Mid-Grade Collectors

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

I picked up this crease free, mid-grade Ted last night.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[PowderedH2O]

I work on my early 50's and earlier cards in whatever looks nice to me. My favorite grades are PSA 1 where the issue is something silly like tape residue or some minor writing on the back. I've bought vintage Ruth, Gehrig, Cobb, Johnson, Foxx, and many more in PSA 1 and 2 that I adore. I once was working on a 1952 Bowman set in PSA 5-8. Then, I saw a raw vg Musial that was beautiful. I won it for about $50, then sold my graded Musial for over $240. I rolled that money into a ton more cards. I am now 75% done on about 15% of what I would have paid for nice graded cards. I am all about "collector grade"!

[jchcollins]

Here are some examples on recent pickups - ‘67 Topps high numbers. These cards in grades above 6 I have learned recently are SUBSTANTIALLY more expensive in eBay auctions. Plus I’ve learned that for lower grade and O/C - there are a lot more sellers who are willing to make deals on Buy-It-Now prices that accept offers. I saved more than $50 off this Colavito from the original BIN asking price. Yeah, it’s O/C but so what? The picture has beautiful color and there isn’t a crease on it. To give you some perspective, the same ‘67 Colavito #580 in a PSA 7 - centered much better than mine but still not perfect - sold for more than $200 in a November 2017 eBay auction. Without saying what I paid for mine, it was a HECKUVA lot less than two bills...

Again, each unto his own and nothing against collectors who shell out big bucks for macho, super high-grade vintage. But if I tried to put together a ‘67 set like that I might have 10 cards before I died.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Here are some examples on recent pickups - ‘67 Topps high numbers. These cards in grades above 6 I have learned recently are SUBSTANTIALLY more expensive in eBay auctions. Plus I’ve learned that for lower grade and O/C - there are a lot more sellers who are willing to make deals on Buy-It-Now prices that accept offers. I saved more than $50 off this Colavito from the original BIN asking price. Yeah, it’s O/C but so what? The picture has beautiful color and there isn’t a crease on it. To give you some perspective, the same ‘67 Colavito #580 in a PSA 7 - centered much better than mine but still not perfect - sold for more than $200 in a November 2017 eBay auction. Without saying what I paid for mine, it was a HECKUVA lot less than two bills...

Again, each unto his own and nothing against collectors who shell out big bucks for macho, super high-grade vintage. But if I tried to put together a ‘67 set like that I might have 10 cards before I died.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Those are great cards! I'm with you in that I would rather give in on centering than have a crease...that's how that card came out of the pack after all! I am finding that in shooting for mid-grade I am usually going to have to make a concession somewhere, but I don't mind doing that. I am having fun, and my collecting is affordable for me. At the end of the day, the card is going into my box or binder, and it is for my enjoyment anyway.

[Vintagevault13]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

Those are great cards! I'm with you in that I would rather give in on centering than have a crease...that's how that card came out of the pack after all! I am finding that in shooting for mid-grade I am usually going to have to make a concession somewhere, but I don't mind doing that. I am having fun, and my collecting is affordable for me. At the end of the day, the card is going into my box or binder, and it is for my enjoyment anyway.

100% agree. Just got this 71 Clemente today. Made an offer that was 1/3 less than similar cards and it was accepted. Definitely OC, but nice color and no creases. Looks sweet in the binder.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Congrats on the pickup, Ed!

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Vintagevault13

100% agree. Just got this 71 Clemente today. Made an offer that was 1/3 less than similar cards and it was accepted. Definitely OC, but nice color and no creases. Looks sweet in the binder.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think the OC gives it some character. Nice card!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

I am learning to live with less than great centering. On Friday, I purchased a partial (241/250) 1954 Topps set at a pretty good price. I have gone through and pulled all the cards with creases and wrinkles and will be looking to sell those. While the centering is varied throughout the set, I am ok with that aspect of the cards. What do you guys think about miscuts? Some of them are otherwise very nice cards, and I believe all are commons. I am keeping some that are OC. Is miscut really that much worse? Would you keep or don't keep?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[Vintagevault13]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

I am learning to live with less than great centering. On Friday, I purchased a partial (241/250) 1954 Topps set at a pretty good price. I have gone through and pulled all the cards with creases and wrinkles and will be looking to sell those. While the centering is varied throughout the set, I am ok with that aspect of the cards. What do you guys think about miscuts? Some of them are otherwise very nice cards, and I believe all are commons. I am keeping some that are OC. Is miscut really that much worse? Would you keep or don't keep?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

