Mid-Grade Collectors
 

Here are some examples on recent pickups - ‘67 Topps high numbers. These cards in grades above 6 I have learned recently are SUBSTANTIALLY more expensive in eBay auctions. Plus I’ve learned that for lower grade and O/C - there are a lot more sellers who are willing to make deals on Buy-It-Now prices that accept offers. I saved more than $50 off this Colavito from the original BIN asking price. Yeah, it’s O/C but so what? The picture has beautiful color and there isn’t a crease on it. To give you some perspective, the same ‘67 Colavito #580 in a PSA 7 - centered much better than mine but still not perfect - sold for more than $200 in a November 2017 eBay auction. Without saying what I paid for mine, it was a HECKUVA lot less than two bills...

Again, each unto his own and nothing against collectors who shell out big bucks for macho, super high-grade vintage. But if I tried to put together a ‘67 set like that I might have 10 cards before I died.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...b7a753ca53.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...21cdfeada5.jpg

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Those are great cards! I'm with you in that I would rather give in on centering than have a crease...that's how that card came out of the pack after all! I am finding that in shooting for mid-grade I am usually going to have to make a concession somewhere, but I don't mind doing that. I am having fun, and my collecting is affordable for me. At the end of the day, the card is going into my box or binder, and it is for my enjoyment anyway.

100% agree. Just got this 71 Clemente today. Made an offer that was 1/3 less than similar cards and it was accepted. Definitely OC, but nice color and no creases. Looks sweet in the binder.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...9e02d8c305.png


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Congrats on the pickup, Ed!

I think the OC gives it some character. Nice card!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am learning to live with less than great centering. On Friday, I purchased a partial (241/250) 1954 Topps set at a pretty good price. I have gone through and pulled all the cards with creases and wrinkles and will be looking to sell those. While the centering is varied throughout the set, I am ok with that aspect of the cards. What do you guys think about miscuts? Some of them are otherwise very nice cards, and I believe all are commons. I am keeping some that are OC. Is miscut really that much worse? Would you keep or don't keep?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

As you can see from the 71 Clemente I posted, I am ok with OC cards. However, I do want to make sure that there is at least a full border around the card. I guess it is just what we can tolerate. I use the “binder test”. If a card looks good while I flip through the binder, I am good with it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Some MC cards I think are tolerable if the borders blend in well or are implied. For example I have a '53 Topps Warren Spahn, PSA 5 MC. It's got a sliver of a top border, but it blends into the color of the painting so well that you have to hold it a couple of inches away from your eye to even see it. The bottom border, where the black nameplate is - is larger than usual because of this - but on the whole the card does not look disproportionate to me, and so I was ok w/ the miscut. There is a scan of this card over on the thread titled "PSA and Off-Center Cards", I think.

I am getting to be the opposite: as long as the card has great centering and is clean and well-registered I am fine with lesser corners or even a slight crease. The vg-ex due to a small crease that looks nm-mt is my favorite place to play in postwar cards. But there are exceptions. If you collect all things 1971 Topps, as I try to, you have to go after OPC cards and you basically will get o/c cards from Canada:


https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...ackson%201.JPG

The centering on OPC sucks so bad that I will take lesser grade if they happen to be centered:

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...%20Seaver.jpeg

The only place I might splurge is on a Hank Aaron (favorite player of the era and all).

Lately I find myself going for all types - VG-EX range and centered are preferable, but I have also gone for some O/C cards that still have sharper corners and are otherwise clean (sharp to me is usually more PSA 6 range than 8...) - especially with late 60's and early 70's cards. It really just depends on the individual card.

[QUOTE=Vintagevault13;1795237]

I use the “binder test”. If a card looks good while I flip through the binder, I am good with it.



this is what I use and some days I get different thoughts on cards but if they look good in the set I keep it. I think to collect mid grade you have to use some OC cards.

hopefully I will finish my 57 set this week with some help from the board. I'll post pics once I do

Great cards fellas! Love mid grade - majority of my collection! Here are some of my "collector grade" favorites

Attachment 323178Attachment 323179
Attachment 323180Attachment 323181
Attachment 323182Attachment 323183
Attachment 323184Attachment 323185

My haul from yesterday’s eBay sale. Definitely some mid grade examples that have good eye appeal to me.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...9c2196d734.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...a443638a5e.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...27909433fc.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nice. I've always thought that VG-EX is an excellent value for the eye appeal most have.

