1951 Bowman Mickey Mantle Rookie Card Help
 

Hello Net 54 Baseball Forum,

I have been a lurker and reader of the forum for a couple of months and finally decided to be apart of the Net 54 community, which I'm excited about.

I recently inherited a 1951 Bowman Mickey Mantle #253 rookie card and wanted to get additional information on it. The card was given to my mother over 30 years ago from a close cousin. My mom held onto the card for many years until recently, she gave it to me. I don’t have any intention of selling, but I would like to eventually get it graded.

Right before I was going to send it off to get it graded, I began reading about real vs fakes and started to think twice on the authenticity of the card…. Maybe I’m overthinking it or have just become cross-eyed from examining and comparing details of 1951 Bowman Mickey Mantle cards. I would like to get feedback on this card and to see what you guys and gals think of this card. I’ve tried to take detailed photos of the card for deeper examination.

EDITED: The last two photos on the right are a bit more sharpened and defined from the first two photos on the left. I have also added the photos on IMGUR https://imgur.com/a/pRuySKA

Please share your honest opinions of the card - Thank you all for your help.

Images are too small; you need to post the photos on a different site (like Facebook or imgur) and then embed the URL links using the Insert Image icon above the text box (yellow sky w/mountains picture).

First glance: I don't like the border being a cream color instead of white. Rest of the card color looks inconsistent with the fading/toning of the borders. Centering is too good. Image is oversaturated. All that scuffing and no creases or back wear? Unlikely. I'm thinking fake at like 95%.

Thanks John, that's a bit heart breaking...lol Also, I've included the photos to IMGUR. https://imgur.com/a/pRuySKA

Well, I'll say I'm not an expert on this card. Here's a high res image of a known good card. You can easily see the border should match the color of the clouds.
https://img.comc.com/i/Baseball/1951...53a1&size=zoom

Here's yours for comparison.
https://i.imgur.com/4FBYa7v.jpg

Buy a couple of commons from the set online and then compare them. Make sure the paper has the same feel, gloss, stock, smell, etc. Basically, be more sure before you pay a $100 or so to try to authenticate.

[QUOTE=swarmee;1990205]Well, I'll say I'm not an expert on this card. Here's a high res image of a known good card. You can easily see the border should match the color of the clouds.

I appreciate it John, thank you. And yes, I would like to get as much information as possible to see if it's worth dropping the $100+ gamble on having this car graded. Also, have you ever seen an 'orb' flaw on this card before (see red arrow in photo)?

Most people call those "print dots" or "fisheyes" or "hickeys". They do not usually repeat in the same location.
You can use this link to look at over 500 of them and to compare against.
https://www.psacard.com/auctionprice.../values/211818

For what its worth
 

Most of the 51 Bowman Mantles I have seen are somewhat either off center or slightly off register of the printing. Fakes tend to be 50 50 perfect centered...... as is this one.. dont like the border color either. Sorry but the good news is its just my opinion..... might be worth a shot at a grade just to settle the issue once and for all....

Horrible fake

Yep, fake.
Borders way too wide. Color looks totally off. Same with the paper stock.

amazing how many times fake cards are 'given' to a family member 30 years ago. Seems like better chance to get a real card if given in the past few years from a stranger

fake
 

almost as bad as the old story.. my grand father had a T 205 Cobb..that he kept in a top loader from the day he got it in a pack

I’ll echo what most have said. Horrible, obvious fake. The aging is completely artificial.

I hope I am wrong in saying this and the OP is legit but I hate seeing others give advice to newbies when their first post is about a card/cards that are worth thousands of dollars and highly desirable.

I know I have only been here a relative short time compared to many others but over that relative short period of time, time and time again, I have seen newbies with similar questions, when, once they've received the info on how their fake/reprint cards look, quickly leave never to come back again.

Call me pessimistic, whatever, but by telling these newbies what the tell tales signs are that make their cards fakes only provides the info/tools they need to improve on them.

No offense intended, Diablo, and like I said, hopefully you are not one but I hope you can also understand where I am coming from?

Sure, that is a common concern, Dale. But everything mentioned in this post is easily found on Google to tell this card is a fake. The OP didn't set off my bullocks detector. But I didn't reveal any trade secrets fakers didn't already know.

