By now you have probably seen the news . . . SGC recently awarded a gem 10 grade to a 1961-62 Wilt Chamberlain rookie! As you may know, this card is typically plagued by poor centering and all kinds of print blobs and defects. And given Wilt’s popularity, most were handled and traded quite a bit. The mere thought of an untouched, uncirculated card in this condition is hard to fathom.

SGC prez Peter Steinberg talked up the card in a recent video on X and elsewhere:

“I am honored to be introducing to all of you to one of the most impressive trading cards that The Hobby has ever seen . . . This card absolutely blew our team away.”“Finding a dead-centered copy is nearly impossible,” Steinberg said. “Even if you do, you could turn the card around only to find a gum stain on the back.”

Now, if you’re like me, you’re noticing those rough cut edges. How can this card possibly gem? A lot of people seem to be wondering . . . as evidenced by dozens of comments on social media. “This card would not gem at PSA!” “Are the edges cut funny or is it just the camera?” Etc.

Grading Rough Cut Edges

As to the initial response that “this card would not gem at PSA!” due to the edges, we can easily find examples to the contrary regarding rough-cut edges. The Jerry West is actually very comparable:

So, what’s a “rough cut edge” and when, if ever, should rough cuts be penalized in the grading process? Rough cuts are common in certain card years, a result of the method of using a wire to cut the cards from the sheet. Since the rough-cut is considered native / natural to the manufacturing process, both SGC and PSA have always been “friendly” to them. But neither has an explicit statement or policy on this. But can rough cuts gem? The proof is here:

Thoughts?

What are your thoughts on rough cuts and grading? Should these cards be able to pull gem grades with obvious “flaws”? Do other card years have certain quirks that are graded too harshly? Let’s hear some comments! Want to chat more? Join Cardhound! It’s FREE!