August Pick-ups.

[irv]

Note the PSA 2.5?
I have looked and looked and see no difference between it, front or back, from the 6's I also purchased from the same seller.
I got it on the cheap, and fully realize the saying now, "Buy the card, not the slab"

It is better centered than the 6's but it does have a tilt. Is that what makes it a 2.5 or is there likely something there I can't see?

Either way, pretty happy with these cards and what I paid for them.

[RayBShotz]

Tell me how this is a 5? I thought this was a steal. Won it tonight. (eBay scan).

[Neal]

Nice 52s!

Solid Hammer pickup, Ray!

[irv]

Originally Posted by RayBShotz

Tell me how this is a 5? I thought this was a steal. Won it tonight. (eBay scan).

My 7 doesn't look as nice as that, and I bet I paid more for my copy too!

[MikeGarcia]

Originally Posted by RayBShotz

Tell me how this is a 5? I thought this was a steal. Won it tonight. (eBay scan).

..if the back is off badly enough to rate a " PSA 7 OC " or "PSA 7 MC" but the original submission had that little box " no qualifiers" checked off , then presto you're a 5 instead of a 7 Q . Soooooo , the big question is : what's the reverse look like ? Anywhere near 90-10 ?

..gorgeous card ; congrats , you got a deal.

..

[Canofcorn]

Picked up this Dan Dee Mantle

[DBesse27]

Great Mick, Mike!

[JollyElm]

It looked great in the pictures, so I picked up this card to add to my pile of high graded 1972 high numbers for trade, but in hand I can't for the life of me figure out why it has a 'ST' qualifier…

1972Tatum772PSA8ST.jpg

There are no visible stains whatsoever. The only thing I can see is when it is tilted in the light, there is a very small amount of wax residue on the front. Something that could be wiped away in less than a tenth of a second with some panty hose. Is that the "stain" they're referring to?? I always assumed 'ST' referred to a highly visible, darkened stain that was soaked into the card itself, not something nearly invisible that could easily be eliminated. Am I wrong? Wow.

[DBesse27]

Yes, wax residue will get a ST qualifier. Nice grab.

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by Canofcorn

Picked up this Dan Dee Mantle

This, my friend, is a fantastic card. Major props. My brother told me about this card, if it was the one on eBay that recently sold.

[Canofcorn]

Originally Posted by MattyC

This, my friend, is a fantastic card. Major props. My brother told me about this card, if it was the one on eBay that recently sold.

Thanks! Yes I won it via auction late last week.

Originally Posted by DBesse27

Great Mick, Mike!

Thank you Dan!

[Neal]

that is one DanDee pickup!

[the 'stache]

Fantastic cards, guys!

I don't get the Aaron being a PSA 5, either. Irv is right, that 5 looks nicer than his 7 (not to disparage his 7 at all; it's a nice card, too). I'm going to withhold ripping PSA mercilessly until I see the back of the card, but I really think PSA has gone off the deep end.

If I were a PSA grader, or exec, and I saw those two cards side to side, with the grades given, I'd be embarrassed. Hell, I'd be embarrassed that the first card we ever graded was a major F up, but that's just me. "Little" things like consistency, personal convictions/ethics are important to me.

And that Dan-dee Mick is gorgeous!

[irv]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Fantastic cards, guys!

I don't get the Aaron being a PSA 5, either. Irv is right, that 5 looks nicer than his 7 (not to disparage his 7 at all; it's a nice card, too). I'm going to withhold ripping PSA mercilessly until I see the back of the card, but I really think PSA has gone off the deep end.

If I were a PSA grader, or exec, and I saw those two cards side to side, with the grades given, I'd be embarrassed. Hell, I'd be embarrassed that the first card we ever graded was a major F up, but that's just me. "Little" things like consistency, personal convictions/ethics are important to me.

And that Dan-dee Mick is gorgeous!

I hear what you are saying about PSA. I have similar thoughts, trust me, but in their defense, mine is an older slab and from what I have seen, PSA is a lot tougher than what they use to be.

[DBesse27]

What was the first card they graded?

[KCRfan1]

The first card graded was the Gretzky Wagner. Even though the card was trimmed, they still gave the card an 8. I recommend reading the book, The Card

[DBesse27]

Oh, I know all about the trimmed Wagner, but I thought they were in business a while before they graded that one.

[the 'stache]

I understand that ; that's why I said "if I were a PSA grader", I'd be embarrassed. Their inconsistency is awful. What they graded a 7 not real long ago is now less appealing than what they give a 5 now.

That is a black mark on them, if you ask me. Their wild inconsistency now makes cards with older slabs less valuable.

A little bit of variance is ok, but the difference between those two cards is staggering, and completely unacceptable.

