 |
|
||||||
 |
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
05-05-2009, 02:48 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Whatever the set
I would consider collecting in SGC 20 or PSA 1.5. I pretty much only collect low grade because that's all I can afford, but I've found that a card graded SGC 20 usually presents pretty well. For a couple of bucks more, a 20 can be much nicer than a 10.
|
|
#2
05-05-2009, 02:52 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Without question, T206
|
|
#3
05-05-2009, 03:12 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Exhibits
Exhibits might be worth considering, because of the blank backs, many have writting on the backs and/or have some paper loss/glue on the backs making the technicial grades P-F but very presentable. The 1921 set has a nice list of HOFers (Ruth, Cobb, Johnson, etc) and would be very doable in that grade and not overly expensive.
|
|
#4
05-05-2009, 03:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Any year of the 1920's exhibits would be a choice. A few big $$ cards here and there, but doable.
Also as far as low grade goes, with exhibits, pin holes, writing, and other "techniaclly grade lowering" aspects add to their flavor, IMO. "1923" Cutshaw:  Original owner's dis-like of Al McCoy (including razor slashes), admiration of Good Ol' John Sully. Hand colored Murphy: 
Last edited by mybuddyinc; 05-05-2009 at 03:21 PM. Reason: Scott's tooooo fast for me
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
