1951 Bowman Mantle PSA 7(OC) on PWCC tonight

scooter729 · #1 01-15-2020, 08:30 AM

I think the card was graded early on by PSA (as evidenced by the 011** slab number), and this card met the standard for a PSA 7 OC at that time. Things have tightened up in the meantime, but this looks like it was graded by the PSA standard from 20+ years ago.

As much as we want to chastise Brent (and rightly so) in most cases, I don't see what he is doing wrong with this card?

Scott S@r!@n

Snapolit1 · #2 01-15-2020, 08:58 AM

Yeah, hard to take issue with their scans.

ullmandds · #3 01-15-2020, 08:59 AM

nothing to see here...just a skipping record.

steve B · #4 01-15-2020, 10:16 AM

Not one comment on how loose it is in the holder?

I know the card size isn't always about trimming, but it's small both ways.

perezfan · #5 01-15-2020, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve B

Not one comment on how loose it is in the holder?

I know the card size isn't always about trimming, but it's small both ways.

I saw it, and found it rather alarming. Wasn't going to say anything, since it's been said so many times now.

But if I were to shell out, this would not be one I'd ever touch. I don't see any evidence of trimming, but why on earth chance it? Waaaaaaay too much extra air space in that slab.

samosa4u · #6 01-15-2020, 12:34 PM

The people who submitted their collections to PSA twenty years ago must be laughing. Most of their cards would get two grades less if submitted today.

Anyways, I see that four 51' Bowman Mantles were sold by PWCC last night. I want to comment on a few of them below:

PSA 7(OC) - $11,500 US sale price (plus tax)

The back of this card clearly shows that it was once in an album. If I had been the grader, I would have given it a PSA 2. Now I'm not sure what the winning bidder is going to do with it. Will he try to remove the crap on the back? I'm pretty sure the previous owner attempted it but failed. When stains get absorbed deep into the paper, then you're screwed.

PSA 6 - $16,100 US sale price (plus tax)

Like the card above, this one too was graded long time ago. The centering is off and the corners look weak. On the back, I see what appears to be a corner ding (see PWCC scan - top left corner). This card would never get a PSA 6 if submitted today.

PSA 3.5 - $10,299 US sale price (plus tax)

Over ten grand for a VG card?

pawpawdiv9 · #7 01-15-2020, 02:43 PM

^^^^ I was looking at that 3.5 mantle. It looked awesome (to me) as a 3.5 upgrade from my 2's. But i under-estimated its worth by a ton!!!!

JeremyW · #8 01-15-2020, 03:38 PM

The BVG3 had paper-loss on the back, right?

investinrookies · #9 01-17-2020, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pawpawdiv9

^^^^ I was looking at that 3.5 mantle. It looked awesome (to me) as a 3.5 upgrade from my 2's. But i under-estimated its worth by a ton!!!!

That 3.5 was a very nice example, it looked better than 80-90% of the examples Ive seen over the years in any grade. Its a tuff card to get centered like that with clean registration and being in focus like that one was. Its more about eye appeal than the grade....

CMIZ5290 · #10 01-15-2020, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve B

Not one comment on how loose it is in the holder?

I know the card size isn't always about trimming, but it's small both ways.

Plus 1, this too as well....If I, as a grader, was completely confident of this card NOT being trimmed, I would have given a grade of PSA 5 or 6 (ST) or (MK)

JollyElm · #11 01-15-2020, 06:11 PM

In general, it is absolutely amazing how many cards are so obviously small one or both ways in the holder. It's almost come to the point where every single card I look at (lower to moderately expensive) could've been trimmed. It is truly mind numbing. And I'm not talking about accepted minimal standard deviations in size, I mean very noticeable thinning side to side or top to bottom (like the card at the heart of this thread). I wonder if I investigated real cheap, common cards, would I find the same size differences everywhere (meaning it was just a universal result of the printing/cutting process from the last 50 or 60 years)?? Highly, highly doubtful. Something is clearly up.

If you do nothing else, protect yourself and see how well the card you're interested in fits inside the holder.

Stampsfan · #12 01-16-2020, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JollyElm

If you do nothing else, protect yourself and see how well the card you're interested in fits inside the holder.

Ive heard and read over the years this is not always an accurate assessment. Holders have evolved over the years. However, if a standard card does not fit into a 2 1/2 X 3 1/2 holder, I do question that. They should be able to get that right.

What are others thoughts on this statement? I’d love it if it were that straightforward.

Republicaninmass · #13 01-16-2020, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JollyElm

If you do nothing else, protect yourself and see how well the card you're interested in fits inside the holder.

you build a smaller mousetrap, they build a smaller mouse

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
1951 Bowman Mantle vs. 1952 Topps Mantle	samosa4u	Postwar Baseball Cards Forum (Pre-1980)	17	09-07-2019 03:13 PM
(3) 1951 Bowman Roe, Fox, Rosen - Auction ends tonight!!	Leon	Live Auctions - Only 2-3 open, per member, at once.	5	07-03-2016 09:36 PM
Buying 1951 Bowman Mantle + 1952 Topps Mantle	Sean1125	1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T	0	02-26-2016 01:23 PM
ENDS TONIGHT - 1951 Bowman MONTE IRVIN HOF RC	GehrigFan	Live Auctions - Only 2-3 open, per member, at once.	5	03-13-2015 10:00 AM
1951 Bowman Mickey Mantle PSA 5mc (Ends Tonight 8pm CST)	sycks22	Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T	3	12-07-2014 08:48 PM