Very well done!Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

I picked these up last night for the '54 Topps set I am building. I like the eye appeal of these cards. The Yogi scan wouldn't cooperate. Tommy Lasorda is the last card I need to complete the set. After that, there will be a few upgrades but nothing major.

Great cards.

Thanks for sharing them with us.

Duane

Great thread and some really nice cards posted! While I love the high end stuff, the mid grade stuff fits my wallet much better!

Love that Kaline!

Nice work!

Me too!!!!!

Great stuff, guys! These are my kind o' cards!

Did someone say mid-grade?
 

Great discussion and some awesome cards in here.

Nothing like finding that rare low-mid grade card that makes you look no further. Rare but when it happens, it's like a bonus thrill.

https://www.collectorfocus.com/image...slugger-museum

https://www.collectorfocus.com/image...-bowman-mantle

https://www.collectorfocus.com/image...-bowman-mantle

https://www.collectorfocus.com/image...9-topps-mantle

https://www.collectorfocus.com/image...-topps-jackson

https://www.collectorfocus.com/image...6-fleer-jordan

https://www.collectorfocus.com/image...r-jack-jackson

https://www.collectorfocus.com/image...1911-d304-cobb

https://www.collectorfocus.com/image...9-topps-mantle

Matt - wow!!!!!

Geez Matt. Those are like high grade compared to what I collect. And what the heck is wrong with that PSA1 Jordan RC?!

thanks to Ben "MIKE GARCIA" finished my 57 topps set mid grade would be psa 5-7, mostly. some writing on the mantle back but good looking card

on to my 56 and 55 sets only a couple more to get

That Reggie is an incredible 5!
RayB

what's wrong with that Jordan is there no back at all???? looks good

Another thing in favor of mid-grade (or even lower really)...the older I get the crappier my eyes get. Even with my glasses, I truly can't tell the difference between just about anything PSA 5 and above. Centering and color still stand out for me, but small corner dings don't even register for me anymore.

The downside of my vision degrading with age is that I struggle to read the card backs these days--especially on something like a 1981 Fleer McCovey--but the upside is that the eye appeal of all these great cards just goes up and up each year for free.

I've been getting into modern cards in slightly lower technical grades than the expensive ones. Great way to pick up prime RCs and other cards without spending big on them.

https://photos.imageevent.com/exhibi...ticker%201.jpg

Here are a couple of others for my 1971 sets. Got great deals on both. For my criteria, they fit my set perfectly and have good eye appeal.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...c154b1526b.pnghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...a9444dcc9d.png


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Love this thread, as it’s right in line with my collecting philosophy of buying the card and not the grade. I usually aim for a nice 5 or 6, but when it comes to the more sought after players like Mantle or Williams, I’m more than happy with a nice 3.



https://sportscardalbum.com/c/4k8y7apr.jpeg


https://sportscardalbum.com/c/ij19z9d5.jpeg


https://sportscardalbum.com/c/v5i6tz6r.jpeg


https://sportscardalbum.com/c/y80r6jqt.jpeg

I usually skip mid grade and buy low grade, because I love baseball history, the nostalgia and the images, not the sharpness of the corners. I can get every 60's set in low grade, or just one of them in near mint. The choice seems easy to me. Round corners, edge wear, a crease, a pinhole, none of these are a problem. It's the same card, with the same picture, the same stats on the back, and I get just as much fun looking them through as I do a near mint example. My low grade 1956 Mantle that cost $40 instead of $400 brings just as much joy for a fraction of the price. I often downgrade cards even, buying a low grade copy and selling a mid grade if I have one. I do get disgusted looks from some dealers at card shows when I ask if they have poor-good cards, but it works for me. It's a more relaxing hobby, in my eyes, to not care about being one of the hobby elite or worrying if there is a wrinkle that isn't visible in the scan, and just build sets for personal enjoyment.

Man, do I love the sentiment! I am trying very hard to get back to simply enjoying having the cards/sets just for the sake of having fun owning them. If I can help it, I would rather not have pin holes or writing, but trying to "get over" most everything else.

