Factory cuts vs trimming

[cardsagain74]

Whenever I sort through all of my late '60s and early '70s cards, it's so easy to see how inconsistent the size of the cuts can be. It's also been mentioned how this was naturally the case in many prior issues too, both pre-war and post-war vintage.

With this in mind, I'm curious why people usually assume the worst when they think something is "swimming inside a slab", etc. I know PSA has missed plenty of trimmed cards, but with as common as various size cuts can be, wouldn't a slightly short cut (that they decided to grade rather than return as "min size") still be a more likely reason?

Or, am I really underestimating how often the culprit actually is trimming?

[samosa4u]

I'm not sure what you're asking here, but let me say this: the SlabGate scandal has made me paranoid. If I see a card that looks even slightly small, then I won't touch it with a ten-foot pole. Whether it came out of the factory looking that way, or if it was done in somebody's basement, is totally irrelevant to me.

Another thing I want to mention is how PSA has different-sized holders. Some can be slightly bigger than others. So, I don't judge a card based on how much "space" is surrounding it. I just study the borders instead.

Sorry if my post didn't answer your question.

[Tomman1961]

Many of my 1939 Playball cards are crazy oversized. Fodder for someone who would love to trim them. If I took all my Diamond Stars to the calipers they are all over the place- the small ones show a lot of corner wear. The cutting technology of the times. By what era would we expect the dimensions to be dead on?

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by samosa4u

I'm not sure what you're asking here, but let me say this: the SlabGate scandal has made me paranoid. If I see a card that looks even slightly small, then I won't touch it with a ten-foot pole. Whether it came out of the factory looking that way, or if it was done in somebody's basement, is totally irrelevant to me.

Another thing I want to mention is how PSA has different-sized holders. Some can be slightly bigger than others. So, I don't judge a card based on how much "space" is surrounding it. I just study the borders instead.

Sorry if my post didn't answer your question.

Apologies if I wasn't clear. It's just seemed like when a card measures short, people are much quicker to think "trimmed" instead of the factory cut, especially after slabgate. But with how often factory cuts can apparently be off, I wondered if the cut is usually the culprit (and the trimming issue in the hobby isn't quite as rampant as assumed.)

And like you said, the different sized slabs can factor in to how something comes off at first glance. Though when I was comparing my '71 T Brooks to PSA versions, these were the two most recent PSA 7 sales. The second card looks clearly smaller L/R, with or without the slabs

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1971-Topps-...-/383777188192

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1971-Topps-...-/324302009620

[Johnny630]

A lot of vending cards have been notorious for being factory short. Also many dead on solid 9’s and 10’s have been pulled from vendors over the years.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

A lot of vending cards have notorious for being factory short.

Did not know that about vending boxes. It explains plenty of what remained unanswered to me.

Thanks Johnny

[jchcollins]

My experience at least as of late would tend to agree with the OP's notion that normal factory size variance (more common than many would imagine with vintage, especially when we are talking less than 1/32 of an inch...) is more apt to be viewed as possible trimming - to the point sometimes of paranoia. Cards coming out of packs with slightly different dimensions is not something that ended with tobacco cards. I've had several different '58 Topps cards just in the past year that are too big and will not fit into One Touch holders. I'm not sure PSA's "Min Size" can be much of a useful yardstick at all; the hobby is rife with stories of how one card was originally graded and then got returned a Min Size with an effort to get a bump, or vice versa. PSA misses both trimming AND factory discrepancies quite frequently, IMO. I'm not sure I have a solution to the problem, other than buy the card and not the slab, and make sure you are happy with the card in the slab regardless of things like the grade on the flip or movement / lack of movement in the slab. Just as an aside, simply because a card moves a bit in the holder is not necessarily indicative of trimming or a factory size problem. For some, the late 60's through the early 70's in particular - the card stock was simply thinner, and cards even with perfectly normal dimensions will move somewhat. I'm not sure I've ever seen a 1970 Topps card that remained perfectly still in a PSA holder.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

Did not know that about vending boxes. It explains plenty of what remained unanswered to me.

Thanks Johnny

Your Welcome Buddy

[puckpaul]

Originally Posted by Johnny630

A lot of vending cards have been notorious for being factory short. Also many dead on solid 9’s and 10’s have been pulled from vendors over the years.

Opened a vending box of 71 Topps Hockey and PSA said a few were short and wouldnt grade them. Ridiculous! They were all the same and no one trimmed and replaced a whole vending box.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by puckpaul

Opened a vending box of 71 Topps Hockey and PSA said a few were short and wouldnt grade them. Ridiculous! They were all the same and no one trimmed and replaced a whole vending box.

They prob were short...naturally from vending. Not trimmed but Mini Sized

[Hxcmilkshake]

To me its one and the same. I will just find one that measures correct. Nothing is perfect though

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by cardsagain74

Whenever I sort through all of my late '60s and early '70s cards, it's so easy to see how inconsistent the size of the cuts can be. It's also been mentioned how this was naturally the case in many prior issues too, both pre-war and post-war vintage.

With this in mind, I'm curious why people usually assume the worst when they think something is "swimming inside a slab", etc. I know PSA has missed plenty of trimmed cards, but with as common as various size cuts can be, wouldn't a slightly short cut (that they decided to grade rather than return as "min size") still be a more likely reason?

Or, am I really underestimating how often the culprit actually is trimming?

It's really all about how much evidence has come to light lately showing the scumbaggery of card doctors, and it makes everyone second guess everything. Most of us collectors knew some garbage was done in the past (using magic markers to make 1971 cards look beautiful, for instance), but in this new era of the graded card, who knew how bad it was going to get?! So it's really out of an abundance of caution to treat any 'very short' card as a trim job first, and then do some research and comparison efforts to determine if you're satisfied it actually came out of the factory that way. That is my approach.