1960 Topps Mantle PSA 9 with print mark

[OsFan]

Took me a minute to find it which I think helps. If it were on The Mick’s forehead that’d be another story. Though I wonder if the grading companies see it that way as well.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by OsFan

Took me a minute to find it which I think helps. If it were on The Mick’s forehead that’d be another story. Though I wonder if the grading companies see it that way as well.

I think a mark on his nose or the back of the card in a blank area pretty much counts the same. Not always, but pretty much. I am not bidding on a great looking card in an auction right now, that I need, because of a tobacco spot on the player's head... It's a fantastic card otherwise and I need it. But all I see is the dot on the head .... AND it's centered almost perfectly.....which I absolutely love. But that darned dot is all I see....

[russkcpa]

Originally Posted by Leon

I think a mark on his nose or the back of the card in a blank area pretty much counts the same. Not always, but pretty much. I am not bidding on a great looking card in an auction right now, that I need, because of a tobacco spot on the player's head... It's a fantastic card otherwise and I need it. But all I see is the dot on the head .... AND it's centered almost perfectly.....which I absolutely love. But that darned dot is all I see....

I would tend to think you are correct. It's all a matter of where the imperfection lies. Looking at this Mantle card I see tremendous colors with absolutely no snow or surface imperfections (other than the print mark) Add to that razor sharp corners and you can see why it would garner a 9. On my wish list !!

[ALR-bishop]

Anyone know if the mark is recurring ? The 67 Mantle can be found ( fairly easily ) with a red print dot at the bottom right front above the S in Yankees or along top right border. To me these are recurring print defects, or variant cards ( as opposed to variations) but they do not seem to affect the grading of the 67 card in any way.

[russkcpa]

A beautiful example with that recurring defect. I'm guessing it will not affect grade. This is a great looking PSA 9

[MattyC]

Originally Posted by russkcpa

A beautiful example with that recurring defect. I'm guessing it will not affect grade. This is a great looking PSA 9

It is true the 67 and 60 PD's noted in this thread were rather common flaws on the cards; similar issues routinely plague the other Mantle basic issues. Despite the common nature of the flaws, I couldn't give those two 9s a pass and call them nice 9s, in my opinion. On the 67, side centering is off and it has the PD above the S. One can find an example without those flaws, though it is scarce. Same for the 1960; that PD and the centering (not to mention the focus) would make it a hard pass— at that grade level for that money I need the card to look lights-out.

Many of the high-grade Mantle cards were given those grades ages ago and would not make the cut today. Card over flip.

[pokerplyr80]

I've seen them referred to as a fish eye before, but as others have mentioned they're pretty common. I've even seen a couple of PSA 10s with them. And I agree with Matt if I were to spend the kind of money a 60 Mantle in a psa 9 would go for the card would need to be nearly perfect in terms of centering and visible flaws. Otherwise I would prefer a nice 7 or 8.