Nice cards. My '56 Williams is an SGC 3. On many of the oversized 1950's cards, I think they can tolerate / "wear" their wear so to speak better than later cards because the card stock quality was better and the cards themselves were a bit thicker. Particularly '56 Topps - which I think was printed on slightly thicker card stock than '55. I don't like big ugly creases that break the surface, but '56 Topps cards can hide lesser creases well and remain very attractive. Once you get into most sets from the 1960's, and then the early 70's which I think were the worst - the card stock becomes terrible, much thinner and just generally of crappy quality. I think the late 60's and early 70's was worse on the whole for dramatically O/C and miscut cards as well.

I mostly agree, but when it comes to my era the 1970s I can usually find nice looking cards very cheaply for all but the biggest stars anyway. Now, when it comes to marquee cards, I definitely downgrade in the interests of having more of them:

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...%20Mantle.jpeg

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...0SGC%2040.jpeg

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...s%20Mantle.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...s%20Mantle.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...s%20Mantle.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...20Clemente.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...20Clemente.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...s%20Koufax.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...20Robinson.JPG

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...ams_%20Ted.jpg

http://photos.imageevent.com/exhibit...0PSA%203_1.jpg

Great stuff and very motivational! I have fancied myself a set builder over the years and have enjoyed that. However, I am getting increasingly restless. There are sooooo many cards out there that I want, and I just don't have the ability or perhaps desire to build that many sets. Then I thought I needed my star cards to be higher grade since I wasn't building sets. (I know...programmed robot ;() However, I love this list of cards, and it makes me realize what I could accomplish. Thanks for this!

This is exactly my sweet spot for 50’s cards. Low grade copies that retain a nice image. Readable backs matter too, as I love the Topps cartoons and over the top enthusiasm of the written descriptions. I’m around 95% of the way through a full 1950’s Topps/Bowman run thanks to cards like these

I am really starting to consider selling off most of my commons from some baseball and football partials to buy some star cards I have been wanting. It feels like a lot of work though.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Glad to have found this conversation hub on the interwebs. I started collecting when I was a kid, so, about 30+ years ago. Managed to thin out the pile of junk wax over the years .... gave most of it away to thrift stores, and kept a couple for nostalgia (a couple shoe boxes full, that is). Among the junky stuff, of course, I made sure to save my short stack of Upper Deck Ken Griffey Jr. cards that my nutty card collector uncle had given me (he had 2 closets overflowing with wax packs and sets back then). The late 80's/early 90's was a fun era ... lots of hype, cheap packs all over the place, lots of card shops with old worn down vintage cards to stare at and drool over. Off centered cards were the norm ... keeping those corners and edges razor sharp and keeping the surfaces clean and glossy, that was the name of the game back then.

Did some searches on ebay a few years ago and discovered that vast new wonderland of collecting. Back in the days of the card shops, I never could have imaged the future would be so bright. So these days, I enjoy being able to browse thousands of vintage cards from the 50's through the 70's from the leisure of my home. The way I see it, I would have to have $$ millions $$ to burn before I ever buy high grade vintage cards that are NM or nicer. The handled worn down cards have just so much more character, in my opinion. I actually think a crease-free VG or VG-EX 50's card with decent Left/Right centering is prettier to look at than a NM or Mint example of the same card. I don't spend big bucks ... $80 or $100 is a major card purchase for me. I don't mind even a small crease or two on a 50's or 60's card. I pretty much draw the line at badly miscut cards, cards that have been butchered, ugly print lines/wax stains, and ones that are badly out of focus. I love the cards with rounded corners, chipped edges, a light crease or two or three, and moderately faded colors (as long as it's not over the player's face). I feel like a kid in a candy store when I can score a couple of nice VG/VG-EX cards for $20 or $30.

Fun thread...I dont buy more than a handfull of cards each year. When I do I try to focus n HOFers between 1952 through 1973. I prefer to stay in the 350 to 500 range for the best PSA 6 I can find. It seems that with the current standards a PSA 6 is a very pretty card. Centering as long as it doesn't carry an OC qualifier bother me. On regional cards like the Wilson Frank's I will settle for a PSA 4 or 5 in my price range.

