Possible grade on '58 AS Mantle?

[mferronibc]

Hi Guys,

I know it's not the most valuable card but it is sort of my prized possession. When I was about 10 (30+ years ago) my dad bought this for me in the hype of my 80s junk wax collecting and really piqued my interest in vintage. One of those if the house was on fire this is what I'd grab over any other more valuable card in my collection.

Always have wondered about the grade. Not sure I'd ever send it in but hoping someday to pass on to my kids and might want it slabbed/authenticated for them.

I always thought somewhere in the PSA 5-6 range? Sorry for the lighting and the scratches are on the case not the card surface. Any thoughts?

Thanks for your input!

[jchcollins]

Nice card. Assuming no surface issues that we can't see, I'd guess in the 6-7 range.

[Hxcmilkshake]

5

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

[JollyElm]

That looks pretty sweet to me. For comparison, I sent these two in with one of Bobby's group subs, and the card on left came back as PSA 7 OC (and it has color shifts), and the one at right a PSA 6 (with a rather large print line)...

1958mantleas487two.jpg

Yours (as far as I can tell, and lacking any unseen problems) blow both of these away, with stellar clarity, sharp corners and decent centering. PSA 7 at a minimum, I would say.

[timzcardz]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Nice card. Assuming no surface issues that we can't see, I'd guess in the 6-7 range.

I'd agree with this, except possibly . . .


What are :

The vertical line running between the 2nd and third columns of stars from the left?

The curved line from the "z" in "Magazine" to the intersection of his bat with his back?

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by timzcardz

I'd agree with this, except possibly . . .


What are :

The vertical line running between the 2nd and third columns of stars from the left?

The curved line from the "z" in "Magazine" to the intersection of his bat with his back?

Agreed, which is why I said assuming no surface issues that we can't really determine through a picture. If they are just print issues, the card woud probably still have an outside chance at a 7. Increasingly however, graders are making decisions based on what they see under 10x (and +) loupes, so the reality is it's impossible to tell what the card would grade or even get a good ballpark just from a picture. I have vintage cards that look like 7's that got SGC 5's and 5.5's. On some I still have no clue why.

[mferronibc]

Thanks for the input guys. The lines are both on the plastic case not the card itself. Kinda feel like more likely to be disappointed with a 5-6 than I am to be pleasantly surprised by a 7+. Wouldn’t want to ruin my perception of the card as it is so sentimental to me and unless it was an 8 to “lock in” that kind of value don’t see too much upside to sending it in for now.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by mferronibc

Thanks for the input guys. The lines are both on the plastic case not the card itself. Kinda feel like more likely to be disappointed with a 5-6 than I am to be pleasantly surprised by a 7+. Wouldn’t want to ruin my perception of the card as it is so sentimental to me and unless it was an 8 to “lock in” that kind of value don’t see too much upside to sending it in for now.

Also know that consciously or not, grading companies under-grade Mantle. He's the single most popular player in vintage card collecting and always has been. If that were a '58 All Star of Frank Robinson or Eddie Mathews in the exact same condition, it would be a lot more likely to get a 7 than Mantle. Not fair, but true.

[mferronibc]

Great tip thanks John. Sounds like the problem you ran into with your ‘65 mantle you posted on the other thread. If this did come back a 5 I’d solicit your help breaking it out because looking at that grade every day would just depress me.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by mferronibc

Great tip thanks John. Sounds like the problem you ran into with your ‘65 mantle you posted on the other thread. If this did come back a 5 I’d solicit your help breaking it out because looking at that grade every day would just depress me.

Yeah, but you can't get hung up like that with grading. Technical grade is not the same as eye appeal. Buy the card, not the grade. If you are happy with that card and don't plan to sell it, then no real reason to send it in. I actually pride myself on lower grade cards that look fantastic, because in most cases in means I got a good deal. Check out the thread "Mid-Grade Collectors" in this same forum.

[Gorditadogg]

The card looks NM to me, I see three sharp corners, maybe a little wear on the bottom right? Color is good and focus looks fine. I don't think the centering would keep it from getting a 7. Why do you think it is just a 5 or 6?


Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[ALBB]

75

[packs]

One of my all time favorite cards:

[Casey2296]

Sentimental value: Gem Mint 10+

PSA value: why would that even matter given the above value?

[mferronibc]

All valid points. Guess there's just this curiosity of value particularly if someday my kids don't appreciate its sentimental value passed through a generation.

And that auto version is priceless IMO - beautiful.

[mintacular]

I feel like a 7 is merited, unless there is a surface issue that we cannot see. The centering including the back centering and light softness corners + chippy/ding-age on edges makes me think anything higher is unlikely

[GasHouseGang]

Looks like a 7. The only thing that concerns me is the back. If you submit it be sure to ask for no qualifiers. Otherwise they might give you an OC for the back.

[judgebuck]

7 OC, in my opinion.

[ASF123]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Yeah, but you can't get hung up like that with grading. Technical grade is not the same as eye appeal. Buy the card, not the grade. If you are happy with that card and don't plan to sell it, then no real reason to send it in. I actually pride myself on lower grade cards that look fantastic, because in most cases in means I got a good deal. Check out the thread "Mid-Grade Collectors" in this same forum.

This. It seems like grading companies exist just to shit on beautiful cards like this one. “Ah, but there are print flaws you can only see under 10x magnification. No points for you!” (evil cackle).

[Tyruscobb]

5.5 or 6 in my lay, humble opinion. Nice card despite the grade it receives. Enjoy it.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by judgebuck

7 OC, in my opinion.

The OC standard for a PSA 7 drops out at 75/25. Assuming that card is not miscut in an odd way or something we can't see in the scan, it's centered better than that.