PSA 8 1960 Clay Exhibit??

[Peter_Spaeth]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1960-EXHIBI...p2047675.l2557

Not in the pop report as best I can tell and they don't grade them. So was it decertified at some point?

[Exhibitman]

I don't think it was decertified. For some reason PSA refuses to grade anything except baseball Exhibit cards. That was not always the case, so there are a few other subject cards out there.

The sepia tone of the card indicates it was from a later print run, say mid-1960s.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

I don't think it was decertified. For some reason PSA refuses to grade anything except baseball Exhibit cards. That was not always the case, so there are a few other subject cards out there.

The sepia tone of the card indicates it was from a later print run, say mid-1960s.

If in fact it was graded but not decertified then it would be in the pop report, no? It's not. Or do they just zap the pop if they stop grading?

[Exhibitman]

I have no idea; I am not well versed in the workings of PSA. Makes my head hurt.

[D. Bergin]

Is it possible for any Ali/Clay exhibit to have come out in 1960? Seems like an awfully optimistic date speculation on the slab.

[Exhibitman]

No, thats bullshit. My guess has always been the Exhibit card is from around 1962-1963. The image they used looks like it is from a photo session that produced one of Ali's promos:



The very first Clay promo photo session took place in December 1960 in Miami. Here is a photo using that image, from 1963:



It is clearly earlier than the ESCO image. Now, here is a publicity photo from The Thrilla in Manila:



The first image is the same as the Exhibit image. They used that to illustrate the young man. The second image was used in the packet for the first Frazier fight but dates to the latter part of the 1960s.

Here is a rare ca. 1967 card of Ali:



From the extension of the Kid Herman set. I've also seen a lot of photos from a 1962 Stanley Weston session that look similar to the image but are of a younger man. So we are narrowing the window down to pre-forced retirement but post 1962. My guess is 1963 since Clay was decimating the ranks and becoming a top contender. Of course, we would need catalogs to pin it down.

Here's an uncut sheet:



Willie Pastrano won a title in 1963. As did Joey Giardello.

[swarmee]

Still in the pop report. Here is what I got on my search:
https://www.psacard.com/cert/30151430

PSA Certification #30151430
According to the PSA database, the requested certification number is defined as the following:

ITEM INFORMATION
Certification Number 30151430
Reverse Cert Number/Barcode No
Year 1960
Brand EXHIBITS BOXING (NO LONGER GRADING)
Sport BOXING/WRESTLING CARDS/MMA
Card Number
Player CASSIUS CLAY
Variety/Pedigree
Grade NM-MT 8
POPULATION
2
POPULATION W/QUAL
0
POPULATION HIGHER
0

[Exhibitman]

Further exploring dates, Sugar Ray Robinson is next to Clay on the sheet. Robinson's last fight of note was against Giardello in 1963. After that he went to Europe on a greedy bastard tour and fought a bunch of tomato cans with mixed results. My guess is that he was in the set because he was still considered a serious contender until Giardello beat him down on June 24, 1963. That would be consistent with a 1963 issue date.

[The Nasty Nati]

I have a black and brown version. Are there differences in dates between the two? Is one older than the other?

And I'd presume this Exhibits card would be considered Ali's American rookie card.

[Exhibitman]

I have all three, plus a glossy 'slick' meant to be pasted to a machine header card. My best info is that the set was issued in green first, then sepia, then black and white, so the greenies are the earliest.

As far as I know the green Exhibit is the first American Clay card issue. However, I still believe that the Hemmets is the rookie card and the 1962 Rekord probably predated the green Exhibit as well. I'd guesstimate that the Exhibit was followed by the Chocolat Simon and MacRobertson in 1964, then a wave from Europe in 1965 (Peretti, Lampo, orange background Swedish chocolate, Dutch Serie MLH). Also the Argentine 'pog' Clay which PSA dates as 1962 but which has a photo taken on June 18, 1963 (PSA wrong again...I am shocked), so not. 1966 we have the first Panini Clay and also the Mundo de Fantasia from Argentina.

BTW, can you see the difference between these two cards?



Both are blank backed. They look the same to me.

[The Nasty Nati]

Thanks for the clarification Exhibitman.

I'm not surprised this Exhibit card is starting to get more attention as it's his first American rookie card. Not only that but it seems to be his first true card that didn't need to be cut out of a magazine like the Hemmets and Rekford as it predates the Chocolate Simon.

What irks me about the 1960 Hemmets is that the backs don't line up when cut out, making me think those were never intended to be cut out like cards.

If the 1925 Exhibits RC Lou Gehrig is now getting a lot of love maybe the 1962/63 Exhibits Ali will too.

[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.

[Exhibitman]

Now, here is a 1969 sale list from ESCO:



I don't know if you can make it out but under "sports cards" the prizefighters and wrestlers are the only available sets. The other non-sport topicals give a clue. The Beach Bunnies (pin-ups) are a set I have handled quite a bit (yeah, insert dirty joke here) and they are the same stock and printing as the BW boxers. As are the later Jets versions.

So, by 1969 the company had stopped making baseball cards but was still willing to crank out boxing and wrestling cards. Judging from the populations, I don't think there were many takers. My purely unscientific observation is that the sepias are the easiest to find, followed by the greenies, and the BW are the toughest. Well, the slicks are the toughest but they aren't 'cards' per se.

[sthoemke]

Fantastic sales sheet.

I google mapped the address, and looks like the building is still there.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8864...8192?entry=ttu

[Exhibitman]

I've been searching for years to get ESCO catalogs, sale sheets, samples, and other marketing materials to try and debunk some of the hobby myths associated with these sets. Like dates on the football set. A million years ago, when dinosaurs ruled the hobby, someone pulled 1948-52 out of his butt and that became the set date. Worse yet, some other myth-makers attached those dates to the Canadian Exhibit issues (except the dated 1953 set). Well, I found a catalog offering the football cards in 1955. The 1950 catalog offers the HOF baseball set as a "new series" illustrated with the Ruth standing in front of the bat rack pose. So much for the 1948 date that the dinos put on the set.

As it regards Clay, a 1961 ESCO catalog states that the boxers are "Revised for 1961". Does that mean they went to the 16-card set in 1961? No. The catalog lists 32 cards in the set. What I need to see are 1962-1963 catalogs and order forms to see when they went to the 16-card issue. When that happened is when the Clay happened.

[sthoemke]

I was reviewing the 1961 sales packet currently listed on ebay, and see that it states that there were 51 different sets available for that year.

Are set counts known for any other years?

[Exhibitman]

I guess you could add up the listings in any given catalog. I haven't. The sets I care about are only a handful each year.