I would agree that 6 is a pretty nice place to play in 1960’s cards and earlier. Unless just dramatically O/C, they usually have nice corners and surface features. Most of the newer 6’s (where PSA is being tough) and some cards present like 7’s or 8’s. If you don’t mind a bit more corner wear, I also think that PSA 4’s and 4.5’s are great value for the money. It takes awhile, but you can find centered 4’s of HOFer’s from the 50’s and 60’s for a fraction of the price that some truly high or investment grade cards sell for.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm pretty much the same as you Mike. I start getting nervous if I get much higher than $500. This card was on ebay and it looked nicer than most of the PSA6's I saw. When the 15% off day came I picked it up for a price I was more comfortable paying. The picture they had was taken with a phone and made it difficult to tell condition, but it turned out to be really nice for the grade. This is a scan I made.

Here are a couple of my favorites.

David and Kieth, No matter the grades those cards are serious eye candy.

I love this thread. To me it represents the heart and soul of vintage collecting.

For me mid-grade is a subjective term and depends on the card. Personally I try to collect “upper” mid-grade cards. So for 1950’s as 1960’s I stay in the PSA 6-7 range. That’s my sweet spot. 8’s just seem like too expensive 7’s usually (a dash more centering) and 9’s and 10’s are unattainable unless one is highly motivated for a specific card. I honestly can rarely tell the difference between a 9 and a 10.

But as I said the older the set the lower mid-grade becomes. In the way of an example I enjoy PSA 4-5’s in the 1940 Playball set. That’s my 1930’s-1940’s mid range.

Incredible cards. I would imagine that for a Cracker Jack Cobb, 4 may be well more than "mid-grade" among remaining examples.

Wow, those cards are the definition of eye appeal and “strong for the grade”. Thanks for sharing!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you fo the comments everyone - very much appreciated. Been lucky on a couple of these cards that I was able to pick them up at a good price, and I try to find cards that look like a PSA 7/8 but for some reason have slower grade. The Cobb I won in REA and paid strong for it but in hand it looks like an 8. There is zero chance I find a CJ Shoeless to make a pair with it without selling a car or a kid 😄

KC

Mid-grade?

I’d say that’s the low end of high grade. But one could argue the very top of mid-grade. Obviously centering is the only real issue. No matter what ya call it, that card is bonkers! #drool

I wanted to revive this thread to whine a little. [emoji2957] When shopping in the PSA 5-6 range, it is getting harder and harder to find cards that are well centered AND have good focus/registration. [emoji2959] It is becoming more clear that I am going to have to give in on one or the other. It puts me in the minority, but I am starting to think I would rather give in on centering and keep the nice, clear image. Some corner wear doesn't bother me too much.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I don’t mind centering issues as much as bad focus, print lines and ink smudges.

Here's my 1954 Bowman Ted Williams. Well worth the $10 I paid.

https://oi1139.photobucket.com/album...68/54B_Ted.jpg

Put together a mid-grade 1951 Bowman set back in the early '80's, when nice looking commons could be had for about a buck. Kind of financially strapped at the time and the ball & chain didn't approve of my hobby, so had to consider the set complete without VG-EX keys Mantle and Mays. I think those two guys at that time were around 200 and 100 bucks, respectively. Twenty five years later and out of my cage, I splurged on these two examples at an even grand for the pair to finally complete the set.

Poor registration to me is worse than slightly o/c as well, but I'm not a centering freak. I'll take a nice picture and 70/30 centering over print problems and 50/50 every time.

I collect mid to lower end myself depends on the mid grade price and player, damage doesn't bother me either but I like a fully intacted card so when looking at them I can read the front and backs. Most of my 1960 Topps Baseball set is EX to EXMT and some of the lower end commons NM but those are the under 10.00 ones.

I like to put cards into binders, so right there a slabbed or top loader won't do me any good, and also handling of cards and putting them in pages can damage them as well. Personally, I find there is some charm in worn, damaged or otherwise altered cards, and for the most part, I would prefer to have a card of that type in my binders.

I even had recently bought a lot of late 50s/early 60s cards where the original owner had cut up other cards to "update" his older cards, or had written on them. I need cards for a lot of players from back then, and if I can get them at a low price because they are damaged, then that is good for me.

Here is the only pic I took of the cards from this lot, and you can see other low grade cards in the picture also (like the Orlando Pena) or other of the modified cut-up cards like the Don Larsen.
http://i.imgur.com/8PLv6WBl.jpg

I collected '71 to '92 Topps! Still have them all too, and they're all pretty much minty. I have a spot set aside, in my modest, but nice, memorabilia room at home.

