Opinions on my '56 Mick...

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Your card looks to have much more damage because of the loss of ink and gloss.

Thanks. Yeah mine wouldn't be in the PSA 5 range to begin with, but hard to say. The enlarged scan of the paper loss of that 5 out on eBay I think looks just as bad as what I did, LOL. I suppose beauty (and damage vs. patina vs. character) is all in the eye of the beholder...

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Thanks. Yeah mine wouldn't be in the PSA 5 range to begin with, but hard to say. The enlarged scan of the paper loss of that 5 out on eBay I think looks just as bad as what I did, LOL. I suppose beauty (and damage vs. patina vs. character) is all in the eye of the beholder...

I am with you on it looking nicer without the stain and a little paper loss. You will notice the loss of gloss more if you tilt the card and reflect light off it. Your card also looks to have a little more dirty/old look to it.

If you want to play doctor a little more a good wash, a little exposure, and a hint of gloss would fix it right up.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by bnorth

I am with you on it looking nicer without the stain and a little paper loss. You will notice the loss of gloss more if you tilt the card and reflect light off it. Your card also looks to have a little more dirty/old look to it.

If you want to play doctor a little more a good wash, a little exposure, and a hint of gloss would fix it right up.

All valid points. Besides the paper loss, I've always thought of my Mantle as pretty much a VG card without creases, which is what I go for when I can find them from the 1950's and earlier. It's difficult to find VG cards without creases or wrinkles though, (I do have a '53 Topps Reese that falls into that category) and especially graded ones. I also have a '56 Ted Williams which based on corners and other attributes would be a solid EX-MT - if not for one small spider crease on the right side. It was graded an SGC 40.

LOL on the further doctoring. I have no such interests any longer in my old age. Although I've read some of the articles on how people soak pre-war cards and all that stuff and the intricacies are fascinating. I'd faint trying to do something like that. Much less what Bill Mastro did putting a copy of the world's most desirable card into a paper cutting machine...

Bottom line, I look at my Mantle as an "altered" card, but that's ok. You know what else is altered by those same standards? The aforementioned PSA-8 Wagner, and technically - the Mona Lisa. Which has been cleaned and repaired many, many times in it's history. Yeah ok, I know that's a little different maybe. :-)

[KCRfan1]

Nice card John!

Personally, the first thing I would do is get the card out of the screw down holder. I have seen cards get a little wavy in those things and that may hurt grading if you choose that route, and can certainly damage the card.

Keep in mind those new PSA holders are going to be a BEAR to bust a card out of if you do not like the grade your Mantle gets.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by KCRfan1

Nice card John!

Personally, the first thing I would do is get the card out of the screw down holder. I have seen cards get a little wavy in those things and that may hurt grading if you choose that route, and can certainly damage the card.

Keep in mind those new PSA holders are going to be a BEAR to bust a card out of if you do not like the grade your Mantle gets.

I don't have the screws too tight on it, but good point just the same. Most of my other pre-57 cards that are not graded are in Card Saver I's.

Don't have plans to send this off for grading really because of my experience with SGC. Do you think they would slab it or tell me that it was altered again? PSA does seem to go easier on paper loss, but with this card I'm wondering if they see something else on that corner under the black light. In any event, this card is from a time in my collecting past when I was much less concerned with condition, so I will probably be inclined to leave it as-is and enjoy it for what it is. Back when I was a kid if a card was roughed-up some, that was just more proof that it was old, LOL. (And you should have seen the '65 Mantle I once had that was so waterlogged it couldn't be taken out of it's top loader without disintegrating...) I will admit that though I see the point in professional grading now (and prefer to buy graded cards online for peace of mind...) when I first heard of the practice, I did think it was pretty ridiculous for a good long while. Grading even today remains very subjective. And a quick glance at some other PSA graded '56 Mantle's out for sale right now confirms again what I've seen before: My card even with the paper loss is still a very decent example for the grade. :-)

[KCRfan1]

John, I don't believe PSA goes easier on paper loss. It's a bit of a coin flip, but generally count on a 2 grade deduction for paper loss. So what may appear as a 5 could grade as a 3. An eraser could come back as altered or certainly mk ( mark ) qualifier.

[CW]

I would agree that the EX 5 you showed is overgraded. PSA definitely misses things on occasion. As far as what you did to your card... hey, if you like the way it looks and it's for your collection, more power to you. Even with the minor bit of paper missing that is still a great Mantle!

[ls7plus]

[QUOTE=jchcollins;1478092]I don't have the screws too tight on it, but good point just the same. Most of my other pre-57 cards that are not graded are in Card Saver I's...

My experience over 25+ years is that if the screws are only tightened finger tight, you will almost never have a problem insofar as damaging the card is concerned, and the card won't fall out. Screwdowns, especially 1/2 inch lucites, were how we did it prior to TPG slabbing--they are very protective. I say "almost never" because my one exception just happened to be a '62 Maris in NrMt-Mt. The inner holder surface was uneven, leaving a slight wrinkle in the card's surface. I spooned that out as best I could, but it still got downgraded to a "7" by PSA due to that flaw.

Happy collecting,

Larry