WELCOME to the boards
 

Sorry for the "painful" introduction. If you've checked out the boards - you know there is no shortage of opinions and usually very few punches pulled. So I hope the status of your card (real or fake) will not dissuade you from staying a member.
Regarding the card - I usually prefer to have the card in hand when forming an opinion - that said, I tend to agree that the border is what stood out as a flag for me the moment I saw the scan. Secondly agree that the paper stock doesn't look right. So not a forgone conclusion, but a huge red flag and giant question mark.

Thank you @Nicedocter and @thecomebacker
Thank you @swarmee - I'm not looking to pawn or sell this card and I appreciate the help you shared.

@Bestdj777 - The "aging" is not artificial. But I guess I can understand how one may THINK it's artificial by looking at it.

@irv, I totally understand where you're coming from. I planned to come back to utilize the forum. In fact, I find this forum extremely useful for collectors. Eventually, I'll block the noise and the people who assume I'm "artificially" making cards or creating a story... really?

Yet, I can also see why newbies don't return because some people like @1952boyntoncollector, @albb and @Bestdj777 assume I'm making this up, so rather welcoming me to the forum and share some advice and tips (as others have), they decide to bully newbies around - Why would anyone want to return?

I came to this forum to first be welcomed and secondly get some tips and guidance, not for people like @1952boyntoncollector, @albb and @Bestdj777 to think I'm making up a story or try to "age" a baseball card. As I stated in my original post, I don't plan on selling the card (real or fake) because of the sentimental value it holds.

Also, I didn't feel it was anyone's business, but I guess I have to explain the WHOLE story to@1952boyntoncollector, @albb, and @Bestdj777 or they may think I'm making stuff up. This card was given to my mom and me from a cousin who was tragically killed back in 1992 at the age of 20 years old on the streets of Bensonhurst, Brooklyn.

Here's some advice from someone who could possibly be one of your sons - Words matter, our tongue has the power and strength to build or to destroy. And people should NEVER assume someone's story and bash them, just because there may have been phony posts started in the past.

@hcv123- Thank you! Some people feel good when they're punks behind a computer. Regardless of real or fake, I'm keeping the card, and I appreciate the advice.

Again, thank you for those who have shared your inputs and advice.

Reprints of the 51 Bowman set have been around since at least 1986 when the Card Collector's Company produced some, but CCC's did state reprints on the back initially.

Before building the 51 Bowman set myself I had one of the CCC reprint sets (Fritsch used to sell them) which I later gave to another board member. ( not the OP :) )

I didn’t bully you, I didn’t say your story was a lie, and I didn’t say that you artificially age the card. I have no reason to think you are lying about the history of the card or that you faked it—please reread my post. You asked for opinions regarding the card. I have around 500 mostly low grade Mantles from the 50-60s—I know what aging and wear happens naturally. The card you have does not have natural aging. Rather, it looks like someone took sandpaper to the surface to make it look warn and then put coffee on it to discolor it. I’m 99% positive it is artificially aged. My comments were to counter those giving you hope on it as there is absolutely no point sending this for grading and wasting that money. People faked stuff a lot in the 80s and 90s (and still do) and a lot of people are now holding family pieces from that error that aren’t real.

Now, all that said, it seems to be a very important piece for you with a family connection. I recommend you get a custom frame for it, hang it on the wall, enjoy it, and future generations argue about it 50 years from now.

Welcome to the forum. I’m hear as a resource should you have any questions—just PM me as I don’t check often. I’m not, however, a bully.

Right, Al. Hope I'm not seen as piling on, but here is a comparison for eyeball inspection of the CCC Reprint, a genuine card and the OP's card.
Notice how the fake closely resembles the reprint at the top line of the reverse. Mantle's name is clumsily offset from the text below it contrasted against the genuine example.

Glad to hear, and I agree, this is a great site with tons of knowledgeable members more than willing to help most times.

Welcome aboard. :)

welcome aboard maybe someday you will get into the 5,000 post club..

swarmee and alrbiship are getting close...

Thank you for informing me. Also, being apart of the 5,000 post club would be a great incentive to be part of Net 54.