Quote:
Originally Posted by sb1
Thanks Tony, I have an 86 as well, but actually like this 80 better! Bigger number does not always mean better looking card.
|
That Collins knocks my socks off!!! 
I have to agree with your comment about the number grades, too. I use them as a starting point, and then evaluate the card's eye appeal. I've seen SGC 40s that look much better than cards a grade or two higher. That's good for a collector like me that operates on a budget. I can still get some real beauties that have been graded somewhat more critically because of flaws that are not immediately perceptible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter W Thomas
|
Peter, those are unbelievable. They could have been printed yesterday.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrlebert
Love the thread, everyone. It's threads like this, and the accompanying education and banter, that keep me coming back every day to net54!
|
Agreed, J.R. In my humble opinion, these kinds of threads represent the very best Net 54 has to offer. As somebody that is still being exposed to card types for the very first time, it's absolutely thrilling, like Howard Carter unearthing Tutankhamun tomb.
I have to say, too, that I'm a little shocked there are still such high quality examples of these cards in circulation. The T204s jump out to me as cards that would show border and corner chipping quite easily, especially the solid border cards. Yet some of these appear pretty much flawless.
Keep em coming, guys. Whatever you have, any player, any condition. I want to see them!
__________________
Building these sets: T206, 1953 Bowman Color, 1975 Topps.
Great transactions with: piedmont150, Cardboard Junkie, z28jd, t206blogcom, tinkertoeverstochance, trobba, Texxxx, marcdelpercio, t206hound, zachs, tolstoi, IronHorse 2130, AndyG09, BBT206, jtschantz, lug-nut, leaflover, Abravefan11, mpemulis, btcarfagno, BlueSky, and Frankbmd.
|
03-21-2014, 09:24 AM
Similar Threads
Hybrid Mode
