Nice cards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really nice Mantle - Mine is a PSA 2. I got mine on Amazon. Basically I had a lot of credit card points and even though the conversion rate on Amazon sucks, I was able to obtain the card without spending a penny. Mine is nicely centered as well but has some creasing and other issues. I'd say it presents very well for the grade. But to get that card in say a PSA 5/6 it would probably be the only purchase I made for 6 months!

I do agree with one poster - A 1956 Ted Williams in PSA 4 condition is great for me but not really a fan of say a 1975 Robin Yount in a PSA 4. That card is still cheap in PSA 7 lets say. It's all about price point for me and for 99% of cards from 1954 to 1969 I can buy cards in VGEX condition without a problem. Some exceptions would be the 56 Mantle, 55 Koufax/Clemente etc.

Thanks. My Mantle has no creases, but the corners are pretty rough. I would expect it to get either a 1 or an A for the paper loss, but have no plans to send it in.

I would agree that for most 50's and early 60's cards, VG-EX 4 is a very nice grade. Most 4's are not going to have noticeable creasing, generally they just have corner wear or other issues that are not acceptable for a 5. I have a '61 Topps Aaron right now that is a perfectly centered 4.5 and one of my favorite cards. It was really at that sweet spot where eye-appeal and price tag met.

Will agree with you that it's hard for me to look at VG or lower range once out of the 1950-60's. I'm considering doing the 1970 Topps set, and those cards in a 3 or 4 look a bit rough. The good thing of course is that it's also cheaper to get 70's cards in the 6+ range. Also I think going back to the 50's for lower grades - if you think about it, the cards then were the bigger size and the card stock was better / thicker. I think that's why some of them don't look so awful in grades 2 - 4. By the 1970's the card stock sucked in comparison and those cards got nastier quicker.

This guy...

Thank you John.

Your '61 Aaron is sweet. Perfect example of what you said earlier, the 4 range is the sweet spot for great looking cards and affordability.

I may be in the minority, but I grew up thinking T-206 and 1933 Goudeys were made with rounded corners.

I've seen mint examples of both and they just look plain wrong to me.

Exactly. I want 1970s cards looking like they did when I pulled them out of the packs as a kid but older cards are supposed to look old. Though every once in a while I see a higher grade card and gotta get it.

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...0PSA%207.5.jpg

I can understand the sentiment. I knew they weren’t made that way but there are certainly some still fine looking T cards and Goudeys with rounded corners...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yowza!! Talk about getting smacked in the face with reality!!! As a Mets and Mays lover, I was recently looking at that very card to possibly consider buying it (or hopefully a cheaper one) when ebay has another coupon code offering...but, man, that's a hard pill to swallow when I can see what I could get for the same money. Bravo.

Hey guys,

I collect mostly low grade stuff. My collector friends and I typically trade or send each other cards without condition requirements at all. If we get a nice card from someone its rare.

I like the look of lower grade cards as they show the life of the card. There is something to be said of a really nice mint vintage card for sure. But like Adam said, I'd rather have a bunch of lower grade cards than one really nice one for the same price.

I think budgets dictate what we collect as well. I can't afford a high grade 56 Mantle, but the low grade one I have makes me happy all the same.