a PSA 6 and PSA 7.

Here are some various aspects to consider:

PSA 6:

Color strike and black are super rich
A-grade gloss
Card has a fresh from pack look, whites are very white
Off center top to bottom
Very small wrinkle top right corner
Card is overall very sharp

PSA 7:

Better focus/registration
A-grade gloss
colors and black not as rich/contrasty as the 6
decently sharp but not as sharp as the 6 IMO
Nicely centered
back is crisper and has a deeper red color

I'm torn. I love the contrast and color and freshness of the 6, but the centering bothers me more than i thought it would, in hand. *Some of the above observations are harder to see in the pic."

*********

NOWHERE does it say you bought these cards ("blew their hard earned money"), just a vague reference to 'in hand,' and here's (again) what you said:
"Hey guys, interested to hear which card people would generally prefer as this is something I struggle with myself. We have a PSA 6 and PSA 7."

The PSA 7 card LITERALLY (and I'm not using that word the way a lot of people these days use it, where it means anything but literally) looks trimmed. LITERALLY. You could fit a slice of bacon next to the card and it still wouldn't hit the barrier (yes, that's obviously sarcasm). Yet, when that's pointed out by someone (just what you asked for, input) you act like he insulted your family, and now you're doubling down on it??? And somehow an old video game is introduced into the scenario??

This thread seemed to be about you asking which card would be 'better' to buy. You even said you were torn. By pointing out how short the PSA 7 is side to side, he was trying to give you very valid information to consider...and now he (and I) are the bad guys??? Holy cow, man!!!

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

Dude, please go away.

Really? You mean I shouldn't stick around to hear you throw out more insults to the people who offered you honest input? Interesting.

[Phil68]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Really? You mean I shouldn't stick around to hear you throw out more insults to the people who offered you honest input? Interesting.

I'll throw in my 2 cents...
You REALLY should just go away. Your "honest input" is worth almost as much as we paid for it. You clearly have violated the spirit of the thread. If we were in person, I assure you--you'd go away. Luciobar can handle it himself, of course, but you're just not being a dude.

[steve B]

I prefer the 6 for a few reasons.

Am I the only one who noticed the slight cropping difference?
That makes them "different" cards, and you need both.

I do think the 7 is more narrow than I'd like, even if it is factory.

[luciobar1980]

Originally Posted by Phil68

I'll throw in my 2 cents...
You REALLY should just go away. Your "honest input" is worth almost as much as we paid for it. You clearly have violated the spirit of the thread. If we were in person, I assure you--you'd go away. Luciobar can handle it himself, of course, but you're just not being a dude.

This right here, phil68, is my boy.

[JollyElm]

To Lucio and your Apostle (pun intended, der!!), you realize that people have the ability to read, yes? That anyone can come here and see how the OP asked for input on two cards, that someone pointed out the FACT that one of them is short as hell side to side, and that the OP's reaction was as if someone burned down his house??? And it's because the simple phrase "looks trimmed" was used instead of something else??? It's right there for everyone to see, so no matter how much spin you two put on it, nothing changes. My God!!!

And Phil, are you f_cking kidding me?????!!!!! You're the guy who got completely bent out of shape when someone kidded about your card having 45/45 centering...even though his response was full of smiley faces!!!!!!! Get over yourself.

The OP asked for input about the cards. Here's how they look inside the holders:

oprahs.jpg

Next time you ask for opinions on something, instead of being ridiculously sensitive, why don't you spell out exactly what words can and cannot be used. That way everyone will be happy. This thread is ridiculous. And BTW, no one that I am aware of said the card WAS trimmed. He said it looked trimmed, in other words, significantly short side to side.

[luciobar1980]

Ok, thank you. Got it, 7 is narrow. Ok.

[luciobar1980]

But BTW, just checked... they are the SAME EXACT width. Have PSA cases not varied AT ALL by fractions of millimeters over the years?? Again, I find it ridiculous to make thee statements based on a photograph.

[Tyruscobb]

You elicited opinions concerning two cards. A few posters opined they thought the 7 appeared trimmed. You obviously disagree.

Opinions are not fact. Everyone is entitled their own opinion. So what. No need to get defensive and bent out of shape. Don't ask for opinions if you can't handle the results.

I stand by my opinion that the 7 doesn't look right. I'm not perfect and may be wrong, but it is my opinion. Back away from the ledge.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by luciobar1980

But BTW, just checked... they are the SAME EXACT width. Have PSA cases not varied AT ALL by fractions of millimeters over the years?? Again, I find it ridiculous to make thee statements based on a photograph.

You should measure again. It's not fractions of a millimeter, it's a pretty big difference.

[Gr8Beldini]

I like the fat Oprah better.