Best card grades for the money

[bk400]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

This is a fun topic, and I was actually thinking about it yesterday and found this video. Maybe some of you will like it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mt4h7DETVTQ

Very informative video -- thanks for sharing. Sounds like there's a lot of value to be found in the lower grades with vintage cards. Makes the hunt more fun than for the modern cards.

[UKCardGuy]

Personally VGEX 4 and EXMT 6 are where I find the sweet spot for quality vs price for post-war vintage.

I don't mind a card that's a little bit OC but I want sharp corners and no creases. I don't tend to get that with VG 3

[jethrod3]

I bought a 1955 Topps Jackie Robinson at the National in a PSA 3.5 holder. It had a couple of corners with a little wear, but was probably docked the most for a corner front surface crease visible only under high intensity light. So it presents fabulously. I'll take those kinds of surface creases all day as 3.5's.

[rugbymarine]

I love discussions like this. As some have alluded to, the lower you go on the technical grading scale, the more variability you get within a grade. In the low-to-mid grades, it's always interesting to see what collectors prioritize. Corners, centering, edges, back centering, color, registration, lack of staining, no creases, lack of print defects, etc. For most cards lower than a 5, or maybe a 6, something has to give and the card can only have some of those qualities (kind of obvious I guess....since if it had them all, it would be a higher grade).

For me personally, I've settled in to a sweet spot of mid grade examples for my vintage HOF. There are so many beautiful 4s, 5s, and 6s. And as other have mentioned, there are 5s that look better than 6s, and 6s that look like they could've been 8s if they were graded 20 years ago.

[cgjackson222]

Great eye, Ian! Those are some beautiful cards! The centering is outstanding, and the borders are snow white. Can't believe some of those didn't grade higher, especially the '56 and '60 Mays cards.

[jethrod3]

Originally Posted by rugbymarine

For me personally, I've settled in to a sweet spot of mid grade examples for my vintage HOF. There are so many beautiful 4s, 5s, and 6s. And as other have mentioned, there are 5s that look better than 6s, and 6s that look like they could've been 8s if they were graded 20 years ago.]

The '56 Aaron and '60 Mays look fabulous for those grades, IMO!!

[rugbymarine]

The 56 Mays has a good bit of corner wear. a 5 feels right there.

I've never sent any card to a TPG for review, but of all my cards I keep considering sending that 60 Mays in for a 2nd look. It looks as good in hand, and I think it should be a 7 all day. These grades are subjective opinions, and I remind myself that I bought the card...not the holder.

Thank you the kind words!

[cardsagain74]

I don't agree with 3s being a lot cheaper than 4s.

Overall, 4s are my favorite value when it comes to any vintage before the 1970s. Naturally they often have pretty good eye appeal, but without the much higher cost of something a little sharper.

And when you go below that, the "just wanna have the card" factor artificially raises the prices on the lowest grades. Especially since the pandemic boom.

So I've always thought vg-exish is the best bang for your vintage buck

[jb67]

[QUOTE=rugbymarine;2362240]I love discussions like this. As some have alluded to, the lower you go on the technical grading scale, the more variability you get within a grade. In the low-to-mid grades, it's always interesting to see what collectors prioritize. Corners, centering, edges, back centering, color, registration, lack of staining, no creases, lack of print defects, etc. For most cards lower than a 5, or maybe a 6, something has to give and the card can only have some of those qualities (kind of obvious I guess....since if it had them all, it would be a higher grade).

For me personally, I've settled in to a sweet spot of mid grade examples for my vintage HOF. There are so many beautiful 4s, 5s, and 6s. And as other have mentioned, there are 5s that look better than 6s, and 6s that look like they could've been 8s if they were graded 20 years ago.

Ian,

The centering certainly jumps out to me but I was also impressed with the color/registration. When you get both of those qualities in a mid-grade grade that is just outstanding. Great eye Ian.

[Peter_Spaeth]

I like the 9s in 4 holders because kids who see nothing but ultramodern chrome have no idea how to grade.

[bk400]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I like the 9s in 4 holders because kids who see nothing but ultramodern chrome have no idea how to grade.

That's really weird. Almost as if the label got swapped out by accident. As an aside, I just picked up a 50/50 centered, 1979 CSG 8 Ozzie (presumably newly graded, but hard to know with all the reholdering going on) and I cannot find the flaws. The price gap between a centered PSA 8 and a PSA 9 (forget the 10s) is 10x. Factor in the CSG (read: non-PSA) re-sale gap, and it's kind of a head scratcher. I'm trying to figure out whether I'm a chump or if at some point we are all going to break our cards out of their slabs and just go by eye appeal like back in the good old days.

[Kutcher55]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I like the 9s in 4 holders because kids who see nothing but ultramodern chrome have no idea how to grade.

Is there maybe some writing in the middle of the card below the auto? Or maybe just bad print? Either way it’s a great card. I love some of that panini stuff from the 70s. A couple of years ago I brought a couple of 74/75 Panini Led Zeppelin stickers and they are in ridiculously great shape. I sent them to SGC expecting 8s or even 9s and they both came back as 5s. I think they may have been the first of their kind graded by SGC and they went ultra conservative. That was my take anyway.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by UKCardGuy

Personally VGEX 4 and EXMT 6 are where I find the sweet spot for quality vs price for post-war vintage.

I don't mind a card that's a little bit OC but I want sharp corners and no creases. I don't tend to get that with VG 3

Makes sense. 4 is the old "tweener" grade between VG and EX, and 6 is the same for what used to be EX and NM. Lots of really nice looking cards can be found in those slabs.

Part of the problem with TPG's is pegging tweener grades like that to a number. That doesn't make a lot of sense if you look at how grading worked in say, 1985. Now we have broken the numbers down into half grades as well. 4.5, VG-EX+. Wouldn't VG to Excellent (plus) just be Excellent? Don't get me wrong, I get it - it's how things have evolved.