Originally Posted by irv

I hear what you are saying about PSA. I have similar thoughts, trust me, but in their defense, mine is an older slab and from what I have seen, PSA is a lot tougher than what they use to be.

[the 'stache]

Nope. Serial # 00000001

Originally Posted by DBesse27

Oh, I know all about the trimmed Wagner, but I thought they were in business a while before they graded that one.

[begsu1013]

.

[KCRfan1]

There was some controversy over the Wagner back in the day, about whether it had been trimmed or not.

The owners of the card needed a way to " authenticate " it, and PSA was a fledging company that had just started up. PSA needed to make a " splash ", to get a name for themselves and what better way to do that than to grade the hottest card in the market.

For the owners , the card HAD to grade numerically. This would justify the price paid and help remove doubt about the credibility of the card.

For PSA, delivering a numerical grade to the card would be a positive for the hobby and THEMSELVES. People would be reluctant to submit cards for grading if the very first card graded, was deemed authentic or trimmed. Hence, negative news. PSA took off after the press coverage in the news and hobby industry after the very favorable grade the Wagner received.

This was a huge shot in the arm for a hobby that was on the decline.

Like it or not, this was great for the hobby and certainly PSA.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by MikeGarcia

..if the back is off badly enough to rate a " PSA 7 OC " or "PSA 7 MC" but the original submission had that little box " no qualifiers" checked off , then presto you're a 5 instead of a 7 Q . Soooooo , the big question is : what's the reverse look like ? Anywhere near 90-10 ?

..gorgeous card ; congrats , you got a deal.

..

Also 5's can have very hard to see wrinkles and starts of creases. Twist the card around in the light and see if you can find any of that. I have a '55 Bowman Kaline like that - corners look NM or better. That's not something that bothers me, a 5 is a 5...but I can see where it might bother some folks.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Nope. Serial # 00000001

Right in that it was the first graded card, but it's been re-holdered at least once. The 0's in the original slab had the slashes through them a la dot-matrix style. The slabs you still occasionally see like that are the oldest ones. My guess is it was probably re-holdered before Ken what's his name that owns the Diamondbacks bought it.

[jchcollins]

Two August pickups for my "nicer Cubs" project...

-John





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Luke]

Only my 2nd post-war pickup since starting to collect again like 6 years back. Love this card. Can't see why it isn't a 6.5 or so, but don't care too much about the grade. Mr. Hutchinson is from Seattle like me, and we have a world renowned cancer research institute named after him. Bought this one on a whim from the BST at a nice price. Thanks Tom!

[Neal]

Very pleased with this one, as I am slowly rebuilding my once complete Aaron set. The bright spots on the two corners are from the card sleeve inside the slab

1955BowmanAaron.jpg

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by LukeLyon

Only my 2nd post-war pickup since starting to collect again like 6 years back. Love this card. Can't see why it isn't a 6.5 or so, but don't care too much about the grade. Mr. Hutchinson is from Seattle like me, and we have a world renowned cancer research institute named after him. Bought this one on a whim from the BST at a nice price. Thanks Tom!

Nice card. A 4.5 that looks like a 6 or better likely has some hidden wrinkle or other problem that comes out in grading under the black lights, but isn't readily noticeable otherwise. I agree with you, don't worry about the grade. I wonder how many cards in the 1980's that were honestly called NM or in that range later got stabbed as VG or something because of issues known only to the world of grading. I understand the purpose of grading, but cards like that are proof that it isn't the end-all, be-all I think. At the end of the day you can enjoy a card for it's presentation value and eye appeal over and above a technical grade.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RayBShotz]

Neal - Great looking Aaron. Solid 7. Great pose from an under loved issue.
Good luck with your Aaron set.
RayB

[Stonepony]

Originally Posted by Neal

Very pleased with this one, as I am slowly rebuilding my once complete Aaron set. The bright spots on the two corners are from the card sleeve inside the slab

Attachment 240102

Great card, Neal!

[Canofcorn]

Nice Hammerin' Hank! Great card Neal.

[JollyElm]

Since this guy seems to have become the de facto 'card of the month,' I'll add the one I just got to bring me a step closer to completing the set…

1961aaronmvp484.jpg

[irv]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

I understand that ; that's why I said "if I were a PSA grader", I'd be embarrassed. Their inconsistency is awful. What they graded a 7 not real long ago is now less appealing than what they give a 5 now.

That is a black mark on them, if you ask me. Their wild inconsistency now makes cards with older slabs less valuable.

A little bit of variance is ok, but the difference between those two cards is staggering, and completely unacceptable.

I agree with that!

Originally Posted by LukeLyon

Only my 2nd post-war pickup since starting to collect again like 6 years back. Love this card. Can't see why it isn't a 6.5 or so, but don't care too much about the grade. Mr. Hutchinson is from Seattle like me, and we have a world renowned cancer research institute named after him. Bought this one on a whim from the BST at a nice price. Thanks Tom!

