OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Frank Evanov</b><p>Great story Ted. Thanks for sharing your memories. The thought of pulling a Mantle from a 1952 wax pack is mind boggling.<br><br>Frank

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Frank, Ted: as a kid growing up in Jersey my greatest memory of plucking a 'great' card from a pack was either a) Hank Aaaron HR King card (1974) or b) a Washington National Leaguer card. Clearly, I was screwed badly by growing up in the wrong era.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>oops - wrong thread (duh).<br /><br />-Al

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>Barry,<br />The Pafko out of that low number pack graded PSA 10. It sold for a ton of money.<br />JimB

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Jim- I remember that now. What would it sell for today? The price of a house?

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>I'll make an effort to answer Richard's question about why the 52 Topps Mantle is more popular than the 51 Bowman. I think there's several factors.<br /><br />First, as Barry said, the 52 Topps set is considered to be the classic post-war set. But I don't think that alone explains it. After all, that would mean Willie Mays' 52 Topps card should be worth more than his 51 Bowman rookie.<br /><br />Second, and I think this is critical, throughout the 70s and 80s, 52 Topps high numbers were true glamour cards. They were very expensive (by the standards of the time) and were simply unavailable from most dealers. Few collectors even knew of true rarities like E107s, so 52 Topps high numbers were considered genuine rarities among those cards that ordinary people actually collected. Mantle was more popular than any other player in the high number series, including Mays. So his 52 Topps card was the king of this run of rarities.<br /><br />Third, it was not until the late 1980s that Mantle's card was discovered to be a triple print. By this time, its status as the most important and most valuable post-war card had been fixed. (Though the 54 Bowman Ted Williams gave it a run for this title for awhile.)<br /><br />Fourth, marketing. Once the 52 Mantle was established as the most desireable post-war card, dealers started to exaggerate its significance to boost sales. To this day, some dealers falsely call the card Mantle's rookie card. Even highly respected dealers and auction houses refer to it as Mantle's "Topps rookie card." I think this caused many novice collectors to either overlook the 51 Bowman Mantle entirely, or to think that there was something "wrong" with the card that disqualified it from being his rookie (just like many collectors find something "wrong" with 1947 Homogenized Bond cards and don't consider them rookies). Collectors carry with them what they learn when they are novices. So, as these collectors became more experienced, they still valued and desired the 52 Mantle, even though they eventually learned that he had a legitmiate earlier card.<br /><br />Fifth, Mr. Mint's find of 52 Topps high numbers. Once the rarity of the 52 Topps high numbers was established, Alan Rosen found some mint unopened cases. This suddenly made ultra-high grade 52 Topps Mantles available. Others may disagree, but I think the influx of these cards actually made the price of ultra-high grade 52 Mantles go up. Until this "find," I don't think collectors strived to own the single finest 52 Topps Mantle, or one of the top ten. They satisfied themselves with owning a very nice one. After the "find," this became the top priority of many collectors, driving up the price of high grade 52 Mantles even further. The development of grading companies also contributed greatly to this phenomenon, but the existence of grading companies doesn't explain why the 52 Topps Mantle was singled out.<br /><br />There may be other factors that I've overlooked, and some may disagree with the ones I've listed. But I've given it my best shot.<br /><br />Paul<br /><br />

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>PAUL<br /><br />Well said, and I would say between your very informative post and my post (1 PM) relating<br /> my experience as a kid in 1951-1952 , we pretty well accounted for the popularity of the<br /> 1952 Topps Mantle over his 1951 Bowman card.<br /><br />I was hoping you had mentioned the 1980 auction in Philly where 3 - 1952 Mantle cards<br />sold for a total of $10,000. This selling price at that time was unprecendented for just<br /> any BB cards, that it received nationwide attention since it was depicted on the front<br /> page of Philadelphia's major newspaper.<br /><br />This event "jump-started" the hype on the '52T Manntle and 6 years later Al Rosen's big 52T<br /> find in Boston raised the level of hype and the value of this Mantle card an order of magnitude.<br /><br />I must correct you on one minor item....the 52T Mantle is a double-print (not a triple-prt)..<br /><br />And, there are subtle front picture differences between these double-prints.<br />The earlier posted (PSA8) card is referred to as "Type II".<br /><br />I will post a scan later today of mine which is referred to as "Type I".<br /><br />Thanks for a great explanation.......TED Z