As you can see from the 71 Clemente I posted, I am ok with OC cards. However, I do want to make sure that there is at least a full border around the card. I guess it is just what we can tolerate. I use the “binder test”. If a card looks good while I flip through the binder, I am good with it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[baseballfan]

[QUOTE=Vintagevault13;1795237]

I use the “binder test”. If a card looks good while I flip through the binder, I am good with it.



this is what I use and some days I get different thoughts on cards but if they look good in the set I keep it. I think to collect mid grade you have to use some OC cards.

hopefully I will finish my 57 set this week with some help from the board. I'll post pics once I do

[Neal]

Great cards fellas! Love mid grade - majority of my collection! Here are some of my "collector grade" favorites

1933 Green Ruth.jpg1957 Aaron.jpg
52Ashburn.jpg1948LeafWilliams.jpg
1954RHMantle.jpg1964ToppsRosePSA6.jpg
1952BMantle5.5.jpg1957MantlePSA5.5.jpg

[dclarkraiders]

Originally Posted by Neal

Great cards fellas! Love mid grade - majority of my collection! Here are some of my "collector grade" favorites

Attachment 323178Attachment 323179
Attachment 323180Attachment 323181
Attachment 323182Attachment 323183
Attachment 323184Attachment 323185

Great cards.

Thanks for sharing them with us.

Duane

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

I am learning to live with less than great centering. On Friday, I purchased a partial (241/250) 1954 Topps set at a pretty good price. I have gone through and pulled all the cards with creases and wrinkles and will be looking to sell those. While the centering is varied throughout the set, I am ok with that aspect of the cards. What do you guys think about miscuts? Some of them are otherwise very nice cards, and I believe all are commons. I am keeping some that are OC. Is miscut really that much worse? Would you keep or don't keep?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

Some MC cards I think are tolerable if the borders blend in well or are implied. For example I have a '53 Topps Warren Spahn, PSA 5 MC. It's got a sliver of a top border, but it blends into the color of the painting so well that you have to hold it a couple of inches away from your eye to even see it. The bottom border, where the black nameplate is - is larger than usual because of this - but on the whole the card does not look disproportionate to me, and so I was ok w/ the miscut. There is a scan of this card over on the thread titled "PSA and Off-Center Cards", I think.

[Exhibitman]

I am getting to be the opposite: as long as the card has great centering and is clean and well-registered I am fine with lesser corners or even a slight crease. The vg-ex due to a small crease that looks nm-mt is my favorite place to play in postwar cards. But there are exceptions. If you collect all things 1971 Topps, as I try to, you have to go after OPC cards and you basically will get o/c cards from Canada:




The centering on OPC sucks so bad that I will take lesser grade if they happen to be centered:



The only place I might splurge is on a Hank Aaron (favorite player of the era and all).

[jchcollins]

Lately I find myself going for all types - VG-EX range and centered are preferable, but I have also gone for some O/C cards that still have sharper corners and are otherwise clean (sharp to me is usually more PSA 6 range than 8...) - especially with late 60's and early 70's cards. It really just depends on the individual card.

[Marchillo]

My haul from yesterday’s eBay sale. Definitely some mid grade examples that have good eye appeal to me.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Marchillo

My haul from yesterday’s eBay sale. Definitely some mid grade examples that have good eye appeal to me.

Nice. I've always thought that VG-EX is an excellent value for the eye appeal most have.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Very well done!

Originally Posted by Marchillo

My haul from yesterday’s eBay sale. Definitely some mid grade examples that have good eye appeal to me.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

I picked these up last night for the '54 Topps set I am building. I like the eye appeal of these cards. The Yogi scan wouldn't cooperate. Tommy Lasorda is the last card I need to complete the set. After that, there will be a few upgrades but nothing major.

[Marchillo]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

I picked these up last night for the '54 Topps set I am building. I like the eye appeal of these cards. The Yogi scan wouldn't cooperate. Tommy Lasorda is the last card I need to complete the set. After that, there will be a few upgrades but nothing major.

Love that Kaline!

Nice work!

[Vintagevault13]

Here are a couple of others for my 1971 sets. Got great deals on both. For my criteria, they fit my set perfectly and have good eye appeal.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Topcat79]

Love this thread, as it’s right in line with my collecting philosophy of buying the card and not the grade. I usually aim for a nice 5 or 6, but when it comes to the more sought after players like Mantle or Williams, I’m more than happy with a nice 3.

