Some Cool News - Mick Chosen For Topps Museum Exhibit - PICS & TV NEWS LINK ADDED!

[brian1961]

Mike---you must realize that Matt is the king of the gents that go for the jugular when it comes to centering. He searched long and wide for such a Mantle. You're right, of course, Darth Grader surely took his own light saber and whittled the grade down. Which, in turn, whittled the value down disproportionately so that Matt could bag this kingly gem. Technically, it must have somehow earned the 4.5. I have a Mantle like that, from another set. A small but definite flaw killed the grade to an SGC 50. Nuf said on that account.

Matt---congrats bro! Anyone who has the privilege of seeing that sumptuous feast of pop culture will get his fill. Boy oh boy, what a line-up of powerful items. Your gorgeous 52 Topps Mantle will glow like a beacon. How many dads will say, "Wow! Wow! Wow! There it is. A real 1952 Topps Mickey Mantle! I've seen pictures of this card. Here's the real thing. Amazing. It is SO beautiful!" The fathers' responses will leave indelible impressions on their impressionable sons, and perhaps a daughter or two.

I can imagine it will be difficult and trying to be apart from your gem for such a lengthy time. This is a sacrifice, bro. I salute you.

----Brian Powell

[MattyC]

Thanks a million. I used to say that myself about the 52 Mick the few times I saw one. I was well into my 30s when I actually even held one for the first time.

Regarding this card's grade, there is a micro-wrinkle in the top left corner that is simply not visible to the naked eye. It takes strong light and just the right angle, and better yet magnification, to really see it.

I am incredibly thankful for that wrinkle (and the asinine, arbitrary grading rules) since it made the card just barely affordable If I can't see the flaw in hand or in a wall display, then I welcome it. I am all about anomalous freak cards that have some flaw that does not at all detract from their eye appeal, but does keep their cost down. They are out there. They don't come up often, but when they do I am all over them. The two times I've encountered such cards were this Mick and my Ruth Rookie. It's a big thrill when you can spend X on a card that looks flat out better than some that cost 2X or even way more!

[Shoebox]

Congrats on your card's inclusion in the display. I wish I lived close enough to travel to see. I am among those that has never seen this card in person. Thank goodness I can admire so many great collections via scan through this board.

[GregC]

I still say they should have used my "well loved" SGC 1.5 for the exhibit. Your 4.5 is simply too clean, looks like a 7 or 8 easy in hand. Some kid is going to think its a reprint with those even snow white borders. A nice roughed up copy is where it's at (says the younger brother that can't afford the minty looking version).