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Paul- I agree, great analysis, but I believe it was only one case that was found. They were all cello packs, highs and semi-highs, and I vaguely remember it contained about 4000 cards. One ironic aspect of it is that the seller got somewhere around 100K for it, and he must have felt like the luckiest guy in the world, getting all that money for something that was sitting in his attic for more than 30 years. But if he knows what the case is worth today, he is probably sick to his stomach. I would say $5 million would be a conservative estimate of its current break value.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>For those who are interested in the difference in the printing of the fronts of this double-printed card.<br /><br />My Mantle is referred to as type I and when you compare it with the PSA-8 card (type II), shown in an<br /> earlier post on this Thread, observe that the skin color of Mantle's right arm is clean. While the type II<br /> card has a "glossy sheen" on it. Also, the yellow star name box in the type I card is clean, while the<br /> type II card has a somewhat "ragged" name box.<br /><br />The only difference on the back of these two cards is the stitching on the BB containing the card's #,<br /> which is reversed when you compare type I vs. type II.<br /><br />TED Z <br /><br /><img src="http://www.freephotoserver.com/v001/tedzan/mmantle52t.jpg">

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>I have never seen more than maybe a tiny resemblance between the 52T Mantle and the real Mantle.<br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1166716371.JPG">

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Your photo of Mickey appears to be one when he was in his 30's....and "NYC aged".<br />The picture used by <br />Topps for his 1952 card is when he was only 19 years old....fresh from Oklahoma<br /><br />T-Rex TED

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Ted- of all the diagnostic points you cited the easiest way to tell a type 1 from a 2 is the stitching on the ball by his number "311". But here's a question- which is type 1, and which is type 2? Do you know which was printed first?

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>I remember very clearly an article in SCD many years ago concluding that the 52 Topps Mantle was a triple print, and it was listed that way in the Standard Catalog for awhile. But it has been listed as a double print for a long time now. I can't remember what the basis was for concluding it was a triple print. And since SCD has been listing it as a double print in their Standard Catalog, I think it's safe to say they no longer stand by their original analysis. So, I guess I'll join the consensus that it's just a double print.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Paul there are 97 different cards in the high number series #311-407. The first three are double printed, thus making 100 cards on a high number sheet. Does that make sense (since I have never seen a high number sheet)?

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>I never really understood the type1/type2 thing with 52'topps mantles, and was wondering if there is any belief that the print run for one was higher than the other....? And have auction results reflected that?<br /><br /><br />thanks<br />daniel

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>BARRY<br /><br />Let us start with 1952 Topps cards were all printed on 100-card sheets. And, there are 97 cards<br /> in the Hi# Series......#311 - 407. Therefore, Topps had to double-print three cards. They chose<br /> Mickey Mantle (#311), Jackie Robinson (#312) and Bobby Thomson (#313). These 3 were perfect<br /> choices. The first two were very popular by late 1952 and Thomson was the hero of the 1951 play-<br />off game with his famous HR.<br /><br />Confirmation of these 3 being dbl-prints was evident in Al Rosen's 1952T find in 1986. There were<br /> 37 Mantle cards, and similar numbers of JRobby and Thomson. While there were just 17 complete<br /> Hi# runs.<br /><br />Now, for your question regarding Type I & Type II Mantle cards. They were printed simultaneously.<br />Apparently, one plate of the double printing plates differed from the other. This is not an unusual<br /> occurence.<br /><br />TED Z<br />

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>As always Ted, right on target.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>Barry, that makes perfect sense, as does Ted's explanation. Thanks. I just wish I remember why SCD once reported the cards as triple prints.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>I looked at my SCD guides #1, 2 and 3 and I cannot find anywhere that they say Mantle was a triple-print.<br />Also, the 1981 Beckett (#3) guide had already listed that Mantle, JRobby and Thomson were double-prints.<br /><br />TED Z

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>dan mckee</b><p>This nut case is why grading is a joke.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Guys,<br /><br />There are probably a few guys still in mourning over the passing of The Mick. But they will get over it and the prices will drop.<br /><br />A better measurement of Mantle's popularity is to look at the prices for 1969 White Letter Mantle. When the price of that card starts coming down, Mantles will be entering into a slump.<br /><br />I really didn't have anything to say, I just wanted to be post 100.<br /><br />Peter

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>Ted, maybe my memory is just fading much, much earlier than it should. I could have sworn it was listed as a triple print for awhile.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Guys,<br /><br />I remember that the Mick and Jackie have always been listed as double-prints. Possibly what you remember as being a triple-print is the '59 Mickey Mantle All-Star card.<br /><br />Peter

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Frank Evanov</b><p>Peter, this is Mickey in his early 20's...a much closer fit to the 1952 card:<br /><br /><img src="http://www.themick.com/Youngportr.jpg"> <img src="http://www.damox.com/sports/cards/1952_Topps_Mickey_Mantle.jpg"><br><br>Frank

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>Frank I don't see the resemblance there either. His 51 and 53 Bowman cards look like him, but the 52T, to me, looks more like my brother in law than it does Mantle.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Mantle still generates a lot of interest on Net54, based on the responses in this Thread.<br /><br />Anyhow, what uniform # did Mickey wear as a rookie in 1951 ?<br /><br />Then, why did he have to switch to #7 in 1951, and who else wore #7 in 1951 ?<br /><br />And, if those are too easy......what was Joe DiMag's rookie uniform # ?<br /><br />T-Rex TED

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>These look a lot more like him to me than does the 52.<br /><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1166754476.JPG"> <img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1166754461.JPG">

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>Ted I believe he originally wore 6, being considered the next in line to Ruth Gehrig and DiMaggio (3 4 and 5). I think the other guy who wore 7 that year was Cliff Mapes. Not sure about Dimaggio's number.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Peter you are on a roll, you got two of the trivia questions.....so, now for the 3rd......<br />why did Mantle have to give up #6 ?<br /><br />And, Cliff Mapes is the answer to what Trivia quiz ?

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>I know he was awful during his initial stint with the club, so maybe they thought the number making him the next in line was too much pressure? No idea about Mapes.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Mantle was given Bobby Brown's #6 and when Brown returned from military duty he wanted back his old #6.<br /><br />When Cliff Mapes joined the Yankees in 1947 he wore #47 and in 1948, Mapes wore #3 until the Yankees fi-<br />nally retired Ruth's uniform #3. Then Mapes was given #7......so, Mapes wore two great HOFer's uniform #s.<br /><br />Joe DiMaggio's first unifom # was 9.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>cmoking</b><p>Ted, great trivia! Do you know if any other Yankees wore #3?

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Peter Thomas</b><p>I have a black and white Japanese card that has a photo of Mantle with #6 visable. The picture was taken in spring training 1951, but the card issued in 1953. I will post it when I can.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>PETER<br /><br />I have the complete rosters and uniform #s of the Yankees from 1929-1971....when you<br /> look thru it, by the 1950's there really was no "rhyme or reason" as to who got assigned<br />any specific #s. Number "6" was just available when Bobby Brown went into the military<br /> in 1950-51. A good example of what I am saying is in the answer to King's question.<br /><br />KING<br /><br />NY Yankees uniform #3 was worn by.....<br /><br />"Twinkle Toes" Selkirk 1935-42<br />Bud Metheny 1943-46<br />Hal Peck 1946<br />Roy Weatherly 1946<br />Frank Colman 1946-47<br />"Ducky" Medwick 1947<br />Allie Clark 1947<br />Cliff Mapes 1948<br /><br />August 16, 1948 Babe Ruth passed away and his uniform #3 was retired.<br /><br />TED Z<br />

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Barry,<br /><br />To respond to your earlier question, I think the Pafko psa 10 could be the hobby's first post-war million dollar card. I ewould think it would go for higher than a Mantle 10 which I would think would be about a $750,000 card.<br /><br />Jim<br /><br />Jim

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Jim- I don't know the final number, but there would be quite a fight for a PSA 10 Pafko and I agree that it would set a record for a post-1948 baseball card.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>With all due respect to Andy Pafko.....I watched him play when I was a kid, he had a iong 17-year career,<br /> BA = .285, and hit 213 HR's with the Cubs, Dodgers and Milw. Braves.<br /><br />But, if his 1952 Topps card (#1) were to sell for a Million, irregardless of grade, this would be the ultimate<br /> example of absurdity in this hobby. And, I'll predict that within a year after such an event, such a purchase<br /> will have de-valuated to less than 1/2 of this price. For, such events are of "fleeting and foolish" moments.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>I agree with Ted about the absurdity part, but not about the deflating part. Unless another 10 shows up someday, which I think is unlikely.<br /><br />-Al

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Ted- I'm not the one who is going to buy it if it comes up for sale. But I can offer my house in Sag Harbor straight up for it in a trade. Should I do it? <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>I wholeheartely disagree. Though I realize a Pafko would sell for an insane amount of money, there is no way it would go higher than a PSA 10 Mantle head to head. The Mantle may be the first post-War million dollar card, but I think the Pafko in a PSA 10 would not go for more than $200-300k. Even that is insane for a common. Would a PSA 8 in that slot for a high-grade set not do the trick?<br />JimB

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Jim- while you very well may be correct the Pafko, like the 33G Bengough, is a card with a reputation of being impossible to find in nice shape. High grade 52T Mantles are really not that difficult. If the Pafko came up for auction and the top ten set registry people went after it, I can't even imagine the havoc they would wreak. And each of those ten probably already has a Mantle in at least an 8, if not a 9 or 10. Of course the whole thing is insane, but that's the hobby.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Those who don't realize the value of Pafko obvioussly do not collect graded cards. This is a pop 1 with no 9s!!!!!!!!!!! The toughest card in the most popular post-war set there is!!!!!!!<br /><br /><br />JimB--I can guarantee the Pafko would go for $500K because I would pay that--but I can think of 4 guys at least off the top of my head that would outbid me. I think at $500K, the 52 Pafko in PSA 10 would be a terrific buy.<br /><br />Jim<br />

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>Jim:<br /><br />Not a criticism at all, just a legitimate question. I understand how tough the Pafko is.<br /><br />You would pay $500K for a PSA 10 Pafko. Wouldn't you worry that somewhere along the line, a 9 or a 10 might pop up somewhere, either from another unopened find, from a high-grade raw collection, or perhaps from a high-end 8 that got bumped to a 9? Wouldn't an increase in pop - even an increase of one - have an impact on the value of the 10?<br /><br />-Al<br /><br />

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Al,<br /><br />Do not think any more Pafko 10s will pop up.<br /><br />If I bought it for $500,000 which in my opinion would be a steal I would look to flip it for a Pafko 8(pop 9)and $400,000.<br /><br />As I said, I think there would be at least 4 buyers that I could think of for that card with 2 likely to go over a million...and that excludes a wealthy LTS guy who might top them all??? You know who I mean.<br /><br />Jim

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>I really don't understand collectors who will pay huge sums of money for condition rarity. $500,000 for a 52 Topps Pafko??? A card that can be had in lesser condition on ebay EVERY SINGLE DAY OF THE YEAR. An extrememly common card. Sure it's rare in PSA 8-10, but if you're buying the card for the number on the slab then IMO you are a collector of numbers and not cards. And strictly for the purpose of competition of which this hobby is not and should not be about.<br /><br />If someone willing to pay a half a million dollars for an Andy Pafko card is the backbone of the hobby then we're in worse shape than I thought.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>I agree 100% Dan. Can you imagine how many really nice pre-war tobacco and caramel cards you could buy for $500,000??? It staggers the mind, my mind at least...

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>NetJr</b><p>Quote: "And strictly for the purpose of competition of which this hobby is not and should not be about."<br /><br />I don't agree with this assessment, its a fine opinion and each is welcome to it as much as they want, but its just an opinion. To state that it "should not be about" might be your opinion but mine is opposite. I think the registries are quite intriguing and fun. Without them the hobby may have even less interest. <br /><br />A $250k card is certainly not something I'm going to buy now (maybe never). But I still don't understanding begrudging those who can - and the reasons why they do so.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>There are people out there in ANY type of collectibles who want the "best" of everything. I completely understand that. More power to 'em. There are guys buying shiny cards every day (in much greater numbers than we, BTW) who shake their heads at the idea of spending money on an off-grade Joe Tinker card when you can get a beautiful shiny card of Albert Pujols with his autograph on it for a mere $3K. There are people who shake their heads at the idea of buying ANY baseball card when you can get a piece of equipment used by the player instead. There are PLENTY of different ways to collect, and I respect all of them.<br /><br />And while I would never spend $500K on a postwar common, I would never spend $500K on a prewar HOFer, either. Other people do it, though, and I think that's great.<br /><br />The Pafko is a tough, tough card in nice shape. That's the appeal of the card. That's ALWAYS been the appeal of the card, as far back as I can remember.<br /><br />My concern is more related to the idea of buying a card for an extravagant sum based on graded population reports only. Jim is right - I sincerely doubt another 10 will ever pop up. But if an 8 gets bumped to a 9, and then another 9 shows up somewhere down the line, how would that impact the value of the 10? Even Jim says he'd pay $500K for the 10, and flip it for $400K and an 8. Part of this is because Jim collects 8s, not 10s. But Jim, wouldn't you say that part of why you'd flip it for $400K and an 8 would be to mitigate the risk of another 9 or two showing up some day and reducing the value of the 10 slightly?<br /><br />-Al

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Dan,<br /><br />You don't understand people who collect high grade cards and sets. I and others do not do it solely for the numbers. Competition may be a part of it(and the competition part can be a lot of fun as well)but the real reason is we like and can afford nice cards.<br /><br />I have absolutely no desire to have a off-center Pafko or one with corner wear or creases--that seems to be fine with you--wonderful! I want to collect high-grade sets.<br /><br />Al,<br /><br />Thats a good question--I am not sure that 1 or 2 psa 9s would reduce the value of a 10. I suspect if there was a 9 it would find a value of around $400,000 and the 10 would maintain a value of over a million. Just my opinion.<br /><br />Jim

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>You know, the difference between a million dollar house and a $50 house is the million dollar one would probably have four bedrooms, be on an acre of land in a nice neighborhood, and perhaps have a swimming pool; while the $50 one would likely be a seat on a park bench.<br /><br />But the difference between a million dollar Pafko and a $50 Pafko is squarer corners. When you look at it like that, even a PSA 8 collector has to chuckle <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Jim- I am having trouble getting a handle on what exactly you want with respect to cards: do you want to own extremely nice PSA8ish and PSA9ish cards per se or do you simply strive to own the highest graded card known? In other words, if the highest graded known card is an SGC 50, would you want to own it or would you pass on ever owning that particular card because it wasn't an 88? Just curious....<br />Bob

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>That is kinda funny, Barry.<br /><br />Now you've got me thinking about selling my house, buying a $50 house and spending the profits on cards. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />-Al

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Is this absurd or what ?<br /> <br />"Those who don't realize the value of Pafko obvioussly do not collect graded cards. This is a pop 1 with<br /> no 9s!!!!!!!!!!! The toughest card in the most popular post-war set there is!"<br /><br />Even if we don't collect post-War BB cards....most of us are keenly aware of the "condition scarcity" of<br /> this card.<br /><br />And, such a statement shows that you are the un-informed....not us.<br /><br /> Furthermore, in the post-War category.......a 1949 LEAF Leroy "Satchel" Paige in equivalent condition<br /> would generate a lot more of excitement than this Pafko card, and perhaps sell for 1/2 million.<br /><br />And, finally..... <br />those who live by the "pop reports" (generated only by PSA) will some day suffer from the "pop reports".

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>paulstratton</b><p>I think John McEnroe said it best..." You cannot be serious!"

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Jim, it's not personal, and you're right I do not understand it. More power to you. I just have to chuckle when you and the other 5 guys in the world willing to pay 1/2 million dollars for a common card consider yourselves to be the backbone of the hobby.<br /><br />Merry Christmas!

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Al- a park bench can get awfully cold and lonely in the winter <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Ted,<br /><br />You are wrong. Leaf set not very popular.<br /><br />Dan,<br /><br />You are misquoting me--I said that beacuse over half of the dollar value of all transactions was in psa 8 or better cards that the high grade collector was becoming the backbone of the hobby--since low grade pre war collectors do not like not being called the backbone, I just changed it to the majority.<br /><br /><br />Bob,<br /><br />Depends--if highest example for most cards was a psa 5 or 6 then no--if there was just a couple of cards bthat had no examples in 8 or better I would likely go for it. Just don't like low grade cards.<br /><br />Jim<br />

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Jim- do you really think a PSA-6 is a low grade card? I have seen a lot of 6's that are awfully nice.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Barry,<br /><br />No-mid grade--but I have no interest in 6s.<br /><br />Jim

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>leon</b><p>Please put your name by your post, per the board rules. IF you don't then I will be deleting it...nothing personal and thanks much.....<br /><br />Btw, I think collecting numbers on slabs is fine...if that's what you're into...it's not card collecting and the card hobby though...<br /><br />Jim- if you would collect for the love of the game, the art on the cards, the history of the cards, the friendships the hobby can bring, then you would be much happier. You don't ever sound like you are having fun. Remember the thread about the E221 Bishops I picked up, and how excited I was/am, that's what it's all about. It's about the 5 day frat party every year called the National...The Net54 dinner where 60 or so folks get together and meet and talk. You concentrate on the number on the slab and most of us concentrate on everything else. Just a few words you might think about. Take care

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>That was sort of what I was thinking, but said it in fewer words. I respect everyone's decison to collect what they want, but it's going to be hard to convince me that PSA-8 guys aren't just collecting the labels; because the physical difference between a nice 6 and an 8 is pretty insignificant. Like Jim said, it's really more of a competition. Fair enough, just not my thing. If I want to compete I play chess. If I collect I don't care what the other guy has, I'm just happy to enjoy what I have.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Leon,<br /><br />I think all ways of collecting are fine.<br /><br />But I have some advice for you--get all your cards graded by SGC or PSA and upgrade your dogs to PSA 8 --you will have much greater peace of mind and enjoy the hobby more. Just a few words Leon you might think about.<br /><br />Seriously Leon where do you get off talking about my happiness or lack thereof. I have a great job, a wonderful family and I love the hobby. I collect for different reasons you do. If its all about the Bishops for you and frat parties--great--I am happy for you. For me its collecting high grade sets that makes me happy--comprende?<br /><br />Jim

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Barry,<br /><br />Exactly--collect what makes you happy--thats what I am doing.<br /><br />By the way, do you have a chess rating?<br /><br />Jim

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>What frat parties? Leon is 45.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Many years ago I played tournaments and had a rating around 1600. Most of my chess playing days were at the Village Chess Shop on Thompson Streeet, and in Washington Square Park. I preferred the casual game over tournaments. But I really don't play much anymore.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Barry,<br /><br />Thats about my rating too although on my Kasparov computer game I am at about 1800. <br /><br />When we meet for dinner in January maybe we can play a quick game or two of chess.<br /><br />Jim

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Dan Bretta</b><p>Hey Leon when you upgrade your 4BH Kelly to an 8 can I have your beater?

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Jim- I'm always up for a game but we may have a few distractions at the dinner. Maybe we can play an online game sometime.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Ted Zanidakis</b><p>Leon just said what a lot of us have not said to you, and although I share his feelings regarding<br />your style of collecting....high-value plastic is your thing. So, I say let's live and let live.<br /><br />But, what a good number of us don't care for is your continuous condescending "bullcrap" that<br /> you have thrown at us this past month. It's getting tiresome.....you admonish us not to judge<br />you. However, have you actually read some of statements you have posted here ? You are<br />constantly deriding the rest of us for not being like you. You just don't get it.....we don't ever<br /> want to be like you. <br /><br /> I'd bet anyone that you have not even bothered to read any of the more worthwhile Threads<br /> about vintage cards and collecting that many of us take the time and effort to research and<br /> share with each other on this Forum. You are just to self-centered to bother.<br /><br />I'm sure you will dismiss these comments I have made, as you think you are better than all of us.<br />So, be it....you do your thing....and leave us alone to do ours.<br /><br /> Just give us a "damn break" will you, man !<br /><br />

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Frank Evanov</b><p>Having been in Jim's Collection Room, I can attest that he's a very happy collector. In showing his cards to us, I saw the same look in his eyes that we all share when we discuss our cardboard, be they low grade, mid grade or high grade.<br /><br />That said, I'm hurt that he would rather have a Pafko card in 10, than a Mickey.<img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br><br>Frank

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Jim and Barry: I'm not 100% sure on this, but I think there is no such thing as a "quick game of chess". lolol. <br /><br />And for Jim (and maybe Bruce): A question of genuine interest and curiosity - I'm not accusing anyone of collecting a number on a slab. If grading were still not invented, do you think your collecting would still be the same? I can't tell from scans the difference between a 7 and a 9. Does that mean your quest for high-end cards would limit you to cards that you could see in person? Or would you still be able to maintain the focus and criteria you have now?<br /><br />Do you think this hobby would be more interesting and challenging, or less?<br /><br />Me? My collecting world is in the lower to middle ends, so usually I can tell from a scan if I would like a card or not - the differences are obvious. I'm not sure how it would work for characteristics that are less obvious. (Also, I'm not all that expert in higher end cards - it could be that these collectors can see some things in scans of 7's, 8's, and 9's that completely escape me.)<br /><br />Joann

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Joann- one of the most popular versions of casual chess is "speed" or "blitz" chess where both players use a clock and have five minutes to play their entire game. I've played thousands of speed games and they can be a lot of fun. Sure, you make errors, but you can still play at a pretty high level if you know what you are doing.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Barry,<br /><br />Now THAT is a kind of chess I could get into. I'd probably lose every game for a long time (I don't know any of the set strategies, etc), but at least I could get through a game without being as distracted by the waiting like I usually am.<br /><br />Cool.<br /><br />J

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>You of course don't have enough time to analyze each move so you look for familiar positions and recognizable themes. You can't play the best move, but you can play a logical one. It takes its own special discipline.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>cmoking</b><p>Barry wrote: "because the physical difference between a nice 6 and an 8 is pretty insignificant. "<br /><br />I can see the difference vividly. When correctly graded (and yes, there are some incorrectly graded ones), a 8 and a 6 are worlds apart. Barry, I won a 6 and an 8 in your November auction. They were from two different grading companies, but the condition of the card is a lot different and if one looked at the card carefully and close up (no need for a loupe even), it should be plainly obvious what the differences are. Some people don't care about that difference, some do, and yet others (like me) sometimes do and sometimes don't depending on the set and/or card.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Ted,<br /><br />You have got to be one of the most condescending people I have ever met. You think your way is the only way to collect. Quit attacking me and post about whatever you want to post about. Do you ever read what you write? Ever since I have started with my campaign to clean up the hobby you have done nothing but criticize me--get a life buddy and try to quit attacking me!<br /><br />Hi Frank--<br /><br />Tough to decide which one I would rather have but I do think the Pafko would go for more--thanks for the plug--I am a happy collector except whren people like Ted try to impose his way of collecting on us.<br /><br />Barry and Joann,<br /><br />Five minute blitz chess is brutal--respecially playing the guys in the park--I always lose on time, even when I am winning the game.<br /><br />King,<br /><br />Completely agree--I think a big difference between a 6 and an 8.<br /><br />Jim

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>E, Daniel</b><p>I would think the whole collecting by condition discussion comes down to being pretty simple - you become expert at what you focus on. If it's 7's 8's and 9's you look at all day, then the differences though seemingly minor to many are plain as day to those whose focus they are. <br />Similarly if you like SGC40's better than 30's because it often means less distracting or major creases - though in number they may be the same, then you choose them that way. Everyone gets to choose what's important in a card's aesthetics, and then builds their collection to reflect that.<br />I could be wrong, but it seems everyone who wants to denegrate Jim's collecting style focus on the grade of the flips he collects. And I think Jim focuses on that grade because it is reflected in the card's condition. If an 8 requires similar corners but better centering than a 7, I'll lay dollars to donuts he just plainly prefers a centered card. In fact, he's said a million times when drawn in to such discussions that he simply doesn't like the look of creases/wrinkles, wear to surface and corners, poor centering, and other effects of time or poor print quality on paper. <br />At a guess, he probably similarly likes his car clean, and when it gets dirty it bugs him. If someone puts a scrape or a nick in his fender, he more than likely gets it fixed straight away so that he can continue to enjoy his car...<br />I'm not sure why anyone hounds him for his decisions (ok, exept the whole backbone comment, though I doubt it reflects everything he has added to the board or to other interested collectors, and shouldn't follow him for bloody ever...). They make him happy.<br />A guy with a vintage car who keeps it absolutely shmick and cleans it when he gets home, or a motorbike rider who has to keep all the chrome absolutely reflective, we don't judge their true ability to enjoy the machinery they own because of a pre-occupation with condition? In fact, it seems mostly we celebrate those people as serious enthusiasts who give us nice eye candy to look at in the magazines we thumb in barber shops and planes.<br /><br />And, if ultimately he also sleeps easier at night as a collector because he feels the market for his cards will save his bacon or conscience if he has to sell, and wishes to talk it up for both his own peace and to make it self-fulfilling through some marketing....hell, I don't care. Why should anyone? The truth will be told in the lifetime of his collecting and how he disposes of it.<br /><br />While it is regularly said you shouldn't spend what you can't afford to lose on this hobby, truth is that for most people losing the money they've spent on cards would hurt them enormously emotionally, financially, and have consequences to others in their families. Maybe some will tell me bulldust and that their collecting affects no-one but themselves, I'd think that they would be in minority.<br /><br />I thought with Frank's post attempting to celebrate however we collect, that we were past all this crap.<br />Doesn't everyone just want to move on?<br /><br /><br />Oh, and I love my GAI3 52' topps Mantle and wouldn't upgrade it for the world. Kind of like my old dog, she maybe couldn't do it all but she reflected the best parts of me and will always be connected to me, I mean, I chose her, and loved her from the very start. And similarly I feel a real connection to my cards as I keep them safely until the next owner gets that responsibility. Isn't that enough to know, and isn't participation on this board with the time it chews up a pretty good example of everyone's passion for vintage cards? I doubt you could start one up that only had slabs and the flips inside, with no cards to enjoy!<br /><br /><br />Daniel

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>I agree with King re the difference between a 6 and an 8. Two totally different specimens. As for the difference between a 7 and an 8, it is more subtle but still usually obvious. That being said, when I'm completing a set in the 7-8 range I usually buy the graded card of 7 or 8 which comes up first on ebay or otherwise. Sometimes one does feel stupid paying anywhere from 3-5x more for a common 8 simply because it became available first.<br /><br />As someone who has some registry sets, I often wrestle with the true stupidity of completing a set by paying large numbers for common 8s or 9s, simply to complete the set. Spending $1800 on a 1955 Art Fowler PSA 8 when I could have used that money towards an SGC 88 E93 Mathewson is just one of many examples of this sort of stupidity.

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>Jeff,<br /><br />I agree--the way I battle this is to have a number of sets I am working on so I can avoid paying a high price for a hot card. The 55s have been hot for some time but slowly I am moving toward completion here--the 59s are another red hot set with the lower pops.<br /><br />Daniel,<br /><br />Thanks--people like different things. I have said a million times collect what you want to collect--I do not like collecting anything less than nrmt-mt cards as I just don't like the looks of them. I am a passionate collector and love the hobby but I hate cards with dinged corners or off center or creases or other visible defects. You guys who like these --wonderful--I don't--to each his own.<br /><br />Jim

OT-$282,587 for a Mantle PSA 9
 

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>King- your point is well taken, so let me rephrase what I meant, and your purchase is a perfect example. While the difference between a 6 and 8 is apparent, you are a collector of high grade cards, and although you might prefer to have 8's you deemed the 6 high enough quality to fit in your collection. And that was really my point- that 6's are nice looking cards, and that I disagreed with Jim calling a 6 a low grade card. Granted, not a registry grade, but for most collectors a quality example.