I've seldom been all that fussy about condition.

If I need a card, and it's a good deal for what it is I might buy it.
The last few years I have been passing on really worn commons, if a nice one is only a dollar or two more I may as well wait.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/181922...eposted-public

https://www.flickr.com/photos/181922...eposted-public

I mostly collect mid grade cards. These are two of my favorite cards in my collection. I think I picked both of them up for less than a $100 dollars.

So how's everyone making out in the great slabbed card scandal of 2019? Nice to be a lower grade collector right about now: I've got no skin in the game.

About 5 years ago I set out to complete my 1969 and a 1972 Topps sets in raw mint condition. Visited card shows, scoured eBay - I was a Greg Morris fan way before he got cool. Looking back, it was way more hassle and expense than it was worth, especially the '72 set (the post-war monster!) Wish I'd just gone for centering and left it at that.

Cards like these are much more fun:
Attachment 356084
Attachment 356086
Attachment 356088

I don’t either. Unless someone bothered to doctor my PSA 3 ‘58 Aaron YL or my PSA 2.5 ‘48 Leaf Ted Williams. I seriously hope not...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Agreed. Which made me wonder who’s buying the cards with those scarlet letters. Then I quickly realized that, to some extent, it’s me. I simply will not buy a card with a nasty crease, stain, or paper loss. Unless it’s been on my wish list for many years and the violations aren’t too obtrusive. For example, I recently bought a rookie Aaron in a PSA 2 slab. While viewing the front, you scratch your head because you swear you’re looking at a 6 and wonder why in the world it’s only a 2. Then closer examination of the back reveals paper loss the size of a pinhead. So I bought it — paid a grand for an otherwise EX-MT card. I’ll buy those all day long, but they have to be highly desirable cards impossible to find in high grade without getting into a bidding war and, ultimately, paying exponentially more for the same card without the flaw.

This is a perfect example of why I boycotted PSA (way before the Moser/PWCC scandal erupted). No way this is a 9... no way! And recently graded too. Unbelievable...

grade
 

Nothing like buying a card graded a 1 or 2......getting it home and saying... what ? " that's what I call VG ++ "

Before the internet
 

Someone mentioned buying cards from mail brochures back in the day. I did the same and purchased this “near mint” ‘69 Clemente from a reputable dealer, who now has a seemingly successful eBay business in cards so I won’t call him out. Besides, at the time this actually was considered NM. And I didn’t have any complaints when I received it. Apologies for the crappy iPhone pic; it actually looks better in-hand — definitely not NM though.

Truth is that back in the 80’s and earlier, prices for the most part were low enough across the board that ads even for stars and HOF’ers could say something like “EX or better” and 9 times out of 10 nobody cared. Centering was scarcely a consideration at all. A far cry from today when the difference between a PSA 5 and 8 of the same card can be many multiples...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No gloating zone
 

I'm in your brotherhood, Adam. No worries with a low-to-mid grade unslabbed collection.

In light of the recent scandal involving PWCC, Moser and PSA et al, the above bold is no longer on my wish list.
Like I said in another post, it was pointed out to me on a FB post about a current auction with some nicely graded 52 Topps cards with one being a PSA 9.
The 9 was a beautiful card to look at but my immediate thoughts were "Doctored"
Not saying it was as I have no idea but like I have stated numerous times, I find it hard to believe (sometimes) that these 60-70+ and beyond year old cards managed to stay in this condition for all these years.

After being untouched for many years, I finally sorted all my 1970-1976 Topps Baseball, Basketball and Football cards (mostly Ex-Mt) last week. I also found out I need glasses, don't recall the numbers being so hard to see on some sets.

Is anyone working on any of these sets? If so, please send me your want lists and let me know if you have any extra 1973 and 1975 Minis to trade.

