PSA 8 1960 Clay Exhibit??

[scooter729]

Adam, I'm still trying to figure out why those two Clay cards got a 2.5 and a 3 - how am I supposed to tell any differences?!

[Arazi4442]

Bumping this old post for two reasons. Discussion about Ali/Clay RCs and also a couple posts about PSA dating accuracy.

Curious as to people’s thoughts on this auction. I’m always on the lookout for early Ali but never considered a bid on this one. How can it be dated to 1960 when he didn’t change his name until 1964. (I believe)

Seems like a solid price but if this was a true 1960 RC, I suspect it would’ve gone for much, much more.

Anyone with any insight to this card/issue?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/175907937455

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Arazi4442

Bumping this old post for two reasons. Discussion about Ali/Clay RCs and also a couple posts about PSA dating accuracy.

Curious as to people’s thoughts on this auction. I’m always on the lookout for early Ali but never considered a bid on this one. How can it be dated to 1960 when he didn’t change his name until 1964. (I believe)

Seems like a solid price but if this was a true 1960 RC, I suspect it would’ve gone for much, much more.

Anyone with any insight to this card/issue?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/175907937455

That's a 1965 issue. Or later. There are several different Clays in the issue, which is under the Dutch Gum umbrella, serie M.L.H. Labelling mistake by PSA generates absurd money. No way it goes that high if properly labelled IMO.

Here's another.
https://milehighcardco.com/c__1965_6...-LOT78411.aspx

And
https://milehighcardco.com/c__1965_6...-LOT78408.aspx

And the very card in question.
https://www.milehighcardco.com/LotDe...entoryid=77552

[Arazi4442]

Thanks for the explanation, Peter!

Boy, that is a huge labeling issue from PSA. Good news is it may not cost anyone. Just noticed the card is re-listed (relisted twice! As another auction and BIN)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Arazi4442

Thanks for the explanation, Peter!

Boy, that is a huge labeling issue from PSA. Good news is it may not cost anyone. Just noticed the card is re-listed (relisted twice! As another auction and BIN)

Someone is obviously playing games here.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by Arazi4442

Bumping this old post for two reasons. Discussion about Ali/Clay RCs and also a couple posts about PSA dating accuracy.

Curious as to people’s thoughts on this auction. I’m always on the lookout for early Ali but never considered a bid on this one. How can it be dated to 1960 when he didn’t change his name until 1964. (I believe)

Seems like a solid price but if this was a true 1960 RC, I suspect it would’ve gone for much, much more.

Anyone with any insight to this card/issue?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/175907937455

That's awful. Somebody got fooled.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by D. Bergin

That's awful. Somebody got fooled.

Yeah, the dumbasses at PSA. The poor winner could've gotten a nice early Clay item for that money.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Yeah, the dumbasses at PSA. The poor winner could've gotten a nice early Clay item for that money.

I don't think it really sold.

[Exhibitman]

FWIW, a raw green with visible mildew staining sold for $1226 on eBay recently, so I think the secret is out on the Exhibit Clay cards.

[sthoemke]

I have a small stack of the Green Wrestlers. (shared a sheet with the boxers)

I can definately say that they are rarer/scarcer, and tougher condition-wise.

I believe the green-tints were released first, although I haven't seen absolute "proof" of that.