[G1911]

I usually skip mid grade and buy low grade, because I love baseball history, the nostalgia and the images, not the sharpness of the corners. I can get every 60's set in low grade, or just one of them in near mint. The choice seems easy to me. Round corners, edge wear, a crease, a pinhole, none of these are a problem. It's the same card, with the same picture, the same stats on the back, and I get just as much fun looking them through as I do a near mint example. My low grade 1956 Mantle that cost $40 instead of $400 brings just as much joy for a fraction of the price. I often downgrade cards even, buying a low grade copy and selling a mid grade if I have one. I do get disgusted looks from some dealers at card shows when I ask if they have poor-good cards, but it works for me. It's a more relaxing hobby, in my eyes, to not care about being one of the hobby elite or worrying if there is a wrinkle that isn't visible in the scan, and just build sets for personal enjoyment.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by G1911

I usually skip mid grade and buy low grade, because I love baseball history, the nostalgia and the images, not the sharpness of the corners. I can get every 60's set in low grade, or just one of them in near mint. The choice seems easy to me. Round corners, edge wear, a crease, a pinhole, none of these are a problem. It's the same card, with the same picture, the same stats on the back, and I get just as much fun looking them through as I do a near mint example. My low grade 1956 Mantle that cost $40 instead of $400 brings just as much joy for a fraction of the price. I often downgrade cards even, buying a low grade copy and selling a mid grade if I have one. I do get disgusted looks from some dealers at card shows when I ask if they have poor-good cards, but it works for me. It's a more relaxing hobby, in my eyes, to not care about being one of the hobby elite or worrying if there is a wrinkle that isn't visible in the scan, and just build sets for personal enjoyment.

Man, do I love the sentiment! I am trying very hard to get back to simply enjoying having the cards/sets just for the sake of having fun owning them. If I can help it, I would rather not have pin holes or writing, but trying to "get over" most everything else.

[Exhibitman]

Originally Posted by G1911

I usually skip mid grade and buy low grade, because I love baseball history, the nostalgia and the images, not the sharpness of the corners. I can get every 60's set in low grade, or just one of them in near mint. The choice seems easy to me. Round corners, edge wear, a crease, a pinhole, none of these are a problem. It's the same card, with the same picture, the same stats on the back, and I get just as much fun looking them through as I do a near mint example. My low grade 1956 Mantle that cost $40 instead of $400 brings just as much joy for a fraction of the price. I often downgrade cards even, buying a low grade copy and selling a mid grade if I have one. I do get disgusted looks from some dealers at card shows when I ask if they have poor-good cards, but it works for me. It's a more relaxing hobby, in my eyes, to not care about being one of the hobby elite or worrying if there is a wrinkle that isn't visible in the scan, and just build sets for personal enjoyment.

I mostly agree, but when it comes to my era the 1970s I can usually find nice looking cards very cheaply for all but the biggest stars anyway. Now, when it comes to marquee cards, I definitely downgrade in the interests of having more of them:

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I mostly agree, but when it comes to my era the 1970s I can usually find nice looking cards very cheaply for all but the biggest stars anyway. Now, when it comes to marquee cards, I definitely downgrade in the interests of having more of them:

Great stuff and very motivational! I have fancied myself a set builder over the years and have enjoyed that. However, I am getting increasingly restless. There are sooooo many cards out there that I want, and I just don't have the ability or perhaps desire to build that many sets. Then I thought I needed my star cards to be higher grade since I wasn't building sets. (I know...programmed robot ;() However, I love this list of cards, and it makes me realize what I could accomplish. Thanks for this!

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I mostly agree, but when it comes to my era the 1970s I can usually find nice looking cards very cheaply for all but the biggest stars anyway. Now, when it comes to marquee cards, I definitely downgrade in the interests of having more of them:

This is exactly my sweet spot for 50’s cards. Low grade copies that retain a nice image. Readable backs matter too, as I love the Topps cartoons and over the top enthusiasm of the written descriptions. I’m around 95% of the way through a full 1950’s Topps/Bowman run thanks to cards like these

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Topcat79

I usually aim for a nice 5 or 6, but when it comes to the more sought after players like Mantle or Williams, I’m more than happy with a nice 3.