Thank you,

Mike

I kinda like around PSA 3 range that presents well, I got the 65 off here from a fellow member.

https://i.ibb.co/HrgZnr5/2-CEB61-F2-...-F3-DF8289.jpg
https://i.ibb.co/ZcdXy9h/F8-D3084-A-...C46-A06481.jpg
https://i.ibb.co/8P3pcr5/D4-A0-B58-F...-A7184-FEE.jpg
https://i.ibb.co/vHG3TLk/F56-DC1-AC-...ED773575-E.jpg
https://i.ibb.co/qJwfpyc/B15048-F4-B...-F7518-D65.jpg

Very nice Koufax cards. Other than my Kaline's, I live in the 2-5 range.

One poster made a comment about it before, sure while owning high graded cards would be nice, I get the same amount of joy from the lower graded pieces. I mainly target good eye appeal when I'm looking for a card, the numerical grade doesn't really matter to me.

I think it also comes down to there are Certain cards on my list that I'll never be able to afford in higher grades. I would love a high grade 34 Goudey Gehrig #61 or a high grade t206 Dark Cap Matty, or a high grade 51 Bowman Mantle. However unless I inherit a fortune from an unknown relative or happen to hit the lottery, that's not gonna happen.

Plus there's something romantic about a well worn card in my opinion. It maks you wonder how many hands it passed through? Who collected it i the first place?

Mid-Grade Collectors
 

In December of last year I purchased two fair conditioned 1953 Bowman color commons at a local card show and it ignited a passion I've had since the 1970s to own a complete set. I decided on putting a set together in mostly vg/ex condition as it reflected more or less the types of older cards in the 70s when I was a teenager. eBay has been my main source for purchase, about 156 of the 160 have been obtained from there. To fund my set I have been selling many of my Topps Heritage master sets and SSP variations.

Overall I would rank my set to be in vg/ex + condition with about 45% in vg/ex condition. Thirty-three cards are graded. Most of my high series is still in vg/ex condition. I have been upgrading commons to ex to ex/mint condition here and there. When I began I was able to purchase the high number commons in vg/ex shape from some wonderful eBay dealers anywhere from $3-$5 each, those days, unfortunately, seem to have disappeared. Here is a sample of some of my cards from the set:

In addition to grade 3-5 usually looking pretty good, it often seems like there's less demand for post-war vintage in that range (compared to the many current "gotta have the card" collectors who want to spend as little as possible and thus keep a fairly high floor for the lowest grades' prices).

And naturally the scarcity and higher-end luxury feel to grade 6-7 and above often makes those a totally different ballpark than mid-grade.

So I've always felt that grade 3-5 is clearly the best combo of value and visual appeal. You'd think there would be a lot more others out there who feel the same as many of us here, but the market doesn't really dictate that. Making it the range that I usually focus on for my '50s and '60s collection.

I'm glad this thread got bumped to the top because you guys are my kind of collectors. I like low grade cards for many of the reasons that you guys have already said. I like how it gives them a certain character and makes them feel more real. I usually don't mind if there's a visible crease or 2, if they are off center or have bad corners. The only things that bother me are paper loss, lots of writing or if part of the card are missing. I'm also a big fan of how it allows me to afford more cards in the set that I'm building or more of the random cards that I think are cool.

I look for the same type of cards as you. It's all about how the card looks, and there are plenty of lower grade cards that look just fine when they are in a binder. I'm fine with some minor creases as long as they don't have a major impact on how the card looks. I also try to avoid paper loss and writing as well as tears and pinholes. There is no way I would have nearly as much in my collection otherwise.

I understand the feeling of not wanting writing on a card in your set, but I love cards like this. I just imagine the kid drawing all over the card back in the 60's and think they are awesome. I'd have a better copy for my set, but definitely like having these in my collection all the same.


.

My war crimes against cards:

In 1970 I collected the Odd Rods stickers along with my baseball cards. I stuck the Odd Rods on a box and when they began to come off I glued them to my baseball cards.

Also, my grandmother decided to separate mine and my brother's 1970s by writing "Santa Claus" on the fronts of his cards. He was going through an identity crisis as a 5-year-old at the time, calling himself Santa.

For 1971 I discovered the magic of push pins and I put several of my 71 Topps on the wall by pushing the pin through the dot on the front of the card.

Finally, in 1976, I wanted to display some of my Clemente cards in frames on the wall of my bedroom. Lacking plastic sheets I taped them to the backing of the frames. Needless to say, when I finally decided to remove the cards, it damaged the backs. I had to replace them all.

Just wondering, did any of my former cards end up in anyone's collections?