Like what was written above, you never know what you're going to get, or maybe your's is another one they were hoping you'd Please Submit Again?

[jfkheat]

This arrived today.
James

[the 'stache]

John, I'm not exactly sure how this is germane to the point I was making. It's late, so maybe I'm missing something. Or, perhaps I'm just being dense. Again, here's the comment I was responding to:

Oh, I know all about the trimmed Wagner, but I thought they were in business a while before they graded that one.

My only aim was to produce a picture of the graded card. A re-slabbed PSA maintains its original serial number.

BTW, I know what the original slabs look like. I selected this particular picture for the sake of expediency. The other pictures I found of the Wagner were much larger; I didn't feel like messing with resizing code, or reducing the picture size in Photoshop, and uploading it again.

Originally Posted by jchcollins

Right in that it was the first graded card, but it's been re-holdered at least once. The 0's in the original slab had the slashes through them a la dot-matrix style. The slabs you still occasionally see like that are the oldest ones. My guess is it was probably re-holdered before Ken what's his name that owns the Diamondbacks bought it.

[the 'stache]

More nice cards, guys. Well done.

James, that Williams is a real beauty!

[jason.1969]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

More nice cards, guys. Well done.

James, that Williams is a real beauty!

+10!

There is something about the 1957 Ted Williams that I've been taken by ever since I first saw one. Not too many cards would earn the adjective MAJESTIC, but this is one of them.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

[Sinker Slider]

Really nice stuff posted so far this month. Here are a few of my recent acquisitions (most bought outside of August, but I haven't posted in a while).

First, some HOF Rookies.







These two I bought ungraded and recently got back from PSA.

[Robs70sCards]

Just a plain old Rod Carew IA, but this card has the special distinction of being the last card I need to finish the 1972 set. I know have 1972-1980 complete, along with picking up the 1976 SPCC set a couple years ago. I have to say the 1972 set looks good in the binder, and it's a nice and beefy set.

[Stonepony]

Originally Posted by Robs70sCards

Just a plain old Rod Carew IA, but this card has the special distinction of being the last card I need to finish the 1972 set. I know have 1972-1980 complete, along with picking up the 1976 SPCC set a couple years ago. I have to say the 1972 set looks good in the binder, and it's a nice and beefy set.

Nicely done. It feels great completing sets

[Harliduck]

Originally Posted by Robs70sCards

Just a plain old Rod Carew IA, but this card has the special distinction of being the last card I need to finish the 1972 set. I know have 1972-1980 complete, along with picking up the 1976 SPCC set a couple years ago. I have to say the 1972 set looks good in the binder, and it's a nice and beefy set.

Congrats!!!

That is one tough annoying card. Not only was the 1972 Topps Rod Carew IA card my last card for my 1972 set...it was the last card for me to complete my 1970-79 run. Here is a link to my post here about it...crazy we finished on same card...

http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=184965

[Shoebox]

Great stuff everyone. Filled a hole in my MVP composite that I am building with this.

[MattyC]

Those eBay bucks were not gonna spend themselves!

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by Sinker Slider

Really nice stuff posted so far this month. Here are a few of my recent acquisitions (most bought outside of August, but I haven't posted in a while).

First, some HOF Rookies.







These two I bought ungraded and recently got back from PSA.

Outstanding cards, esp that Carew. So hard to find like that.

[irv]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Those eBay bucks were not gonna spend themselves!

You had a lot of E-Bay bucks!!

[Neal]

Nice postwar haul! That 67 Carew is outstanding!

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

John, I'm not exactly sure how this is germane to the point I was making. It's late, so maybe I'm missing something.

Stache - I would think it's "germane" in that I was giving you some additional information on the slab you posted a picture of. I'm glad that you knew all of that already.

Thanks,
-John

[Canofcorn]

I've been wanting one of these for awhile - long overdue to pick this up!

[Robs70sCards]

Originally Posted by Harliduck

Congrats!!!

That is one tough annoying card. Not only was the 1972 Topps Rod Carew IA card my last card for my 1972 set...it was the last card for me to complete my 1970-79 run. Here is a link to my post here about it...crazy we finished on same card...

http://net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=184965

That is funny! I had bought a bunch of other 72s recently, and this just happened to be the very last one to arrive.

[Neal]

Nice Aaron, Mike! I once owned three of those at once, now down to only one. Love that card.

I added these in recent days ....

a Sterling Sports win
1949BowmanBerra.jpg

was shut out on Friday at the National, so I went back Sunday looking for affordable mid grade
1954ToppsWilliams1.jpg
1957Mantle.jpg

[KCRfan1]

Mike and Neal,

Those are very nice cards!