Nice cards. My '56 Williams is an SGC 3. On many of the oversized 1950's cards, I think they can tolerate / "wear" their wear so to speak better than later cards because the card stock quality was better and the cards themselves were a bit thicker. Particularly '56 Topps - which I think was printed on slightly thicker card stock than '55. I don't like big ugly creases that break the surface, but '56 Topps cards can hide lesser creases well and remain very attractive. Once you get into most sets from the 1960's, and then the early 70's which I think were the worst - the card stock becomes terrible, much thinner and just generally of crappy quality. I think the late 60's and early 70's was worse on the whole for dramatically O/C and miscut cards as well.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

I am really starting to consider selling off most of my commons from some baseball and football partials to buy some star cards I have been wanting. It feels like a lot of work though.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

I wanted to revive this thread to whine a little. When shopping in the PSA 5-6 range, it is getting harder and harder to find cards that are well centered AND have good focus/registration. It is becoming more clear that I am going to have to give in on one or the other. It puts me in the minority, but I am starting to think I would rather give in on centering and keep the nice, clear image. Some corner wear doesn't bother me too much.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[mq711]

I don’t mind centering issues as much as bad focus, print lines and ink smudges.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by vintagebaseballcardguy

I wanted to revive this thread to whine a little. When shopping in the PSA 5-6 range, it is getting harder and harder to find cards that are well centered AND have good focus/registration. It is becoming more clear that I am going to have to give in on one or the other. It puts me in the minority, but I am starting to think I would rather give in on centering and keep the nice, clear image. Some corner wear doesn't bother me too much.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

Poor registration to me is worse than slightly o/c as well, but I'm not a centering freak. I'll take a nice picture and 70/30 centering over print problems and 50/50 every time.

[IgnatiusJReilly]

First off, I love this thread because it perfectly captures my collecting focus and what I believe to be the sweet spot for vintage cards in terms of balancing eye appeal and cost. Great thread!

Here’s a collage of my mid grade 1956 Topps stars. Since creating it I’ve upgraded the Williams and the Reese, but haven’t gotten around to making a new collage. I hope to make a new version in the coming weeks. Thanks for the look:





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BillP]

I consider myself a mid grade collector. What I look for in a card is good focus of the picture, decent centering but not diamond cut, and reasonable corners. Generally between a 4 and 6. With my 57's and 58's it's more about focus on the card.

[jchcollins]

Oh are we showing off cards again? Here are some more “mid-grade” pickups from this year. Reggie and the '65 Mantle were liberated from graded slabs. Anyone care to venture what they were?
















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DeanH3]

Fantastic cards John. Can never get enough eye candy!

I'd guess Reggie and Mick were both 5's that have much better eye appeal than the grade.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by DeanH3

Fantastic cards John. Can never get enough eye candy!

I'd guess Reggie and Mick were both 5's that have much better eye appeal than the grade.

Close. Reggie was a PSA 6, and the Mantle was the nicest SGC 5 I've ever seen.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Oh are we showing off cards again? Here are some more “mid-grade” pickups from this year. Reggie and the '65 Mantle were liberated from graded slabs. Anyone care to venture what they were?
















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

nice eye candy, John. I forgot you had some of those ('63 Banks for one).

[Clemaz]

Hera are some mid grade cards that came in the mail this week


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jchcollins]

Some recent lower-mid pickups that spoke to me. All technically lower grade, but I think they do well in the eye appeal department. In keeping with our theme here, all of these cost me a fraction of the price of graded examples that probably would have been only a few notches higher - mainly due to technicalities & small issues:










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gustomania]

Great group of cards, well done!!

Might need to find me some low grade eye candy Koufax in raw form soon!

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Some recent lower-mid pickups that spoke to me. All technically lower grade, but I think they do well in the eye appeal department. In keeping with our theme here, all of these cost me a fraction of the price of graded examples that probably would have been only a few notches higher - mainly due to technicalities & small issues:








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bammerbb]

I have a 1961 topps SGC Hector Lopez coming, hoping tomorrow. Also have a Banks graded a 6 PSA.

[RayBShotz]

That 69T Mantle is sweet!
RayB

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by RayBShotz

That 69T Mantle is sweet!
RayB

Thanks Ray. I was so busy looking at the ding on the lower left which probably keeps it at VG, that I didn't notice when I bought it how well centered it was. Most '69 Mantles - even in higher grade - have trouble in that dept.

[vintagebaseballcardguy]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Some recent lower-mid pickups that spoke to me. All technically lower grade, but I think they do well in the eye appeal department. In keeping with our theme here, all of these cost me a fraction of the price of graded examples that probably would have been only a few notches higher - mainly due to technicalities & small issues:










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good stuff, John! That's the way to do it!

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk