NonSports Forum

Net54baseball.com
Welcome to Net54baseball.com. These forums are devoted to both Pre- and Post- war baseball cards and vintage memorabilia, as well as other sports. There is a separate section for Buying, Selling and Trading - the B/S/T area!! If you give an opinion of a person or company your full name needs to be in your post. Contact the moderator at leon@net54baseball.com should you have any questions or concerns. Enjoy!
Net54baseball.com
Net54baseball.com

Go Back   Net54baseball.com Forums > Net54baseball Postwar Sportscard Forums > Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-02-2015, 07:48 PM
jchcollins's Avatar
jchcollins jchcollins is offline
John
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 673
Default Opinions on my '56 Mick...

Hi all,

What I am going to detail below is something that has bugged me mildly when I think about it off and on for years. The attached pics of the card in the screw case are of my '56 Topps Mantle #135 gray back. I've had it since I was about 14 years old (1991) when I walked into a card shop in the mall in Hickory, NC and saw it under the glass, my eyes about to bug out of my head - eventually persuading the guy running the shop that day to take everything I had with me (various vintage including a fairly nice '61 Mantle - and at least one '89 UD Griffey RC...) in trade for it. First of all, nice centering huh? Though it is just a tad bit diamond cut if you look very closely. The card itself is in the VG range overall due to the corners, although there are no creases or wrinkles. In general for the last 24 years, I have considered this card among my most very prized possessions. It's still amazing to me in retrospect what a legend Mantle was even to kids like me who grew up in the 1980's...

The 2nd attachment is a bit of a confession, and what I want to ask you all about. What you see in the corner there is where some of the original gloss has worn off along with some paper loss to expose some of the underlying card stock (still white, but a bit more off-white). I'd love to tell you the card has been this way all along for the time that I've had it, but alas - when I first got the card, this area was covered by a very small - but very noticeable - grayish black stain. As a kid (ok, I was actually about 23 years old when this happened) sometime later, I decided that the card, given the fact it was not mint otherwise anyway - would look more....er, eye-appealing without this very noticeable grayish black stain. So with some ingenuity and a little bit of mild (as I remember it anyway) scratching - I removed the stain, leaving the card as it is now. If memory serves, I touched up the rough area with an eraser.

Even to this day I can't say I'm totally upset with myself because 1) I had and have no plans to sell the card or be dishonest about it and 2) uh... it really does look better than it did with the stain!! In fact upon casual inspection, the bottom right corner does not look markedly different than the other corners on the card because they are worn and have areas where this cardboard stock shows through too. It should be pointed out that when I did this was before the advent of professional grading, and honestly I did not think of it as any type of "tampering" with the card at the time. I get that this practice in general is not kosher to say the least now, but that being what it is, it's pretty much water under the bridge - and there is of course nothing I can do about it.

Fast forward another 5 years or so (this brings us up to 2005 maybe?) to a time when I was buying and selling a lot of cards on eBay. I had some really nice 1957 Topps commons that I wanted to get graded to turn around, so I sent them in to SGC. (One of them wound up coming back an 8, which was very satisfying). Almost as a whim at the last minute, I threw the '56 Mantle into the package to send off to SGC to be graded just to see what it would come back as. Many of you now probably will not be surprised as I was at the time to know the card came back as unable to be slabbed due to "questionable color" (I still have the tag) on where else... but that bottom right corner.

My questions: First, what do you think of me, horrible card doctor person?!? Second question will be asked in a follow-up post.

Thanks.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg FullSizeRender.jpg (71.2 KB, 365 views)
File Type: jpg IMG_1471.jpg (74.6 KB, 361 views)
__________________
1950's-70's HOF singles. Pre-war Cubs. Random eBay impulse purchases...

Last edited by jchcollins; 12-03-2015 at 11:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-02-2015, 07:52 PM
jchcollins's Avatar
jchcollins jchcollins is offline
John
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 673
Default

2nd post and 2nd question: The attached picture is NOT of my '56 Mantle, but of a card out on eBay right now. Look closely at the top right corner of this card. Now tell me, is this not the same type of paper loss (worse, actually) than what appears on my card in the original post ?!?!?! I guess maybe SCG could detect my "tampering" (if indeed I used an eraser) whereas maybe this card got the paper loss more honestly?

What are your opinions (grading and dispicable card-tampering practices aside...) as to eye appeal and how these types of things affect them?

Thanks.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Screen Shot 2015-12-02 at 7.03.07 PM.jpg (17.7 KB, 359 views)
__________________
1950's-70's HOF singles. Pre-war Cubs. Random eBay impulse purchases...
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-02-2015, 07:56 PM
bnorth's Avatar
bnorth bnorth is online now
Ben North
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 4,471
Default

As a card doctor you done a horrible job. On a serious note I doubt what you done really changed the value much. You had a stained card before and now you have one missing paper.

EDIT: WOW PSA gives way higher grades with paper loss. I had a solid NrMint Ruth that got a SGC 40/3 because of a piece of paper loss in the border the size of 2 pin heads beside each other. Your card looks to have much more damage because of the loss of ink and gloss.
__________________
T210 Series 3 Ft Worth, looking for low end examples and especially ones with a Y shaped hole punch. I also have some extra T210's for trade.

Last edited by bnorth; 12-02-2015 at 08:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-02-2015, 08:08 PM
jchcollins's Avatar
jchcollins jchcollins is offline
John
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 673
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bnorth View Post
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...
__________________
1950's-70's HOF singles. Pre-war Cubs. Random eBay impulse purchases...
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-02-2015, 08:16 PM
bnorth's Avatar
bnorth bnorth is online now
Ben North
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 4,471
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jchcollins View Post
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.
__________________
T210 Series 3 Ft Worth, looking for low end examples and especially ones with a Y shaped hole punch. I also have some extra T210's for trade.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-02-2015, 08:33 PM
jchcollins's Avatar
jchcollins jchcollins is offline
John
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 673
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bnorth View Post
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. :-)
__________________
1950's-70's HOF singles. Pre-war Cubs. Random eBay impulse purchases...

Last edited by jchcollins; 12-02-2015 at 08:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-02-2015, 09:08 PM
KCRfan1 KCRfan1 is offline
Lou Simcoe
L0u Sim.coe
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 1,374
Default

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.
__________________
Working on my 1973 set
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-02-2015, 09:38 PM
jchcollins's Avatar
jchcollins jchcollins is offline
John
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 673
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KCRfan1 View Post
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. :-)
__________________
1950's-70's HOF singles. Pre-war Cubs. Random eBay impulse purchases...
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-03-2015, 09:21 AM
KCRfan1 KCRfan1 is offline
Lou Simcoe
L0u Sim.coe
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 1,374
Default

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.
__________________
Working on my 1973 set
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-03-2015, 11:53 AM
CW's Avatar
CW CW is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,316
Default

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!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mick jimjim Autograph Forum- Primarily Sports 2 08-08-2013 05:57 PM
Is this Mick or Mack dogmechanic Autograph Forum- Primarily Sports 8 08-07-2013 10:07 AM
Is this Mick good? mcgwirecom Autograph Forum- Primarily Sports 4 08-01-2013 09:00 PM
Joe D, Ted & Mick.. Need help MGHPro Autograph Forum- Primarily Sports 11 07-18-2012 09:55 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:33 PM.


ebay GSB